importance of migration essay

Global migration’s impact and opportunity

Migration is a key feature of our increasingly interconnected world . It has also become a flashpoint for debate in many countries, which underscores the importance of understanding the patterns of global migration and the economic impact that is created when people move across the world’s borders. A new report from the McKinsey Global Institute (MGI), People on the move: Global migration’s impact and opportunity , aims to fill this need.

Refugees might be the face of migration in the media, but 90 percent of the world’s 247 million migrants have moved across borders voluntarily, usually for economic reasons. Voluntary migration flows are typically gradual, placing less stress on logistics and on the social fabric of destination countries than refugee flows. Most voluntary migrants are working-age adults, a characteristic that helps raise the share of the population that is economically active in destination countries.

By contrast, the remaining 10 percent are refugees and asylum seekers who have fled to another country to escape conflict and persecution. Roughly half of the world’s 24 million refugees are in the Middle East and North Africa, reflecting the dominant pattern of flight to a neighboring country. But the recent surge of arrivals in Europe has focused the developed world’s attention on this issue. A companion report, Europe’s new refugees: A road map for better integration outcomes , examines the challenges and opportunities confronting individual countries.

While some migrants travel long distances from their origin countries, most migration still involves people moving to neighboring countries or to countries in the same part of the world (exhibit). About half of all migrants globally have moved from developing to developed countries—indeed, this is the fastest-growing type of movement. Almost two-thirds of the world’s migrants reside in developed countries, where they often fill key occupational shortages . From 2000 to 2014, immigrants contributed 40 to 80 percent of labor-force growth in major destination countries.

Moving more labor to higher-productivity settings boosts global GDP. Migrants of all skill levels contribute to this effect, whether through innovation and entrepreneurship or through freeing up natives for higher-value work. In fact, migrants make up just 3.4 percent of the world’s population, but MGI’s research finds that they contribute nearly 10 percent of global GDP. They contributed roughly $6.7 trillion to global GDP in 2015—some $3 trillion more than they would have produced in their origin countries. Developed nations realize more than 90 percent of this effect.

Would you like to learn more about the McKinsey Global Institute ?

Employment rates are slightly lower for immigrants than for native workers in top destinations, but this varies by skill level and by region of origin. Extensive academic evidence shows that immigration does not harm native employment or wages, although there can be short-term negative effects if there is a large inflow of migrants to a small region, if migrants are close substitutes for native workers, or if the destination economy is experiencing a downturn.

Realizing the benefits of immigration hinges on how well new arrivals are integrated into their destination country’s labor market and into society. Today immigrants tend to earn 20 to 30 percent less than native-born workers. But if countries narrow that wage gap to just 5 to 10 percent by integrating immigrants more effectively across various aspects of education, housing, health, and community engagement, they could generate an additional boost of $800 billion to $1 trillion to worldwide economic output annually. This is a relatively conservative goal, but it can nevertheless produce broader positive effects, including lower poverty rates and higher overall productivity in destination economies.

People on the move: Migrant voices

A series of portraits tells migrants’ stories—part of the 'i am a migrant' campaign.

The economic, social, and civic dimensions of integration need to be addressed holistically. MGI looked at how the leading destinations perform on 18 indicators and found that no country has achieved strong integration outcomes across all of these dimensions, though some do better than others. But in destinations around the world, many stakeholders are trying new approaches. We identify more than 180 promising interventions that offer useful models for improving integration. The private sector has a central role to play in this effort—and incentives to do so. When companies participate, they stand to gain access to new markets and pools of new talent.

The stakes are high. The success or failure of integration can reverberate for many years, influencing whether second-generation immigrants become fully participating citizens who reach their full productive potential or remain in a poverty trap.

Lola Woetzel , Jacques Bughin , and James Manyika are directors of the McKinsey Global Institute, where Anu Madgavkar is a partner and Ashwin Hasyagar is a fellow; Khaled Rifai is a partner in McKinsey’s New York office, Frank Mattern is a senior partner in the Frankfurt office, and Tarek Elmasry and Amadeo Di Lodovico are senior partners in the Dubai office.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

A road map for integrating Europe’s refugees

Creating a global framework for immigration

Urban world: Meeting the demographic challenge in cities

• SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
• DEVELOPMENT & SOCIETY
• PEACE & SECURITY
• HUMANITARIAN AFFAIRS
• HUMAN RIGHTS

Why Migration Matters

While human mobility has been an enduring feature of our global history, it is as pertinent today as it ever was. With 232 million international migrants in the world, according to recent figures released by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA), migration is one of the most important and pressing global issues of our time.

According to UNDESA, the definition of an international migrant is a person living outside of their country of birth. Migration is often driven by the search for better livelihoods and new opportunities. Indeed, global and regional social and economic inequalities are expressed most powerfully through the figure of the migrant, as one who crosses borders in search of work, education and new horizons.

Many people who migrate, however, have not necessarily chosen to do so. Forced migration is becoming ever more prevalent as a result of civil, political and religious persecution and conflict. In 2012, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) estimated that there were 10.4 million refugees in the world. There is, moreover, a growing need to understand the important relationship between environmental change and forced migration and displacement , and the experiences of stateless persons .

Crossing borders and seas involves grave risks, with many migrants not able to complete safe journeys. We can see this most starkly in the numerous tragedies involving migrants that have occurred in recent years. As borders become increasingly securitised, the proliferation of recruitment networks that endanger and profit from migrants and the increasing use of private migration management agencies in border control and security are worrying trends. This ought to make us reflect urgently on how migration is being governed in the world today and on the responsibilities of states in this regard.

Addressing the challenges

As societies become more diverse, there are both opportunities and challenges. Experiences of discrimination on the basis of one’s socio-economic, cultural or religious background continue to be commonplace. A priority will be to promote the means for intercultural dialogue and the inclusion of migrants into the economic, social and cultural lives of the societies in which they live. It is also crucial to mention the striking feminization of migration. As women now comprise 48 percent of all international migrants, efforts to promote the inclusion of migrants must also adequately address the particular experiences of female migrants across the world.

There are key ways in which the international community is addressing these challenges. The October 2013 High-Level Dialogue on International Migration and Development recognized migration as a central part of the international development agenda. Under the heading of ‘Making Migration Work’, discussions revolved around how migration contributes to global development and to poverty alleviation. They also considered how migration could benefit individuals, families, communities and states. Migration will only work for all, however, if greater commitment is shown to eliminating all forms of exploitation and discrimination that migrants experience and to ensuring that their fundamental human rights are upheld.

While the role of migrants in economic development through remittance and knowledge transfers has been acknowledged, recent debates in civil society have emphasized an understanding of migration in human development terms. As the synergies between states, policymakers, researchers and civil society organizations gain momentum, it is imperative to remember the human face of migration and to keep migrants themselves at the centre of discussions.

In order to address these pressing concerns, the United Nations University (UNU) institutes have come together to form a migration research network. The network features migration research experts from different disciplinary backgrounds who examine the complexities of migration at regional and global scales. Current research themes include: the health of migrants, migrants’ inclusion and exclusion from social and cultural life, the consequences of migration on those left behind, human security, migration and development, and the experiences of vulnerable groups such as stateless persons and forced migrants.

The aim of this network is to ensure solid collaborations and the sharing of migration-related research across the different institutes of the UNU. The unique vantage point of the UNU means that research findings will also be shared widely with policymakers and civil society organizations. The launch of the UNU Migration Network’s website promises to be an important first step in the network’s activities to put migration at the heart of research and policy agendas.

Megha Amrith

Megha Amrith is a Research Fellow at the United Nations University Institute on Globalization, Culture and Mobility in Barcelona . She holds a PhD in Social Anthropology from the University of Cambridge and researches international migration, cultural diversity and cities.

Related Articles

Climate Migration ‘a Complex Problem’

A Man Leaves His Island

Understanding the Islanders: Climate Migration in Context

How Rainfall Variability, Food Security and Migration Interact

Displaced Indigenous Malaysians Face Uncertain Future

How-to Guide for Environmental Refugees

How immigration has changed the world – for the better

Image:  A migrant holds his passport and a train ticket in Freilassing, Germany September 15, 2015. REUTERS/Dominic Ebenbichler

.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo{-webkit-transition:all 0.15s ease-out;transition:all 0.15s ease-out;cursor:pointer;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;outline:none;color:inherit;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:hover,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-hover]{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:focus,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-focus]{box-shadow:0 0 0 3px rgba(168,203,251,0.5);} Ian Goldin

.chakra .wef-9dduvl{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-9dduvl{font-size:1.125rem;}} Explore and monitor how .chakra .wef-15eoq1r{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;color:#F7DB5E;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-15eoq1r{font-size:1.125rem;}} Migration is affecting economies, industries and global issues

.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;color:#2846F8;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{font-size:1.125rem;}} Get involved with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale

Stay up to date:.

Is immigration good or bad? Some argue that immigrants flood across borders, steal jobs, are a burden on taxpayers and threaten indigenous culture. Others say the opposite: that immigration boosts economic growth, meets skill shortages, and helps create a more dynamic society.

Evidence clearly shows that immigrants provide significant economic benefits. However, there are local and short-term economic and social costs. As with debates on trade, where protectionist instincts tend to overwhelm the longer term need for more open societies, the core role that immigrants play in economic development is often overwhelmed by defensive measures to keep immigrants out. A solution needs to be found through policies that allow the benefits to compensate for the losses.

Around the world, there are an estimated 230 million migrants, making up about 3% of the global population. This share has not changed much in the past 100 years. But as the world’s population has quadrupled, so too has the number of migrants. And since the early 1900s, the number of countries has increased from 50 to over 200. More borders mean more migrants.

Of the global annual flow of around 15 million migrants, most fit into one of four categories: economic (6 million), student (4 million), family (2 million), and refugee/asylum (3 million). There are about 20 million officially recognized refugees worldwide, with 86% of them hosted by neighbouring countries, up from 70% 10 years ago.

In the US, over a third of documented immigrants are skilled. Similar trends exist in Europe. These percentages reflect the needs of those economies. Governments that are more open to immigration assist their country’s businesses, which become more agile, adaptive and profitable in the war for talent. Governments in turn receive more revenue and citizens thrive on the dynamism that highly-skilled migrants bring.

Yet it is not only higher-skilled migrants who are vital. In the USA and elsewhere, unskilled immigrants are an essential part of the construction, agriculture and services sector.

If immigrants play such a vital role, why is there so much concern?

Some believe that immigrants take jobs and destroy economies. Evidence proves this wrong. In the United States, immigrants have been founders of companies such as Google, Intel, PayPal, eBay, and Yahoo! In fact, skilled immigrants account for over half of Silicon Valley start-ups and over half of patents, even though they make up less than 15% of the population. There have been three times as many immigrant Nobel Laureates, National Academy of Science members, and Academy Award film directors than the immigrant share of the population would predict. Research at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco concluded that “immigrants expand the economy’s productive capacity by stimulating investment and promoting specialization, which produces efficiency gains and boosts income per worker”.

Research on the net fiscal impact of immigration shows that immigrants contribute significantly more in taxes than the benefits and services they receive in return. According to the World Bank , increasing immigration by a margin equal to 3% of the workforce in developed countries would generate global economic gains of $356 billion. Some economists predict that if borders were completely open and workers were allowed to go where they pleased, it would produce gains as high as $39 trillion for the world economy over 25 years.

In the future, it will become even more imperative to ensure a strong labour supply augmented by foreign workers. Globally, the population is ageing. There were only 14 million people over the age of 80 living in 1950. There are well over 100 million today and current projections indicate there will be nearly 400 million people over 80 by 2050. With fertility collapsing to below replacement levels in all regions except Africa, experts are predicting rapidly rising dependency ratios and a decline in the OECD workforce from around 800 million to close to 600 million by 2050. The problem is particularly acute in North America, Europe and Japan.

There are, however, legitimate concerns about large-scale migration. The possibility of social dislocation is real. Just like globalization – a strong force for good in the world – the positive aspects are diffuse and often intangible, while the negative aspects bite hard for a small group of people.

Yes, those negative aspects must be managed. But that management must come with the recognition that migration has always been one of the most important drivers of human progress and dynamism. Immigration is good. And in the age of globalization, barriers to migration pose a threat to economic growth and sustainability. Free migration, like totally free trade, remains a utopian prospect, even though within regions (such as Europe) this has proved workable.

As John Stuart Mill forcefully argued, we need to ensure that the local and short-term social costs of immigration do not detract from their role “as one of the primary sources of progress”.

Author: Ian Goldin is Director of the Oxford Martin School and Professor of Globalization and Development at the University of Oxford. This article draws on his book Exceptional people: How migration shaped our world and will define our future , co-authored with Geoffrey Cameron and Meera Balarajan and published by Princeton University Press. Twitter: @oxmartinschool . He is participating in the World Economic Forum’s Annual Meeting in Davos.

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

Related topics:

The agenda .chakra .wef-n7bacu{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-weight:400;} weekly.

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

.chakra .wef-1dtnjt5{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;} More on Jobs and the Future of Work .chakra .wef-17xejub{-webkit-flex:1;-ms-flex:1;flex:1;justify-self:stretch;-webkit-align-self:stretch;-ms-flex-item-align:stretch;align-self:stretch;} .chakra .wef-nr1rr4{display:-webkit-inline-box;display:-webkit-inline-flex;display:-ms-inline-flexbox;display:inline-flex;white-space:normal;vertical-align:middle;text-transform:uppercase;font-size:0.75rem;border-radius:0.25rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;line-height:1.2;-webkit-letter-spacing:1.25px;-moz-letter-spacing:1.25px;-ms-letter-spacing:1.25px;letter-spacing:1.25px;background:none;padding:0px;color:#B3B3B3;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;box-decoration-break:clone;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;}@media screen and (min-width:37.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:0.875rem;}}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:1rem;}} See all

Why companies who pay a living wage create wider societal benefits

Sanda Ojiambo

May 14, 2024

Age diversity will define the workforce of the future. Here’s why

Susan Taylor Martin

May 8, 2024

From start-ups to digital jobs: Here’s what global leaders think will drive maximum job creation

Simon Torkington

May 1, 2024

70% of workers are at risk of climate-related health hazards, says the ILO

Johnny Wood

International Workers' Day: 3 ways trade unions are driving social progress

Giannis Moschos

Policy tools for better labour outcomes

Maria Mexi and Mekhla Jha

April 30, 2024

2021 Theses Doctoral

Three Essays on International Migration

Huang, Xiaoning

Today, there are about 250 million international migrants globally, and the number is increasing each year. Immigrants have contributed to the global economy, bridged cultural and business exchanges between host and home countries, and increased ethnic, racial, social, and cultural diversity in the host societies. Immigrants have also been overgeneralized about, misunderstood, scapegoated, and discriminated against. Understanding what drives international migration, who migrate, and how immigrants fare in destination has valuable theoretical, practical, and policy implications. This dissertation consists of three essays on international immigration. The first paper aims to test a series of immigration theories by studying immigrant skill-selection into South Africa and the United States. Most of the research on the determinants of immigrant skill selection has been focusing on immigrants in the United States and other developed destination countries. However, migration has been growing much faster in recent years between developing countries. This case study offers insights into the similarities and differences of immigration theories within the contexts of international migration into South Africa and the US. This project is funded by the Hamilton Research Fellowship of Columbia School of Social Work. The second paper narrows down the focus onto Asian immigrants in the United States, studying how the skill-selection of Asian immigrants from different regions has evolved over the past four decades. Asian sending countries have experienced tremendous growth in their economy and educational infrastructure. The rapid development provides an excellent opportunity to test the theories on the associations between emigrants’ skill-selection and sending countries’ income, inequality, and education level. On the other hand, during the study period, the United States has had massive expansion employment-based immigration system, followed by cutbacks in immigration policies. I study the association between immigration patterns and these policies to draw inferences on how the changes in immigration policies have affected the skill selection of Asian immigrants. This research is funded by Columbia University Weatherhead East Asia Institute’s Dorothy Borg Research Program Dissertation Research Fellowship. The third paper centers on the less-educated immigrant groups in the US and investigates the gap in welfare use between less-educated immigrant and native households during 1995-2018, spanning periods of economic recessions and recoveries, changes in welfare policy regimes, and policies towards immigrants. I use “decomposition analysis” to study to what extend demographic factors, macroeconomic trends, and welfare and immigration policy could explain the disparities in welfare participation between immigrants and natives. This paper is co-authored with Dr. Neeraj Kaushal from Columbia School of Social Work and Dr. Julia Shu-Huah Wang from the University of Hong Kong. The work has been published in Population Research and Policy Review (doi.org/10.1007/s11113-020-09621-8).

Geographic Areas

• South Africa
• United States
• Social service
• Immigrants--Economic aspects
• Immigrants--Social conditions
• Race discrimination
• Immigrants--Education

More About This Work

• DOI Copy DOI to clipboard

• Development
• Asia and the Pacific
• Latin America and the Caribbean
• Western Asia
• عربي
• 中文
• Français
• Русский
• Español

United Nations

Department of economic and social affairs desa.

• PUBLICATIONS

Global importance of migration for development

“We must guard against the adoption of protectionist and isolationist policies: history has shown us the cost of those. We must make sure that we guarantee the rights of migrants and assure them of decent lives and working conditions,” said H.E. Mr. Joseph Deiss, President of the 65th session of the United Nations General Assembly, as he opened the Informal Thematic Debate on International Migration and Development.

The one day event was hosted by Mr. Deiss on 19 May at UN Headquarters in New York. The debate discussed policies that attempt to maximize the opportunities of international migration for development and reduce its negative impacts ahead of the 2013 High-level Dialogue on Migration and Development. The first round table discussed the contribution of migrants to development and the second focused on improving international cooperation on migration and development.

Approximately 214 million people or about three per cent of the world’s population is currently living outside their countries of origin. Noting that we live in an age of mobility, a time when more people are on the move than any other time in human history, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon stressed the need to garner the positives of migration for the global good.

Migrant labor is desirable and necessary to sustain economic growth and rise out of the current recession. Migration is important for the transfer of manpower and skills and provides the needed knowledge and innovation for global growth.

In order to address the issues raised by global migration, it is necessary to improve international coordination. Mr. Abdelhamid El Jamri, Chairperson of the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families explained “We need to examine issues faced by migrants in order to help in countries of countries.”

Mr. Anthony Lake, UNICEF Executive Director and Chair-in-Office of the Global Migration Group, of which UN/DESA is a member, concluded, “As we take stock and look ahead to the 2013 High-level Dialogue on International Migration and Development, it is clear that much more remains to be done.  Dialogue, consultation and partnerships have never been more important and we have more to learn from each other than ever before.”

Related information

• Informal Thematic Debate on International Migration and Development

• 2015  (128)
• 2014  (136)
• 2013  (133)
• 2012  (138)
• 2011  (140)
• 2010  (68)
• Capacity Development
• Financing for Development
• Policy Analysis
• Public Administration
• Social Development
• Sustainable Development

UN DESA offers a range of issue specific newsletters. Sign Up and receive your customized newsletters.

READ DESA NEWS

• Office for ECOSOC Support and Coordination
• Division for Sustainable Development
• Population Division
• Division for Public Administration and Development Management
• Financing for Development Office
• Division for Social Policy and Development
• Statistics Division
• Development Policy and Analysis Division
• United Nations Forum on Forests
• Capacity Development Office
• DESA e-Brochure
• Civil Society
• Funds and Programmes
• Copyright |
• Terms of Use |
• Privacy Notice |

An Introduction to Migration Studies: The Rise and Coming of Age of a Research Field

• Open Access
• First Online: 04 June 2022

Cite this chapter

You have full access to this open access chapter

• Peter Scholten 2 ,
• Asya Pisarevskaya 3 &
• Nathan Levy 3  

Part of the book series: IMISCOE Research Series ((IMIS))

29k Accesses

5 Citations

1 Altmetric

Migration studies has contributed significantly to our understanding of mobilities and migration-related diversities. It has developed a distinct body of knowledge on why people migrate, how migration takes place, and what the consequences are of migration in a broad sense, both for migrants themselves and for societies involved in migration. As a broadly-based research field, migration studies has evolved at the crossroads of a variety of disciplines. This includes disciplines such as sociology, political science, anthropology, geography, law and economics, but increasingly it expands to a broader pool of disciplines also including health studies, development studies, governance studies and many more, building on insights from these disciplines.

You have full access to this open access chapter,  Download chapter PDF

Similar content being viewed by others

Changing Perspectives on Migration History and Research in Switzerland: An Introduction

15 Internal Migration

Introduction: Contemporary Insights on Migration and Population Distribution

Migration is itself in no way a new phenomenon; but the specific and interdisciplinary study of migration is relatively recent. Although the genesis of migration studies goes back to studies in the early twentieth century, it was only by the end of the twentieth and the beginning of the twenty-first century that the number of specialised master programmes in migration studies increased, that the number of journal outlets grew significantly, that numerous specialised research groups and institutes emerged all over the world, and that in broader academia migration studies was recognised as a distinct research field in its own right. By 2018 there were at least 45 specialised journals in migration studies (Pisarevskaya et al., 2019 , p. 462). The field has developed its own international research networks, such as IMISCOE (International Migration, Integration and Social Cohesion in Europe), NOMRA (Network of Migration Research on Africa), and the global more policy-oriented network Metropolis. Students at an increasingly broad range of universities can study dedicated programs as well as courses on migration studies. Slowly but gradually the field is also globalising beyond its European and North American roots.

Migration studies is a research field, which means that it is not a discipline in itself with a core body of knowledge that applies to various topics, but an area of studies that focus on a specific topic while building on insights from across various disciplines. It has clear roots in particular in economics, geography, anthropology and sociology. However, when looking at migration publications and conferences today, the disciplinary diversity of the field has increased significantly, for instancing bringing important contributions from and to political sciences, law, demography, cultural studies, languages, history, health studies and many more. It is hard to imagine a discipline to which migration studies is not relevant; for instance, even for engineering studies, migration has become a topic of importance when focusing on the role that social media play as migration infrastructures. Beyond being multidisciplinary (combining insights from various disciplines), the field has become increasing interdisciplinary (with its own approach that combines aspects from various disciplines) or even transdisciplinary (with an approach that systematically integrates knowledge and methods from various disciplines).

1 A Pluralist Perspective on Migration Studies

Migration studies is a broad and diverse research field that covers many different topics, ranging from the economics of migration to studies of race and ethnicity. As with many research fields, the boundaries of the field cannot be demarcated very clearly. However, this diversity does also involve a fair degree of fragmentation in the field. For instance, the field features numerous sub-fields of study, such as refugee studies, multicultural studies, race studies, diversity studies, etc. In fact, there are many networks and conferences within the field with a specific focus, for instance, on migration and development. So, the field of migration studies also encompasses, in itself, a broad range of subfields.

This diversity is not only reflected in the topics covered by migration studies, but also in theoretical and methodological approaches. It is an inherently pluralistic field, bringing often fundamentally different theoretical perspectives on key topics such as the root causes of integration. It brings very different methods, for instance ranging from ethnographic fieldwork with specific migrant communities to large-n quantitative analyses of the relation between economics and migration.

Therefore, this book is an effort to capture and reflect on this pluralistic character of field. It resists the temptation to bring together a ‘state of the art’ of knowledge on topics, raising the illusion that there is perhaps a high degree of knowledge consensus. Rather, we aim to bring to the foreground the key theoretical and methodological discussions within the field, and let the reader appreciate the diversity and richness of the field.

However, the book will also discuss how this pluralism can complicate discussions within the field based on very basic concepts. Migration studies stands out from most other research fields in terms of a relatively high degree of contestation of some of its most basic concepts. Examples include terms as ‘integration’, ‘multiculturalism’, ‘cohesion’ but perhaps most pertinent also the basic concept of ‘migration.’ Many of the field’s basic concepts can be defined as essentially contested concepts. Without presuming to bring these conceptual discussions to a close, this book does bring an effort to map and understand these discussions, aiming to prevent conceptual divides from leading to fragmentation in the field.

This conceptual contestation reflects broader points on how the field has evolved. Various studies have shown that the field’s development in various countries and at various moments has been spurred by a policy context in which migration was problematised. Many governments revealed a clear interest in research that could help governments control migration and promote the ‘integration’ of migrants into their nation-states (DeWind, 2000 ). The field’s strong policy relevance also led to a powerful dynamic of coproduction in specific concepts such as ‘integration’ or ‘migrant.’ At the same time, there is also clear critical self-reflection in the field on such developments, and on how to promote more systematic theory building in migration studies. This increase of reflexivity can be taken as a sign of the coming of age of migration studies as a self-critical and self-conscious research field.

An introduction to migration studies will need to combine a systematic approach to mapping the field with a strong historical awareness of how the field has developed and how specific topics, concepts and methods have emerged. Therefore, in this chapter, we will do just that. We will start with a historical analysis of how the field emerged and evolved, in an effort to show how the field became so diverse and what may have been critical junctures in the development of the field. Subsequently, we will try to define what is migration studies, by a systematic approach towards mapping the pluralism of the field without losing grip of what keeps together the field of migration studies. Therefore, rather than providing one sharp definition of migration studies, we will map that parts that together are considered to constitute migration studies. Finally, we will map the current state of the research field.

To provide a comprehensive overview of such a pluralist and complex field of study, we employ a variety of methods. Qualitative historical analysis of key works that shaped the formation and development of the field over the years is combined with novel bibliometric methods to give a birds-eye view of the structure of the field in terms of volume of publications, internationalisation and epistemic communities of scholarship on migration. The bibliometric analysis presented in this chapter is based on our previous articles, in which we either, used Scopus data from 40 key journals (Pisarevskaya et al., 2019 , or a complex key-word query to harvest meta-data of relevant publications from Web of Science (Levy et al., 2020 ). Both these approaches to meta-data collection were created and reviewed with the help of multiple experts of migration studies. You can consult the original publications for more details. Our meta-data contained information on authors, years of publication, journals, titles, and abstracts of articles and books, as well as reference lists, i.e. works that were cited by each document in the dataset.

In this chapter you will see the findings from these analyses, revealing the growth trends of migration specific journals, and yearly numbers of articles published on migration-related topics, number and geographical distribution of international co-authorships, as well as referencing patterns of books and articles – the “co-citation analysis”. The colourful network graphs you will see later in the chapter, reveal links between scholars, whose writings are mentioned together in one reference list. When authors are often mentioned together in the publications of other scientists, it means that their ideas are part of a common conversation. The works of the most-cited authors in different parts of the co-citation networks give us an understanding of which topics they specialise in, which methods they use in their research, and also within which disciplinary traditions they work. All in all, co-citation analysis provides an insight on the conceptual development of epistemic communities with their distinct paradigms, methods and thematic foci.

In addition, we bring in some findings from the Migration Research Hub, which hosts an unprecedented number of articles, book chapters, reports, dissertation relevant to the field. All these items are brought together with the help of IT technologies, integration with different databases such as Dimensions, ORCID, Crossref, and Web of Science, as well as submitted by the authors themselves. At the end of 2020, this database contains around 90,000 of items categorised into the taxonomy of migration studies, which will be presented below.

2 What Is Migration Studies?

The historical development of migration studies, as described in the next section, reveals the plurality of the research field. Various efforts to come up with a definition of the field therefore also reflect this plurality. For instance, King ( 2012 ) speaks of migration studies as encompassing ‘all types of international and internal migration, migrants, and migration-related diversities’. This builds on Cohen’s ( 1996 , p. xi–xii) nine conceptual ‘dyads’ in the field. Many of these have since been problematised – answering Cohen’s own call for critical and systematic considerations – but they nonetheless provide a skeletal overview of the field as it is broadly understood and unfolded in this book and in the taxonomy on which it is based:

Individual vs. contextual reasons to migrate

Rate vs. incidence

Internal vs. international migration

Temporary vs. permanent migration

Settler vs. labour migration

Planned vs. flight migration

Economic migrants vs. political refugees

Illegal vs. legal migration

Push vs. pull factors

Therefore, the taxonomy provides the topical structure—elaborated below—by which we approach this book. We do not aim to provide a be-all and end-all definition of migration studies but rather seek to capture its inherent plurality by bringing together chapters which provide a state-of-the-art of different meta-topics within the field.

The taxonomy of migration studies was developed as part of a broader research project, led by IMISCOE, from 2018 to 2020 aimed at comprehensively taking stock of and providing an index for the field (see the Migration Research Hub on www.migrationresearch.com ). It was a community endeavour, involving contributors from multiple methodological, disciplinary, and geographical backgrounds at several stages from beginning to end.

It was built through a combination of two methods. First, the taxonomy is based on a large-scale computer-based inductive analysis of a vast number—over 23,000—of journal articles, chapters, and books from the field of migration studies. This led to an empirical clustering of topics addressed within the dataset, as identified empirically in terms of keywords that tend to go together within specific publications.

Secondly, this empirical clustering was combined with a deductive approach with the aim of giving logical structure to the inductively developed topics. Engaging, at this stage, with several migration scholars with specific expertise facilitated a theory-driven expansion of the taxonomy towards what it is today, with its hierarchical categorisation not only of topics and sub-categories of topics, but also of methods, disciplines, and geographical focuses (see Fig. 1.1 below).

The structure of the taxonomy of migration studies

In terms of its content, the taxonomy that has been developed distinguishes various meta-topics within migration studies. These include:

Why do people migrate ? This involves a variety of root causes of migration, or migration drivers.

How do people migrate ? This includes a discussion of migration trajectories but also infrastructures of migration.

What forms of migration can be distinguished ? This involves an analytical distinction of a variety of migration forms

What are major consequences of migration , and whom do these consequences concern? This includes a variety of contributions on the broader consequences of migration, including migration-related diversities, ethnicity, race, the relation between migration and the city, the relation between migration and cities, gendered aspects of migration, and migration and development.

How can migration be governed ? This part will cover research on migration policies and broader policies on migration-related diversities, as well as the relation between migration and citizenship.

What methods are used in migration studies ?

All the topics in the taxonomy are grouped into several branches: Migration processes, Migration Consequences, Migration governance and Cross-cutting. In Fig. 1.2 below you can see how many journal articles, books, book chapters and reports can be found in the migration research hub just for the period of the last 20 years. The number of items belonging to each theme can vary significantly, because some of them are broader than others. Broader themes can be related to larger numbers of items, for instance ‘migration forms’ is very broad, because it includes many types and forms of migration on which scientific research in this field chooses to focus on. On the contrary, the theme of ‘governance processes’ is narrower because less studies are concerned with specific processes of migration management, such as criminalisation, externalisation or implementation.

Distribution of taxonomy branches in the Migration Research Hub

The various chapters in this book can of course never fully represent the full scope of the field. Therefore, the chapters will include various interactive links with the broader literature. This literature is made accessible via the Migration Research Hub, which aims to represent the full scope of migration studies. The Hub is based on the taxonomy and provides a full overview of relevant literature (articles, chapters, books, reports, policy briefs) per taxonomy item. This not only includes works published in migration journals or migration books, but also a broader range of publications, such as disciplinary journals.

Because the Hub is being constantly updated, the taxonomy—along with how we approach the question of ‘what is migration studies?’ in this book—is interactive; it is not dogmatic, but reflexive. As theory develops, new topics and nomenclature emerge. In fact, several topics have been added and some topics have been renamed since “Taxonomy 1.0” was launched in 2018. In this way, the taxonomy is not a fixed entity, but constantly evolving, as a reflection of the field itself.

3 The Historical Development of Migration Studies

3.1 an historical perspective on “migration studies”.

A pluralist perspective on an evolving research field, therefore, cannot rely on one single definition of what constitutes that research field. Instead, a historical perspective can shed light on how “migration studies” has developed. Therefore, we use this introductory chapter to outline the genesis and emergence of what is nowadays considered to be the field of migration studies. This historical perspective will also rely on various earlier efforts to map the development of the field, which have often had a significant influence on what came to be considered “ migration studies ”.

3.2 Genesis of Migration Studies

Migration studies is often recognised as having originated in the work of geographer Ernst Ravenstein in the 1880s, and his 11 Laws of Migration ( 1885 ). These laws were the first effort towards theorising why (internal) migration takes place and what different dynamics of mobility look like, related, for instance, to what happens to the sending context after migrants leave, or differing tendencies between men and women to migrate. Ravenstein’s work provided the foundation for early, primarily economic, approaches to the study of migration, or, more specifically, internal or domestic migration (see Greenwood & Hunt, 2003 ; Massey et al., 1998 ).

The study of international migration and migrants can perhaps be traced back to Znaniecki and Thomas’ ( 1927 ) work on Polish migration to Europe and America. Along with Ravenstein’s Laws , most scholars consider these volumes to mark the genesis of migration studies.

The Polish Peasant and the Chicago School

The Polish Peasant in Europe and America —written by Florian Znaniecki & William Thomas, and first published between 1918 and 1920—contains an in-depth analysis of the lives of Polish migrant families. Poles formed the biggest immigrant group in America at this time. Thomas and Znaniecki’s work was not only seminal for migration research, but for the wider discipline of sociology. Indeed, their colleagues in the Department of Sociology at the University of Chicago, such as Robert Park, had a profound impact on the discipline with their groundbreaking empirical studies of race and ethnic relations (Bulmer, 1986 ; Bommes & Morawska, 2005 ).

Greenwood and Hunt ( 2003 ) provide a helpful overview of the early decades of migration research, albeit through a primarily economic disciplinary lens, with particular focus on America and the UK. According to them, migration research “took off” in the 1930s, catalysed by two societal forces—urbanisation and the Great Depression—and the increased diversity those forces generated. To illustrate this point, they cite the bibliographies collated by Dorothy Thomas ( 1938 ) which listed nearly 200 publications (119 from the USA and UK, 72 from Germany), many of which focused on migration in relation to those two societal forces, in what was already regarded as a “broadly based field of study” (Greenwood & Hunt, 2003 , p. 4).

Prior to Thomas’ bibliography, early indications of the institutionalisation of migration research came in the US, with the establishment of the Social Science Research Council’s Committee on Scientific Aspects of Human Migration (see DeWind, 2000 ). This led to the publication of Thornthwaite’s overview of Internal Migration in the United States ( 1934 ) and one of the first efforts to study migration policymaking, Goodrich et al’s Migration and Economic Opportunity ( 1936 ).

In the case of the UK in the 1930s, Greenwood and Hunt observe an emphasis on establishing formal causal models, inspired by Ravenstein’s Laws . The work of Makower et al. ( 1938 , 1939 , 1940 ), which, like Goodrich, focused on the relationship of migration and unemployment, is highlighted by Greenwood and Hunt as seminal in this regard. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics regards Makower and Marschak as having made a “pioneering contribution” to our understanding of labour mobility (see also the several taxonomy topics dealing with labour).

3.3 The Establishment of a Plural Field of Migration Studies (1950s–1980s)

Migration research began to formalise and expand in the 1950s and 1960s (Greenwood & Hunt, 2003 ; Pedraza-Bailey, 1990 ). A noteworthy turning point for the field was the debate around assimilation which gathered pace throughout the 1950s and is perhaps most notably exemplified by Gordon’s ( 1964 ) typology of this concept.

Gordon’s Assimilation Typology and the Problematisation of Integration

Assimilation, integration, acculturation, and the question of how migrants adapt and are incorporated into a host society (and vice versa), has long been a prominent topic in migration studies.

Gordon ( 1964 ) argued that assimilation was composed of seven aspects of identification with the host society: cultural, structural, martial, identificational, behavioural, attitudinal, and civic. His research marked the beginning of hundreds of publications on this question of how migrants and host societies adapt. The broader discussions with which Gordon interacted evolved into one of the major debates in migration studies.

By the 1990s, understandings of assimilation evolved in several ways. Some argued that process was context- or group-dependent (see Shibutani & Kwan, 1965 ; Alba & Nee, 1997 ). Others recognised that there was not merely one type nor indeed one direction of integration (Berry, 1997 ).

The concept itself has been increasingly problematised since the turn of the century. One prominent example of this is Favell ( 2003 ). Favell’s main argument was that integration as a normative policy goal structured research on migration in Western Europe. Up until then, migration research had reproduced what he saw as nation-state-centred power structures. It is worth reading this alongside Wimmer and Glick Schiller (2003) to situate it in broader contemporary debates, but there is plenty more to read on this topic.

For more on literature around this topic, see Chaps. 19 , 20 , and 21 of this book.

Indeed, these debates and discussions were emblematic of wider shifts in approaches to the study of migration. The first of these was towards the study of international (as opposed to internal) migration in the light of post-War economic dynamics, which also established a split in approaches to migration research that has lasted several decades (see King & Skeldon, 2010 ). The second shift was towards the study of ethnic and race relations, which continued into the 1970s, and was induced by the civil rights movements of these decades (Pedraza-Bailey, 1990 ). These two shifts are reflected in the establishment of some of the earliest journals with a migration and diversity focus in the 1960s—the establishment of journals being an indicator of institutionalisation—as represented in Fig. 1.3 . Among these are journals that continue to be prominent in the field, such as International Migration (1961-), International Migration Review (1964-), and, later, the Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies (1970-) and Ethnic & Racial Studies (1978-).

Number of journals focused on migration and migration-related diversity (1959–2018). (Source: Pisarevskaya et al., 2019 , p. 462) ( R&C Race & Class, IM International Migration, IMR International Migration Review, SE Studi Emigrazione, PP Patterns of Prejudice, JBS Journal of Black Studies, JEMS Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, PDR Population and Development Review, IJIR International Journal of Intercultural Relations, ERS Ethnic & Racial Studies, JIS Journal of Intercultural Studies, RSQ Refugee Survey Quarterly, REMI Revue Européenne des Migrations Internationales, MW Migration World, JRS Journal of Refugee Studies, LCC Language, Culture, and Curriculum, APMJ Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, HM Hommes et Migrations, Id . Identities, PSP Population, Space, and Place, CDEMP Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, IMIS IMIS-Beitrage, EH Ethnicity & Health, CS Citizenship Studies, JSIE Journal of Studies in International Education, REE Race, Ethnicity, and Education, EJML European Journal of Migration and Law, JIMI Journal of International Migration and Integration, NJMR Norwegian Journal of Migration Research, Ethn . Ethnicities, GN Global Networks, JIRS Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, ML Migration Letters, ZAA Zeitschrift für Ausländerrecht und Ausländerpolitik, IJMHSC International Journal of Migration, Health, and Social Care, LS Latino Studies, FJEM Finnish Journal of Ethnicity and Migration, Mob . Mobilities, JDHE Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, NJMR Nordic Journal of Migration Research (merger of NJMR and FJEM), IZAJM IZA Journal of Migration, CEEMR Central and Eastern European Migration Review, MS Migration Studies, CMS Comparative Migration Studies, Mov . Movements, JMH Journal of Migration History, M&S Migration & Society. For more journals publishing in migration studies, see migrationresearch.com )

By the 1970s, although several new journals of migration studies had emerged and the field was maturing in terms of theory-building, there remained a lack of interdisciplinary “synthesis” (Kritz et al., 1981 ; King, 2012 ). This is reflected in the research of Levy et al. ( 2020 ). Based on citation data showing who migration researchers cited over the years, Fig. 1.4 maps the embryo-like development of migration studies every half-decade from 1975 to the present day. In the early decades it shows distinct “epistemic communities” (represented by colours) clustered together based on disciplines in migration research. For example, the earlier decades show economists focused on development (sky blue); economic sociologists analysing the labour market behaviour of migrants (royal blue); demographers (green); and sociologists studying the assimilation topic (red) mentioned above. By the late 1980s, a new cluster of social psychologists (yellow) emerged, with a combination of demographers and economists clustering (pink) in the 1990s. The figure shows an increasing coherence to the field since then, as the next section elaborates, but the 1970s and 1980s was a period of disciplinary differentiation within migration studies.

Co-citation clusters of authors cited in migration studies literature 1975–2018. (From Levy et al., 2020 , p. 18)

Although the field may not have been interdisciplinary in the 1980s, it was indeed multi disciplinary, and research was being conducted in more and more countries: This period entailed a “veritable boom” of contributions to migration research from several disciplines, according to Pedraza-Bailey ( 1990 ), along with a degree of internationalisation, in terms of European scholarship “catching up” with hitherto dominant North American publications, according to Bommes & Morawska, ( 2005 ). English-language migration research was still, however, dominated by institutes based in the global North and the ‘West’.

Interdisciplinarity and Internationalisation in Migration Studies: Key Readings

There have been several publications dealing with the development of migration studies over the years. These readings identify some of the key points related to interdisciplinarity in the field, and how the field has evolved internationally.

Brettell, C. B., & Hollifield, J. F. (2000). Migration theory: Talking across disciplines (1st ed.). Abingdon: Routledge; 2 nd ed. (2008); 3 rd ed. (2015).

Talking Across Disciplines has been used as a standard textbook in migration studies for several years. It represents the first effort towards highlighting the key ideas of the multiple disciplines in the field. It offers an introduction to the contributions these disciplines, as well as critical reflections on how those disciplines have interacted.

Bommes, M., & Morawska, E. (2005). International migration research: Constructions, omissions and the promises of Interdisciplinarity. Farnham: Ashgate.

International Migration Research is one of the first attempts to explore and synthesise migration studies from an interdisciplinary perspective. In this book, scholars from multiple disciplines provide a state of the art of the field which illuminates the contrasts between how these disciplines approach migration studies. It is one of the first works in which migration studies is understood to be an institutionalised field of study.

Thränhardt, D., & Bommes, M. (2010). National Paradigms of migration research. Osnabrück: V&R.

In this book, readers are introduced to the idea that migration studies developed as a policy-driven field in several countries in the twentieth century. Not only did this entail diverse policy priorities, but also diverse “paradigms” of knowledge production in terms of terminology, concepts, and measures. This diversity reflects different national science policies. There are chapters reflecting on these processes from multiple continents, and from both “old” and “new” immigration countries.

In the decades before the 1990s—with a heavy reliance on census and demographic data—quantitative research abounded in migration studies (Greenwood & Hunt, 2003 ). But by the beginning of the 1990s, a “qualitative turn”, linked more broadly to the “cultural turn” in social sciences, had taken place (King, 2012 ). In other words, migration studies broadly shifted from migration per se, to migrants. King notes the example of geographical research: “human geography research on migration switched from quantitatively inclined population geography to qualitatively minded cultural geographers […] this epistemological shift did not so much re-make theories of the causes of migration as enrich our understanding of the migrant experience ” (King, 2012 , p. 24). Indeed, this is also reflected in how Pedraza-Bailey ( 1990 , p. 49) mapped migration research by the end of the 1980s into two main categories: (i) the migration process itself and (ii) the (subjective) processes that follow migration.

Even though it is clear that migration studies is made up of multiple communities—we have already made the case for its pluralist composition—it is worth re-emphasising this development through the changing shape and structure of the ‘embryos’ in Fig. 1.4 above. The positioning of the clusters relative to each other denotes the extent to which different epistemic communities cited the same research, while the roundness of the map denotes how the field can be considered an integrated whole. We clearly see that in the period 1975–1979, the disciplinary clusters were dispersed, with loose linkages between one another. In the 1980s through to the mid-1990s, while some interdisciplinarity was emerging, several clusters, such as demographers and psychologists, were working largely within their own disciplines. In other words, in the 1970s and 1980s, authors working on migration referred to and were cited by other scholars primarily within their own disciplinary traditions. In this time, although a few migration journals had been established, this number was small compared to today. Without many scientific journals specialised in their topic, migration scholars were largely reading and publishing in disciplinary journals. By today—particularly in Europe—this has changed, as the increasing roundness of the maps demonstrate and as the rest of this chapter substantiates.

3.4 Expansion of Migration Studies Since the Turn of the Century

In the 2000s the expansion of migration studies accelerated further (see Fig. 1.5 ). In 1975, there were just under 350 articles published on migration; there were 900 published in 2000; in 2017, over 3000 articles were published. This growth not only involved a diversification of the field, but also various critical conceptual developments and the rise of an increasingly self-critical approach to migration studies. One of these critical developments involved a move beyond a strong focus on the national dimension of migration and diversities, for example in terms of understanding migration as international migration, on integration as a phenomenon only within nation-states, and on migrants as either being connected to the ‘home’ or ‘host’ society.

Number of articles, per year, in migration studies dataset based on advanced query of Web of Science for Migration Research Hub, 12 March 2019. (Based on Levy et al., 2020 , p. 8)

Several key publications marked this important turn. Wimmer and Glick-Schiller ( 2002 ) refer to “ methodological nationalism ” and critique the notion of taking the nation-state as a given as if it were a natural entity. In fact, for Wimmer and Glick Schiller, this way of understanding reality helps contribute to nation-state building more than it enhances scientific knowledge. In a similar contribution, Favell ( 2003 ) critiques the concept of ‘integration’ as naturalising the nation-state in relation to migration. Favell’s main argument was that integration as a normative policy goal structured research on migration in Western Europe. Up until then, migration research had reproduced what he saw as nation-state-centred power structures. Thranhardt and Bommes ( 2010 ) further substantiate this point by showing empirically how migration studies developed within distinct national context leading to the reification of distinct national models of integration/migration.

Where did this turn beyond methodological nationalism lead to? Several important trends can be defined in the literature. One involves the rise of perspectives that go beyond nation-states, such as transnationalist (Faist 2000 , Vertovec 2009 ) and postnationalist (Soysal & Soyland, 1994 ) perspectives. Such perspectives have helped reveal how migration and migrant communities can also be shaped in ways that reach beyond nation-states, such as in transnational communities that connect communities from across various countries or in the notion of universal personhood that defines the position of migrants regardless of the state where they are from or where they reside.

Another perspective takes migration studies rather to the local (regional, urban, or neighbourhood) level of migration and diversity. Zapata-Barrero et al. speak in this regard of the local turn in migration studies (2010). They show how migration-related diversities take shape in specific local settings, such as cities or even neighbourhoods, in ways that cannot be understood from the traditional notion of distinct national models.

Also, in the study of migration itself, an important trend can be identified since the 2000s. Rather than focusing on migration as a phenomenon where someone leaves one country to settle in another, the so-called “mobility turn” (Boswell & Geddes, 2010 ) calls for a better comprehension of the variation in mobility patterns. This includes for instance variation in temporalities of migration (temporary, permanent, circular), but also in the frequency of migration, types of migration, etc. In this book we will address such mobilities in the forms of different types of migration, frequencies and temporalities by discussing very different migration forms .

3.5 Growing Self-Critical Reflection in Migration Studies

Since the 2000s, there has also been a growing reflexive and self-critical approach within migration studies. Studies like those of Wimmer and Glick-Schiller, Favell, and Dahinden are clear illustrations of this growing conceptual self-consciousness. The field of migration studies has itself become an object of critical reflection. In the context of this book, we take this as a signal of the coming of age of migration studies.

This critical reflection touches upon a variety of issues in the field. One is how the field has conceptualised ethnicity, which was criticised as “ethnic lensing” (Glick Schiller & Çağlar, 2009 ). This would involve an inherent tendency to connect and problematise a broad range of issues with ethnicity, such as studies on how ethnic communities do on the labour market or the role that ethnicity plays in policies. The core argument to move beyond ethnic lensing is that focusing only on ethnicity risks defying social complexity and the importance of intersectionalities between ethnicity and, for instance, class, citizenship, education, location, cultural, or political disposition, etc. Dahinden ( 2016 ) calls in this context for a “ de-migrantisation ” of migration studies to avoid the naturalisation of migrants in relation to all sorts of issues and problems. Vertovec ( 2007 ) develops the concept “ super-diversity ” in this context to capture the social complexity of migration-related diversities.

Another strand of critical reflection concerns the field’s relationship to policymaking . Studies like those by Scholten et al. ( 2015 ) and Ruhs et al. ( 2019 ) offer critical reflection on the role that the relationship between migration studies and broader policy settings has played in the conceptual and methodological development of the field. On the one hand, the evolution of the field has been spurred on in its policy relevance, for instance in research on migration management or ‘migrant integration’. This relationship has contributed to the co-production of knowledge and key concepts, such as ‘integration’, and impeded the critical and independent development of the field. On the other hand, the field also leaves important gaps in research-policy relations, leaving important areas of knowledge production hardly connected to knowledge utilisation. Such studies have raised awareness of the necessity of research-policy relations for the societal impact of the field, while also problematising the nature of research-policy relations and their impact on the development of the field itself.

Finally, also in the context of growing public awareness on racism, the field has increasingly become self-reflexive in terms of how it deals with issues of discrimination and racism . This includes a growing awareness of institutional racism in the field itself, such as in institutes or training programs. Besides contributing to the broader field, there has been an increase of instances where institutes revise their own management and procedures in order to enhance racial justice. This includes participation of scholars from the global south, but also a proliferation of diversity policies in the field. At the same time, criticism remains on the extent to which the field has acknowledged issues of racial justice, for instance in studies on integration, migration management, or social cohesion.

4 Mapping Migration Studies Today

4.1 co-citation communities.

Nowadays, migration studies has become a more interdisciplinary field. In the last 15 years, as the “embryo” development in Fig. 1.4 shows, it became more oval-shaped without sharp “tails”. This form indicates a cross-disciplinary osmosis ; a growing interlinkage of epistemic communities. Co-referencing of authors from different disciplinary orientations became more common in the twenty-first century. Such developments can be attributed, on one hand, to the rapid digitisation of libraries and journals, as well as the multiplication of migration-focused journals, which accepted relevant contributions to discussion on migration, no matter the discipline. On the other hand, interdisciplinary endeavours were encouraged externally, for instance via grants (see European Union, 2016) and interdisciplinary master programmes created in various universities. It became fashionable to work at the intersection of disciplines, to an extent that nowadays it is often difficult to determine the disciplinary origin of a publication about migration. Whether such developments have yielded any theoretical or empirical breakthroughs is yet to be seen. In any case, it is clear that migration studies moved from being a multi-disciplinary field (with few connections between them) to an interdisciplinary field (with more connections between multiple disciplines) (Levy et al., 2020 ).

Let us now dive into the most recent co-citation clusters. Such clusters are, of course, not only categorised in terms of disciplines. They also have certain topical focuses. Figure 1.6 below zooms in to the data from Fig. 1.4 and shows the co-citation network in the period 2005–2014 in more detail. We can see seven different groups of migration scholarship that are nevertheless rather interlinked, as the oval shape of the network indicates. At 1 o’clock we can see the cluster we have elsewhere called the “Global systems school”, which has developed around such scholars as Vertovec, Soysal, Levitt, Favell, Faist, and Glick-Schiller, who introduced and developed the concept of transnationalism since the late 1990s. Contrasting with longstanding conventions of looking at migration as having an ‘endpoint’ in the countries of reception, they developed a different view of migration as a global, on-going, and dynamic process impacting receiving as well as sending societies, along with the identities, belonging, and ‘sense of home’ of migrants themselves. Nowadays, this cluster includes a very diverse group of scholars with different thematic focuses, such as the migration-development nexus (see also Chap. 18 , this volume) including de Haas, Carling, and Castles; prominent scholars on Asian migration, such as Ong and Yeoh; and many others, Guarnizo, King, Anderson, Sassen, Joppke and Baubock. Yet, the fact that they all belong to one cluster, proves that their work has been cited in the same reference lists, thus constituting an interlinked conversation on migration as global phenomenon.

Co-citation map of authors with 10+ citations in migration research in the period 2005–2014. (From Levy et al. 2020 , p. 17)

Closer to the centre of the network, we find a blue cluster, centred around Portes, a widely-cited founding father of migration studies in the USA. Next to him we also see other leading American scholars such as Waldinger, Alba and Zhou, Waters, Rumbaut, and Putnam, whose primary concern is the (economic) integration of immigrants. This cluster of scholars has elsewhere been understood as the “Michigan-Wisconsin” school of migration research, given the two universities’ success in training migration scholars in the US (cf. Hollifield, 2020 ). Traditionally this scholarship has developed in the USA and has been very prominent in the field for decades. Especially Portes is cited extensively, and widely co-cited across the epistemic communities of the whole field.

This cluster is closely interlinked with the neighbouring (at 4 o’clock) cluster of economists, demographers, and other quantitative social scientists (turquoise). At the centre of it is Massey , another giant of migration studies, who mainly conducted his migration research from a demographic perspective. Here we also see economists such as Borjas, Chiswick, and Stark, who predominantly studied the immigration reality of the USA.

Then, at 6 o’clock, we see a light-green cluster. The highly cited scholars in its core are Williams and Krieger, who study migration- and race-related differences in health. For instance, Williams’ highly-cited paper is about the experiences of racism and mental health problems of African Americans, while Krieger investigated how racism and discrimination causes high-blood pressure. Health is one of the ‘younger’ topics in contemporary migration studies; the amount of research on the intersection of migration and health has increased significantly in the last decade (Pisarevskaya et al., 2019 ).

Closely interlinked with ‘health’ is the cluster of ‘acculturationists’, positioned at 7 o’clock. The cluster is formed around J.W. Berry, a social-psychologist who introduced a theory of immigrant acculturation ( 1997 ). Scholars in this cluster investigate cross-cultural and intercultural communication from the psychological perspective. Other prominent authors in this cluster include Phinney, Pettigrew, Ward and Tajfel who studied cognitive aspects of prejudice, and Stephan famous for their integrated threat theory of prejudice (Stephan & Stephan, 2000 ).

Another significant group of scholars is positioned between 9 and 12 o’clock of the co-citation network. These are scholars focused on the politics of ethnic and race relations; prominent critical sociologists such as Foucault and Bourdieu are frequently co-cited in this cluster. Among the key authors in this group are Hall, Gilroy, Brubaker, Kymlicka, Asante, Du Bois, and Bonilla-Silva.

At 12 o’clock, we can see an orange cluster, positioned between the ethnic/race relations cluster and the “Global systems school” – this is a relatively new cluster of scholars working on the topic of mobility, developed by Urry, Scheller, and T. Cresswell. Other researchers within this loosely connected cluster focus in their research on mobilities from related to work and studies from the perspective of social and economic geography. The focus on mobility has been on the rise; it entered top three most prominent topics in migration studies in the period 2008–2017 (Pisarevskaya et al., 2019 ).

Overall, in the twenty-first century, the scholarship of migration in its variety of approaches and intertwined themes has seemed to move away from “‘ who’- and ‘what’- questions, to ‘how’- and ‘why’-questions”, compared to the early days of this field. Efforts towards quantifying and tracing geographies of migration flows and describing migrant populations in the receiving countries have somewhat declined in academic publications, while research on the subjective experiences of migrants, perceptions of migrants’ identity and belonging, as well as attention to the cultural (super)diversity of societies has become more prominent (ibid. ).

4.2 Internationalisation

Since migration is a global phenomenon, it is important that it is studied in different countries and regions, by scholars with different academic and personal backgrounds, as well as for knowledge to be transferred around the world. Only by bringing together the diversity of perspectives and contexts in which migration is studied we can achieve a truly global and nuanced understanding of migration, its causes, and its consequences.

Over the course of the field’s development, migration studies has internationalised. Even though analysis of internationalisation trends has only been conducted on English-language literature, the trends seem to be rather coherent. The number of the countries producing publications on migration has increased from 47 to 104 in the past 20 years. Publications from non-Anglophone European countries have increased by 15%, to constitute by today almost a third of English-language publications on migration, while the relative share of developed Anglophone countries (USA, UK, Canada, Australia) has declined (Pisarevskaya et al., 2019 ). The proportion of migration research that is internationally co-authored has also increased over the past 20 years, from 5% of articles in 1998 to over 20% in 2018 (Levy et al., 2020 ).

Nevertheless, international collaboration is not equally spread across the world. European and North American migration scholars have produced the highest absolute number of international collaborations between 1998 and 2018, though the relative share of collaborations among Europe-based scholars is much higher (36%) than that of their North American colleagues (15%). The suggested reasons behind these trends could be that critiques of national paradigms in migration studies have been taken up in Europe more eagerly than in North America. This has not happened without facilitation by broader science policies , particularly in the European Union, which funded the creation of the IMISCOE Network of Excellence, a network which intensified international collaborations between the research institutes working on migration and integration issues in various European countries.

In the global south, similar initiatives have been established, such as the Network for Migration Research on Africa and the Asia Pacific Knowledge Network on Migration. In these regions, international co-authorships are not uncommon, but the absolute number of publications in English compared to those from the north is small. We have thus observed an “uneven internationalisation” of migration studies (Levy et al., 2020 ); in the case of the gender and migration nexus, for instance, Kofman ( 2020 ) argues that the concentration of institutions and publishers in migration studies headquartered in the north perpetuates such inequalities.

5 An Outlook on This Interactive Guide to Migration Studies

This book is structured so as to provide an overview of key topics within the pluralist field of migration studies. It is not structured according to specific theories or disciplines, but along topics, such as why and how people migrate, what forms of migration are there, what the consequences of migration are, and how migration can be governed. Per topic, it brings an overview of key concepts and theories as well as illustrations of how these help to understand concrete empirical cases. After each chapter, the reader will have a first overview of the plurality of perspectives developed in migration studies on a specific theme as well as first grasp of empirical case studies.

The book is designed as an ‘interactive guide’; it will help connect readers to readings, projects, and reports for the selected themes via interactive links. To this aim, the book outline largely follows the official taxonomy of migration studies at migrationresearch.com . Throughout the text, there will be interactive links to overview pages on the Migration Research Hub, as well as to specific key readings. This marks the book as a point of entry for readers to get to know the field of migration studies.

Bibliography

Alba, R., & Nee, V. (1997). Rethinking assimilation theory for a new era of immigration. International Migration Review, 31 (4), 826–874.

Article   Google Scholar  

Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology, 46 (1), 5–34.

Google Scholar  

Bommes, M., & Morawska, E. T. (2005). International migration research: Constructions, omissions, and the promises of Interdisciplinarity . Ashgate.

Boswell, C., & Geddes, A. (2010). Migration and mobility in the European Union . Macmillan International Higher Education.

Bulmer, M. (1986). The Chicago School of Sociology: Institutionalization, diversity, and the rise of sociological research . University of Chicago Press.

Cohen, R. (1996). Theories of migration . Edward Elgar Publishing.

Dahinden, J. (2016). A plea for the ‘de-migranticization’of research on migration and integration. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 39 (13), 2207–2225.

DeWind, J. (2000). Immigration studies and the social science research council. In N. Foner, R. G. Rumbaut, & S. J. Gold (Eds.), Immigration research for a new century: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 69–75). Russell Sage Foundation.

Faist, T. (2000). The volume and dynamics of international migration and transnational social spaces . Oxford University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Favell, A. (2003). Integration nations: The nation-state and research on immigrants in Western Europe. In G. Brochmann (Ed.), Multicultural challenge (Comparative Social Research) (Vol. 22). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Glick Schiller, N., & Çağlar, A. (2009). Towards a comparative theory of locality in migration studies: Migrant incorporation and city scale. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 35 (2), 177–202.

Goodrich, C., Allin, B. W., Brunck, H. K., Creamer, D. B., Thornthwaite, C. W., Hayes, M., … Vance, R. B. (1936). Migration and economic opportunity: The report of the study of population redistribution . University of Pennsylvania Press.

Gordon, M. M. (1964). Assimilation in American life: The role of race, religion, and national origins . Oxford University Press.

Greenwood, M. J., & Hunt, G. L. (2003). The early history of migration research. International Regional Science Review, 26 (1), 3–37.

Hollifield, J. F. (2020). Is migration a unique field of study in social sciences? A response to levy, Pisarevskaya, and Scholten. Comparative Migration Studies, 8 (1), 1–9.

King, R. (2012). Theories and typologies of migration: An overview and a primer . Malmö Institute for Studies of Migration, Diversity and Welfare.

King, R., & Skeldon, R. (2010). “Mind the gap!”: Integrating approaches to internal and international migration. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 36 (10), 1619–1646.

Kofman, E. (2020). Unequal internationalisation and the emergence of a new epistemic community: Gender and migration. Comparative Migration Studies, 8 (1), 1–6.

Kritz, M. M., Tomasi, S. M., & Keely, C. B. (1981). Global trends in migration: Theory and research on international population movements . Center for Migration Studies.

Levy, N., Pisarevskaya, A., & Scholten, P. (2020). Between fragmentation and institutionalisation: The rise of migration studies as a research field. Comparative Migration Studies, 8 (1), 1–24.

Makower, H. J., Marschak, J., & Robinson, H. W. (1938). Studies in mobility of labour: A tentative statistical measure. Oxford Economic Papers, 1 , 83–123.

Makower, H. J., Marschak, J., & Robinson, H. W. (1939). Studies in mobility of labour: Analysis for Great Birtain, part I. Oxford Economic Papers, 2 , 70–97.

Makower, H. J., Marschak, J., & Robinson, H. W. (1940). Studies in mobility of labour: Analysis for Great Britain, part II. Oxford Economic Papers, 4 , 39–62.

Massey, D. S., Arango, J., Hugo, G., Kouaouci, A., & Pellegrino, A. (1998). Worlds in motion: Understanding international migration at the end of the millennium . Clarendon Press.

Pedraza-Bailey, S. (1990). Immigration research: A conceptual map. Social Science History, 14 (1), 43–67.

Pisarevskaya, A., Levy, N., & Scholten, P. (2019). Mapping migration studies: An empirical analysis of the coming of age of a research field. Migration Studies , 1–27.

Ruhs, M., Tamas, K., & Palme, J. (2019). Bridging the gaps: Linking research to public debates and policy making on migration and integration (p. 288). Oxford University Press.

Scholten, P., Entzinger, H., Penninx, R., & Verbeek, S. (2015). Integrating immigrants in Europe: Research-policy dialogues . Springer Nature.

Shibutani, T., & Kwan, K. M. Ethnic stratification: A comparative approach (, 1965).

Soysal, Y. N., & Soyland, A. J. (1994). Limits of citizenship: Migrants and postnational membership in Europe . University of Chicago Press.

Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (2000). An integrated threat theory of prejudice. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 23–45). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Thomas, D. (1938). Research memorandum on migration differentials . Social Science Research Council.

Thornthwaite, C. W. (1934). Internal migration in the United States . University of Pennsylvania Press.

Thränhardt, D., & Bommes, M. (Eds.). (2010). National paradigms of migration research (Vol. 13). V&R unipress GmbH.

Vertovec, S. (2007). Super-diversity and its implications. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 30 (6), 1024–1054.

Vertovec, S. (2009). Transnationalism . Routledge.

Wimmer, A., & Glick Schiller, N. (2002). Methodological nationalism and beyond: Nation–state building, migration and the social sciences. Global Networks, 2 (4), 301–334.

Znaniecki, F., & Thomas, W. I. (1927). In E. Zaretsky (Ed.), The polish peasant in Europe and America: A classic work in immigration history . University of Illinois Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Erasmus School of Social and Behavioural Sciences; Room T17-16, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands

Peter Scholten

Erasmus School of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands

Asya Pisarevskaya & Nathan Levy

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Scholten .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations, rights and permissions.

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Scholten, P., Pisarevskaya, A., Levy, N. (2022). An Introduction to Migration Studies: The Rise and Coming of Age of a Research Field. In: Scholten, P. (eds) Introduction to Migration Studies. IMISCOE Research Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92377-8_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92377-8_1

Published : 04 June 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-92376-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-92377-8

eBook Packages : Social Sciences Social Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Affective Science
• Biological Foundations of Psychology
• Clinical Psychology: Disorders and Therapies
• Cognitive Psychology/Neuroscience
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational/School Psychology
• Forensic Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems of Psychology
• Individual Differences
• Methods and Approaches in Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational and Institutional Psychology
• Personality
• Psychology and Other Disciplines
• Social Psychology
• Sports Psychology
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Immigration, migration, and culture.

• Victoria M. Esses Victoria M. Esses Department of Psychology, Western University
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.287
• Published online: 28 March 2018

Migration is the movement of people from one location to another, either within a country (internal migration between cities or regions) or between countries (international migration). Migration may be relatively voluntary (e.g., for employment opportunities) or involuntary (e.g., due to armed conflict, persecution, or natural disasters), and it may be temporary (e.g., migrant workers moving back and forth between source and receiving areas) or permanent (e.g., becoming a permanent resident in a new country). The term immigration refers specifically to international migration that is relatively permanent in nature. Immigrants are those individuals who have moved to a new country on a relatively permanent basis. Of importance, refugees are a particular type of immigrant, defined and protected by international law. They are individuals who have been formally recognized as having fled their country of residence because of a well-founded fear of persecution, armed conflict, violence, or war. Until they are recognized as such, these individuals are asylum seekers—individuals who have claimed refugee status and are waiting for that claim to be evaluated. Despite the relative permanence of immigration, advances in transportation and communication mean that immigrants are able to travel to, spend time in, and communicate on a regular basis with their country of origin. As a result, what has been termed transnationalism may result, with individuals holding strong ties with, and actively participating in, both the country of origin and the new receiving country.

Migration often results in two or more cultures coming into contact. This contact is especially likely for international migration where immigrants from one national group (the society of origin) come into contact with members of a different national group (the receiving society). Culture may include specific beliefs, attitudes, and customs, as well as values and behaviors. The term acculturation refers to the changes that may occur when individuals from different cultures come into contact, with possible changes in both immigrants and members of the receiving society. Psychological theory and research suggest that acculturation is bidimensional, with changes potentially taking place along two dimensions—one representing the maintenance or loss of the original culture and the other representing the adoption or rejection of the new culture. This bidimensionality is important because it suggests that acculturation is not linear from original culture to new culture, but instead that individuals may simultaneously participate in the new culture and maintain their original culture. The two cultures may be expressed at different times, in different contexts, or may merge to form cultural expressions that have aspects of both cultures. With voluntary and involuntary migration at historically high levels, understanding the drivers of migration and its consequences for migrants and those with whom they come into contact are essential for global cooperation and well-being.

• immigration
• asylum seeker
• transnationalism
• dehumanization
• acculturation

The Different Forms of Migration

Throughout history, humans have migrated, that is, moved from one location to another. This movement of people has dramatically increased in recent years, however, due to advances in transportation and communication paired with unequal economic opportunities and human security risks among locations (Castles, 2013 ; Lonnback, 2014 ; United Nations, 2016 ). Migration may occur within a country or between countries. Internal migration (within-country migration) is of considerable importance, yet relatively understudied (Castles, 2013 ). The number of internal migrants who are living outside of their region of birth has exceeded 740 million people, with potentially profound social, cultural, and economic consequences (Lucas, 2015 ). This number includes approximately 40 million conflict-related internally displaced persons whose numbers have increased rapidly in the past few years (Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre [iDMC], 2017 ). In contrast, though somewhat smaller in magnitude, migration between countries has been the focus of considerable research attention across a variety of disciplines. It is estimated that in 2015 , there were 244 million international migrants, including approximately 20 million refugees (United Nations, 2016 ). The research focus in this area has predominantly been on the drivers and consequences of international migration.

Migration may be relatively voluntary or involuntary. When involuntary, as in the case of individuals who are fleeing conflict and persecution, individuals may be internally displaced persons (IDPs) living within their home country or asylum seekers or refugees outside of their country of birth (IOM, 2017 ; UNESCO, 2017 ). When voluntary, the focus of internal migration tends to be on migrants moving for economic opportunity, and on international migration for economic or family reasons (Castles, 2013 ). Yet this distinction between voluntary and involuntary migration is not as clear as it may seem. For example, temporary labor migrants and migrants from developing countries seeking employment may be viewed as voluntary migrants by others but may themselves see their migration as involuntary, as they do not have the economic opportunities at home required to survive.

Why People Migrate

The question of why people migrate is multipronged, and the literature on this topic often talks about the push-pull factors of migration, that is, what conditions drive people to leave their region or country of origin, and what characteristics attract them to a particular location (Castles, 2013 ; Martin & Zurcher, 2008 ). There is also a growing literature on the personality factors that may play a role in the decision to migrate (Li & Frieze, 2013 ). This research has mainly been focused on international migration across borders.

The literature on the push and pull factors of internal migration is relatively limited. In terms of push factors, internal migration may be driven by poor economic conditions, including loss of rural livelihoods that drive farmers away from rural locations, and poor employment opportunities at home (Castles, 2013 ). Relatedly, push factors for internal migration may include environmental disasters such as drought or extreme weather, forcing people to move away from particular regions (iDMC, 2017 ; Lucas, 2015 ). Internal migration may also be pushed by factors such as conflict, violence, and war (UNHCR, 2017 ). Many of the individuals who move internally migrate to urban areas, which tend to be characterized by the pull of potential economic opportunity (Lucas, 2015 ). This pull may be deceptive, however, in that there is seldom sufficient formal employment for the large number of newcomers to urban areas, which can result in employment in insecure informal sector work and human rights abuse (Castles, 2013 ).

In terms of international migration, both economic and noneconomic push and pull factors may play a role. Major push factors may include life-threatening poverty, natural disasters, environmental degradation, persecution, and war, as well as safety concerns such as high crime rates. Less severe push factors may include relatively poor economic conditions in one’s country of origin such as lack of educational and employment opportunities, low wages, and poor working conditions (Castles & Miller, 2009 ; Martin & Zurcher, 2008 ). Sometimes these push factors are connected to environmental conditions such as drought or flooding that might provide an inhospitable environment per se and may depress wages through crop failure or lead to political instability and a lack of safety (Castles, 2013 ). Other push factors include a culture that encourages migration (such as is evident in the Philippines), low feelings of belonging, and political instability. Economic pull factors include educational and employment opportunities, a high standard of living, and labor recruitment by countries facing demographic challenges (Castles, 2013 ). Noneconomic pull factors include the presence of family and friends, a safe environment, and cultural and political freedoms (Castles, 2013 ). The recruitment of workers by what Castles ( 2013 ) has termed the “migration industry”—including migration agents, labor recruiters, housing brokers, and others—may capitalize on pull factors for migration, making their living by highlighting the pull qualities of a destination.

Global communication networks inform the international community about conditions and opportunities abroad and act as the connector between push and pull factors (Martin & Zurcher, 2008 ). For example, migrants may be motivated to leave their country of origin by high unemployment (push factor) and be encouraged to migrate to a country like Australia by a temporary skilled migration visa program (pull factor). Once this stream of migration is formed, it continues to grow through formal and informal networks of information sharing regarding wages and job opportunities.

Interacting with push and pull factors are the characteristics of migrants themselves. Research on the migrant personality examines why some individuals migrate whereas others living in the same socioeconomic conditions do not (Li & Frieze, 2013 ). This research has shown that personality and motivational factors can play a central role in the desire to migrate. The migrant personality may include resilience to anxiety and insecurity and more dismissing and secure attachment styles. A dismissing attachment style makes an individual more detached from social surroundings and thus more likely to emigrate, whereas a secure attachment style enhances psychological adjustment in the new country. Other aspects of the migrant personality are openness to experience and extraversion, which are positively related to one’s intention to emigrate. Some aspects of personality may promote decisions to emigrate when conditions in the home country are poor. In particular, research has shown that having an internal motivation to compete and achieve (i.e., achievement motivation) and an internal desire for leadership and control over others (i.e., power motivation) may be related to emigration when conditions at home block the fulfillment of these motivations. Alternatively, a desire to form and maintain relationships with others is related to choosing to stay in one’s country of origin.

Transnationalism

Although immigration is defined as international migration that is relatively permanent in nature, it is no longer the case that migrants leave behind their country of birth and move to a new location, expecting to stay there for the rest of their lives. Instead, travel back and forth between two or more locations has become feasible and quite common, facilitated by the ease of global transportation. In addition, migrants are increasingly able to hold citizenship in more than one country and to participate in more than one political process (Bloemraad, 2004 ; Faist & Gerdes, 2008 ). As well, advances in communication technology mean that migrants can easily stay connected with individuals in their home country and with members of the diaspora in other countries (Schuerkens, 2005 ). This development has led to transnationalism, defined as holding strong ties to more than one nation and the ability to stay connected with and participate in both the society of origin and the receiving society (Portes, Guarnizo, & Landolt, 1999 ). Transnationalism is important to consider in the context of the push and pull factors of migration because it changes the immigration process. Through transnationalism, the migration process is no longer unidirectional with push factors driving people to leave their country of origin and pull factors attracting them to their country of settlement. Instead, transnationals may be repeatedly pushed and pulled back and forth between their country of origin and country of settlement. In this context, national borders are less relevant for activities and identity, and individuals can lead multisited lives (IOM, 2010 ).

Research on transnationalism has focused on the social, economic, cultural, and political impact of transnationalism for source and receiving countries (e.g., Ley, 2013 ; Satzewich & Wong, 2006 ; Vertovec, 2009 ). For example, what is the impact on immigrant identity; on perceived loyalty to the two countries; for economic exchanges; and for remittances and investment in the source and receiving countries? Do national policies need to change to accommodate transnationalism? These are only a few of the many questions being researched regarding transnationalism in a variety of fields.

Determinants of Receiving Community Attitudes Toward Immigrants and Immigration

Two important psychologically based theories that have addressed factors influencing attitudes toward immigrants and immigration are the Unified Instrumental Model of Group Conflict, proposed by Esses, Jackson, Dovidio, and Hodson ( 2005b ), and the Integrated Threat Theory of Prejudice, proposed by Stephan and Stephan ( 2000 ). Though quite similar in their perspective on immigrant–nonimmigrant relations, where they differ is in their framing of the factors influencing immigration attitudes—more in terms of competition in the Unified Instrumental Model of Group Conflict and more in terms of threat in the Integrated Threat Theory of Prejudice. Nonetheless, both theories incorporate a variety of factors that may influence immigration attitudes, including economic factors, health and safety, cultural and value-related factors, and national identity.

Perceived Economic Competition and Threat

A recurring debate is whether immigrants contribute economically to their new society or are a drain on resources and compete for jobs with native-born individuals. A specific answer to this question may depend on the immigration policy of the receiving nation, the type of immigrants who are arriving, the form that the receiving country’s economy takes, and demographic and economic characteristics of the receiving country’s economy over time. For example, when economic times are challenging and unemployment rates are higher, the costs of immigration may be seen as greater than the benefits (e.g., Esipova, Ray, Pugliese, & Tsabutashvili, 2015 ; Esses, Brochu, & Dickson, 2011 ).

Irrespective of the actual economic contributions of immigrants, an important factor in determining attitudes toward immigrants and immigration among members of a receiving society is the perceived economic contributions and costs of immigration (e.g., Esses, Jackson, & Armstrong, 1998 ). Immigrants who do not do well economically are likely to be seen as a drain on social services (e.g., welfare), leading to negative attitudes toward immigrants and immigration. On the other hand, immigrants who do well economically may also be seen as a threat to the economic conditions of the receiving society because their successes may at times be seen as coming at the expense of nonimmigrants. These “zero-sum beliefs”—beliefs that the more immigrants obtain, the less is available for nonimmigrants from a pool of limited resources—lead to negative attitudes toward immigrants and immigration (Esses et al., 2005b ). These beliefs mean that some members of the receiving society may perceive immigrants negatively regardless of whether immigrants succeed or fail economically. Fundamentally, it is the belief that immigrants are taking resources from members of the receiving society that drives these negative attitudes.

The belief that immigrants are a drain on receiving nation resources may be more or less likely to be part of the dominant discourse within a country, may be more or less likely to be promoted by the media, and may depend on individual difference variables, such as Social Dominance Orientation. Research has shown that individuals who are higher in Social Dominance Orientation (i.e., support inequality in society and believe in group hierarchies) are especially likely to see the world in general, and to see relations with immigrants in particular, as zero-sum in nature. As a result, they are especially likely to hold negative attitudes toward immigrants and immigration (Esses, Dovidio, Jackson, & Armstrong, 2001 ). There is also evidence that situational factors, such as media representations of immigration, may have profound effects on immigration attitudes (e.g., Sides & Citrin, 2007 ).

Perceived Threats to Health and Safety

In addition to perceptions of economic threat and competition, immigrants may at times be seen as a threat to members of the receiving nations’ health and safety. Concerns that immigrants may carry infectious diseases have influenced immigration policies throughout history and to the present day despite the fact that immigrants are no longer a major vector of disease. Nonetheless, when the association between risk of disease and newcomers is salient in the media, irrespective of whether the risk is genuine, this association may result in negative attitudes toward immigrants and immigration (Esses, Medianu, & Lawson, 2013 ).

Concerns about threats to safety posed by immigrants have become more prevalent since September 11, 2001 , due to the salient association between immigrants and terrorists, exacerbated by the media (Hodson, Esses, & Dovidio, 2006 ). It is now the case that immigrants, particularly Muslims and those from Near and Middle Eastern countries, are more likely to be viewed with suspicion and hostility. Most recently, many Western nations have been resistant to accepting large numbers of refugees fleeing conflicts in Syria and Iraq because of safety concerns and receiving nations’ fear that they may be harboring terrorists and criminals. These concerns may help explain the rise in anti-Muslim refugee attitudes in various parts of the world and the rise of anti-immigrant groups and political parties.

Perceived Cultural and Value-Related Threat and Competition

In addition to potentially being seen as a threat to tangible resources, health, and safety, immigrants are at times seen as threatening the culture and values of members of the receiving society (Esses et al., 2005b ; Stephan & Stephan, 2000 ). Just as some people may see tangible resources as zero-sum in nature, some individuals may also see more symbolic outcomes as zero-sum. As a result, they may believe that if immigrants are allowed to maintain their practices and values, then the culture and values of the receiving society are weakened. These zero-sum beliefs about culture and values are particularly likely to be held by individuals who are higher in Social Dominance Orientation (more likely to believe in hierarchy and inequality) and lead to negative attitudes toward immigrants and immigration (Esses et al., 2005b ). Just as with tangible resources, the belief that immigrants threaten the dominant culture and values may be more or less likely to be part of the dominant discourse within a country and may be more or less likely to be promoted by the media. In recent years, the claim that immigrants are a potential threat to the dominant culture and values of receiving countries has become particularly prevalent within European discourse, resulting in increased support for restrictive immigration policies.

National Identity

How national identity is defined within a particular country and by specific individuals within that country plays an important role in determining whether immigrants are seen as inside or outside of the national ingroup, and as a threat. Two important forms of national identity are nativist/ethnonational and civic/cultural national identity. The nativist form is based on descent or long-term residency and sometimes on being a member of the dominant religion. This narrow construal of the national ingroup is closely tied to ethnonational identity, which is defined by kinship bonds and a common ethnic heritage. In contrast, the civic/cultural form of national identity derives from a voluntary commitment to the laws and institutions of the country and on the feeling of being a member of the national group (Esses, Dovidio, Semenya, & Jackson, 2005a ). Countries with a history of promoting a nativist/ethnonational national identity (e.g., the United Kingdom) are more likely to have restrictive immigration policies and to reject immigrants as members of the national ingroup. In contrast, countries that have a history of promoting a civic/cultural national identity (e.g., Canada) are more likely to have relatively open immigration policies and to accept immigrants as members of the national ingroup soon after their arrival.

Definitions of national identity may change over time. For example, it has been demonstrated that in times of national crisis and threat, the psychological boundaries defining the national ingroup tend to narrow and nativist sentiments tend to increase, resulting in more negative attitudes toward immigrants and immigration (Hodson et al., 2006 ). In addition, large-scale immigration, particularly from new and unfamiliar source countries, can increase concerns about national identity and increase nativist beliefs so that negative attitudes toward immigrants and immigration become evident (Grigorieff, Roth, & Ubfal, 2016 ). Thus, narrow definitions of national identity and unfavorable views of immigrants and immigration may be mutually reinforcing. It is also the case that individuals within a nation may have differing views on how national identity should be defined, with those holding more nativist views especially likely to also hold negative attitudes toward immigrants and immigration (Esses et al., 2005a ).

In addition to construal of national identity, forms of attachment to one’s nation also influence immigration attitudes. In particular, individuals who are higher in nationalism—believing that their nation is superior to all others—hold more negative attitudes toward immigrants and immigration. In contrast, individuals who are higher in patriotism—expressing pride and love for their nation—do not necessarily hold such attitudes (Esses et al., 2005a ).

Attitudes toward immigrants and immigration among members of a receiving community are important for a variety of reasons. First, they may influence support for immigration policies within a nation, determining the levels of immigrants allowed entry each year, the stringency of immigration policies, and the type of supports offered to new arrivals (e.g., Esses et al., 2005b ; Jackson & Esses, 2000 ). Attitudes may also influence the more general treatment of immigrants among members of the receiving population, and as a result, immigrants’ life outcomes. For example, there is evidence that prejudice against particular groups of immigrants may lead to the discounting of their skills and credentials in the labor market, resulting in their unemployment and underemployment (Esses, Dietz, & Bhardwaj, 2006 ). All of these consequences can ultimately affect the degree of harmony or discord within a nation.

The Dehumanization of Refugees

Despite Western nations’ stated commitment to the protection of refugees under the 1951 United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol, individuals seeking entry into Western countries as asylum seekers are at times viewed with hostility and contempt and are perceived as not deserving of assistance (e.g., Human Rights Watch, 2000 ). What role might dehumanization play in this process? Dehumanization is the tendency to regard members of some groups as less human and, thus, as less worthy of humane treatment than members of other groups (Smith, 2011 ). In recent years, it can be argued that the dominant discourse surrounding refugee claimants in many countries has become increasingly dehumanizing, with political leaders and the media often promoting such perceptions (e.g., Gabrielatos & Baker, 2008 ; Taylor, 2015 ). For example, refugees are at times portrayed in metaphorical terms, described as “swarms” and “marauders” who threaten to “flood” Western countries with the goal of “sponging off the welfare system.” Refugees have been portrayed as “a plague of feral humans” and as “cockroaches” and “parasites.” In this discourse, refugees are depicted as similar to animals and as a significant danger to humankind, inciting anxiety and fear. As a result, Western countries may feel justified in arming themselves with stringent refugee legislation to keep the refugee hordes away.

Recent research demonstrates that this dehumanizing language and these messages about refugees being presented by the media can lead to their dehumanization. In particular, media depictions that portray refugee claimants as bogus, and thus as a threat to the integrity of the refugee system, have been shown to lead to the dehumanization of refugees (Esses, Veenvliet, & Medianu, 2011 ). Of importance, dehumanization is not equivalent to negative attitudes, but instead is relatively independent. This dehumanization has a variety of consequences, however, including creating contempt for refugees and support for more restrictive refugee policies. In addition, media depictions that associate refugees with terrorists and criminals can lead to their automatic dehumanization, with those who read these descriptions becoming significantly more likely to automatically associate refugees with animals than with humans (Medianu, Sutter, & Esses, forthcoming ). Of note, further research has demonstrated that this automatic dehumanization has behavioral consequences, leading to less positive nonverbal behavior toward an individual described as a refugee (Sutter, Medianu, & Esses, 2016 ). These findings suggest that refugees may at times be portrayed in ways that lead to their negative treatment and to justification of this treatment on the basis of the perception that refugees are not quite human.

Acculturation

Acculturation refers to “those phenomena which result when groups of individuals having different cultures come into continuous first-hand contact, with subsequent changes in the original culture patterns of either or both groups” (Redfield, Linton, & Herskovits, 1936 , pp. 149–152). Although acculturation is often discussed in terms of the changes that immigrants undergo in a new society, acculturation can also occur in the receiving society. In addition, when considering immigrant acculturation, it is important to note that acculturation preferences involve both immigrants and members of the receiving society. That is, immigrants may have specific preferences for how they wish to fit into their new society, but it is also the case that the receiving society plays a role in terms of allowing or facilitating this acculturation.

The framework of acculturation that has likely been most influential is that of Berry ( 1997 ). According to Berry, two main issues underlie the acculturation strategies that individuals choose. The first is the extent to which individuals wish to maintain their heritage identity and culture (desire for culture maintenance), and the second is the extent to which individuals wish to have contact with those who do not share their heritage identity and culture (desire for contact). Individuals’ preferences regarding these issues result in four acculturation strategies: assimilation, integration, separation, and marginalization (Berry, 1997 ). When immigrants do not wish to maintain their cultural heritage but seek relationships with the receiving society, the acculturation strategy adopted is one of assimilation . On the other hand, when immigrants wish to maintain their cultural heritage but do not seek relationships with the receiving society, the acculturation strategy adopted is one of separation . When immigrants are interested in both maintaining their cultural heritage and seeking relationships with the receiving society, the acculturation strategy adopted is one of integration . Finally, when immigrants are not interested in or able to maintain relationships with either their own cultural group or the receiving society, the acculturation strategy adopted is one of marginalization (Sam, 2006 ).

Acculturation preferences are not static but may vary within individuals, depending on the situation (e.g., being with family vs. out in the community; Noels & Clément, 2015 ), and evolve over time. The acculturation preferences of immigrants may also change across generations. Within the individual, opportunities for immigrants to have contact with members of the receiving community and involvement with the receiving community culture tend to promote positive intergroup relations, leading to a desire for further contact that may increase over time (Asendorpf & Motti-Stefanidi, 2017 ). Although adoption of a receiving community culture may be more likely to occur in public than private domains for first-generation immigrants, this acculturation tends to converge in later generations (Noels & Clément, 2015 ).

The Berry model has been criticized on a number of grounds, including the measure of acculturation utilized and the uncertainty of the causal connection between acculturation and the outcomes to which it has been linked (see Brown & Zagefka, 2011 ). In addition, it is important to note that immigrants are not always free to choose how they relate to the receiving society and to their own cultural group. To illustrate, consider what conditions must exist for immigrants to be able to adopt the integration strategy. First, immigrants must be willing to form relationships with the receiving society. Second, the receiving society must be willing to support the participation of immigrants. For this to occur, the receiving society needs to build a climate promoting cultural diversity and low levels of prejudice toward immigrants (Sam, 2006 ).

Bourhis, Montreuil, Barrette, and Montaruli ( 2009 ) incorporate in their Interactive Acculturation Model (IAM) not only the acculturation orientation of the immigrant group, but also the acculturation preferences of the receiving society (see also Berry, 2008 ; Piontkowski, Rohmann, & Florack, 2002 ). According to Bourhis et al. ( 2009 ), the two main questions facing receiving community members are whether they find it acceptable that immigrants maintain their cultural heritage and whether they accept that immigrants join the receiving society. If receiving society members answer affirmatively to both these questions, then their acculturation orientation is integration. If receiving society members do not want immigrants to join the receiving culture but they do want them to maintain their heritage culture, then their acculturation orientation is segregation. If receiving society members want immigrants to join the receiving culture and do not want immigrants to maintain their heritage culture, then their acculturation orientation is assimilation. If receiving community members do not want immigrants to join the receiving culture and they do not want them to maintain their heritage culture, then their acculturation orientation is either exclusion or individualism. The exclusionist orientation reflects the belief that immigration should be prevented. The individualism orientation reflects the belief that immigrants are individuals and should be treated on an individual basis, based on their personal characteristics (Bourhis et al., 2009 ).

Bourhis et al. ( 2009 ) suggest that the acculturation orientations of immigrant groups must be considered in conjunction with the acculturation orientations of receiving societies. When the acculturation orientation of an immigrant group matches the orientation of the receiving society, the groups are considered to be concordant. In contrast, when the acculturation orientation of an immigrant group does not match (or only partially matches) the orientation of the receiving society, the groups are considered to be discordant. Bourhis and colleagues ( 2009 ) suggest that discordant orientations result in problematic or conflictual relational outcomes including communication breakdowns, discriminatory behaviors, and acculturative stress among members of the immigrant group (see also Brown & Zagefka, 2011 ). Of interest, evidence suggests that it is not only the case that different receiving societies and the individuals within those societies have different views on immigrant acculturation, but also that members of receiving communities may endorse different acculturation orientations toward different immigrant groups within their community (e.g., valued vs. devalued immigrants; Bourhis et al., 2010 ; Montreuil & Bourhis, 2004 ).

Conclusions

It is clear that migration, in its many forms, is having a substantial impact on the global landscape. No longer are people trapped by the circumstances of where they were born. Instead, modern technology means that more people are migrating than ever before, both within and across national boundaries. Push and pull factors play a large role in this process, as does the personality of the migrant him- or herself. Transnationalism means that individuals may lead multisited lives, repeatedly pushed and pulled across borders. Whether members of receiving communities have welcoming or unwelcoming attitudes toward migrants, and the specific acculturation strategies supported by migrants and by members of receiving societies, determine whether migrants and their receiving communities reap the potential benefits that migration poses. Thus, empirical evidence on the factors that drive migration, those that determine the attitudes of receiving communities, and factors influencing the acculturation process is needed more than ever to guide the establishment of policies and practices that ensure that migration is managed and supported effectively for all involved.

• Asendorpf, J. B. , & Motti-Stefanidi, F. (2017). A longitudinal study of immigrants’ peer acceptance and rejection Immigrant status, immigrant composition of the classroom, and acculturation. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology , 23 , 486–498.
• Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation and adaptation. Applied Psychology: An International Review , 41 , 5–68.
• Berry, J. W. (2008). Globalisation and acculturation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 32 , 328–336.
• Bloemraad, I. (2004). Who claims dual citizenship? The limits of postnationalism, the possibilities of transnationalism, and the persistence of traditional citizenship. International Migration Review , 38 , 389–426.
• Bourhis, R. Y. , Montreuil, A. , Barrette, G. , & Montaruli, E. (2009). Acculturation and immigrant/host community relations in multicultural settings. In S. Demoulin , J. P. Leyens , & J. Dovidio (Eds), Intergroup misunderstanding: Impact of divergent social realities (pp. 39–61). New York: Psychology Press.
• Bourhis, R. Y. , Montreuil, A. , El-Geledi, S. , Harvey, S.-P. , & Barrette, G. (2010). Acculturation in multiple host community settings. Journal of Social Issues , 66 , 780–802.
• Brown, R. , & Zagefka, H. (2011). The dynamics of acculturation: An intergroup perspective. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology , 44 , 129–184.
• Castles, S. (2013). The forces driving global migration. Journal of Intercultural Studies , 34 , 122–140.
• Castles, S. , & Miller, M. J. (2009). The age of migration: International population movements in the modern world . Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Esipova, N. , Ray, J. , Pugliese, A. , & Tsabutashvili, D. (2015). How the world views immigration . International Organization for Migration .
• Esses, V. M. , Brochu, P. M. , & Dickson, K. R. (2011). Economic costs, economic benefits, and attitudes toward immigrants and immigration. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy , 12 , 133–137.
• Esses, V. M. , Dietz, J. , & Bhardwaj, A. (2006). The role of prejudice in the discounting of immigrant skills. In R. Mahalingam (Ed.), Cultural psychology of immigrants (pp. 113–130). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Esses, V. M. , Dovidio, J. F. , Jackson, L. M. , & Armstrong, T. L. (2001). The immigration dilemma: The role of perceived group competition, ethnic prejudice, and national identity. Journal of Social Issues , 57 , 389–412.
• Esses, V. M. , Dovidio, J. F. , Semenya, A. H. , & Jackson, L. M. (2005a). Attitudes toward immigrants and immigration: The role of national and international identities. In D. Abrams , J. M. Marques , & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), The social psychology of inclusion and exclusion (pp. 317–337). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
• Esses, V. M. , Jackson, L. M. , & Armstrong, T. L. (1998). Intergroup competition and attitudes toward immigrants and immigration: An instrumental model of group conflict. Journal of Social Issues , 54 , 699–724.
• Esses, V. M. , Jackson, L. M. , Dovidio, J. F. , & Hodson, G. (2005b). Instrumental relations among groups: Group competition, conflict, and prejudice. In J. F. Dovidio , P. Glick , & L. A. Rudman (Eds.), On the nature of prejudice: Fifty years after Allport (pp. 227–243). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
• Esses, V. M. , Medianu, S. , & Lawson, A. S. (2013). Uncertainty, threat, and the role of the media in promoting the dehumanization of immigrants and refugees. Journal of Social Issues , 69 , 518–536.
• Esses, V. M. , Veenvliet, S. , & Medianu, S. (2011). The dehumanization of refugees: Determinants and consequences. In S. Wiley , G. Philogene , & T. A. Revenson (Eds.), Social categories in everyday experience (pp. 133–150). Washington, DC: APA Books.
• Faist, T. , & Gerdes, J. (2008). Dual citizenship in an age of mobility . Migration Policy Institute .
• Gabrielatos, C. , & Baker, P. (2008). Fleeing, sneaking, flooding: A corpus analysis of discursive constructions of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK Press, 1996–2005. Journal of English Linguistics , 36 , 5–38.
• Grigorieff, A. , Roth, C. , & Ubfal, D. (2016). Does information change attitudes towards immigrants? Representative evidence from survey experiments . IGIER Working Paper No. 590.
• Hodson, G. , Esses, V. M. , & Dovidio, J. F. (2006). Perceptions of threat, national representation, and support for policies and procedures to protect the national group. In P. Kimmel & C. Stout (Eds.), Collateral damage (pp. 109–129). Westport, CT: Praeger.
• Human Rights Watch . (2000). 50 years on: What future for refugee protection? .
• Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre . (2017). iDMC’s global internal displacement database .
• International Organization for Migration . (2010). Migration and transnationalism: Opportunities and challenges .
• International Organization for Migration . (2017). Key migration terms .
• Jackson, L. M. , & Esses, V. M. (2000). The effect of economic competition on people’s willingness to help empower immigrants. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations , 3 , 419–435.
• Ley, D. (2013). Does transnationalism trump immigrant integration? Evidence from Canada’s links with East Asia. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies , 39 (6), 921–938.
• Li, M. , & Frieze, I. H. (2013). Before the big decision: Psychological theories on premigration motivation. In E. Tartakovsky (Ed.), Immigration: Policies, challenges and impact . New York: Nova Science.
• Lonnback, L. J. (2014). Integrating migration into the post-2015 United Nations development agenda . Migration policy institute .
• Lucas, R. E. B. (2015). Internal migration in developing economics: An overview . KNOMAD .
• Martin, P. L. , & Zürcher, G. (2008). Managing migration: The global challenge . Population Bulletin (Vol. 63). Population Reference Bureau, Washington, DC.
• Medianu, S. , Sutter, A. , & Esses, V. M. (forthcoming). The role of media portrayals in the automatic dehumanization of refugees .
• Montreuil, A. , & Bourhis, R. Y. (2004). Acculturation orientations of competing host communities toward valued and devalued immigrants. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 28 , 507–532.
• Noels, K. A. , & Clément, R. (2015). Situational variations in ethnic identity across immigration generations: Implications for acculturative change and cross-cultural adaptation. International Journal of Psychology , 50 , 451–462.
• Piontkowski, U. , Rohmann, A. , & Florack, A. (2002). Concordance of acculturation attitudes and perceived threat. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations , 5 , 221–232.
• Portes, A. , Guarnizo, L. E. , & Landolt, P. (1999). The study of transnationalism: Pitfalls and promise of an emergent research field. Ethnic and Racial Studies , 22 (2), 217–237.
• Redfield, R. , Linton, R. , & Herskovits, M. J. (1936). Memorandum for the study of acculturation. American Anthropologist , 38 , 149–152.
• Sam, D. L. (2006). Acculturation: Conceptual background and core components. In D. L. Sam & J. W. Berry (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of social psychology (pp. 11–26). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Satzewich, V. , & Wong, L. (2006). Transnational identities and practices in Canada . Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.
• Schuerkens, U. (2005). Transnational migrations and social transformations: A theoretical perspective. Current Sociology , 53 (4), 535–553.
• Sides, J. , & Citrin, J. (2007). European opinion about immigration: The role of identities, interests and information. British Journal of Political Science , 37 , 477–504.
• Smith, D. L. (2011). Less than human: Why we demean, enslave, and exterminate others . New York: Macmillan.
• Stephan, W. G. , & Stephan, C. W. (2000). An integrated threat theory of prejudice. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Claremont symposium on applied social psychology (pp. 23–46). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Sutter, A. , Medianu, S. , & Esses, V. M. (2016, December). The behavioural consequences of the automatic dehumanization of refugees . Paper presented at the fourth annual meeting of the Pathways to Prosperity Partnership, Ottawa, Canada.
• Taylor, A. (2015). Why the language we use to talk about refugees matters so much . Washington Post .
• UNESCO . (2017). Learning to live together .
• United Nations . (2016). International migration report 2015 .
• UNHCR . (2017). Internally displaced people .
• Vertovec, S. (2009). Transnationalism . New York: Routledge.

Related Articles

• Social Comparison
• Culture and Human Development

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Psychology. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 17 May 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [66.249.64.20|91.193.111.216]
• 91.193.111.216

Character limit 500 /500

If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

To log in and use all the features of Khan Academy, please enable JavaScript in your browser.

World history

Course: world history   >   unit 3, causes and effects of human migration.

• Key concepts: Human Migration
• Focus on causation: Human migration
• Migration is the movement of people from one place to another with the intent to settle
• Causes: In preindustrial societies, environmental factors, such as the need for resources due to overpopulation, were often the cause of migration
• Effects: As people migrated, they brought new plants, animals, and technologies that had effects on the environment

Causes of migration

• (Choice A)   Temporary movement that follows seasonal weather patterns A Temporary movement that follows seasonal weather patterns
• (Choice B)   Movement to a new region with the intent to settle there B Movement to a new region with the intent to settle there
• (Choice C)   Continuous movement to follow resources C Continuous movement to follow resources

Causes of migration in Africa

Causes of migration in the pacific.

• (Choice A)   Iron farming tools and weapons A Iron farming tools and weapons
• (Choice B)   Long-term food preservation techniques B Long-term food preservation techniques
• (Choice C)   Types of canoes that could sail in the open ocean C Types of canoes that could sail in the open ocean

Effects of migration

• (Choice A)   Rats eating eggs and greatly reducing the bird population A Rats eating eggs and greatly reducing the bird population
• (Choice B)   Intense storms that altered the landscape of the island B Intense storms that altered the landscape of the island
• (Choice C)   Human activity, such as hunting and cutting down trees C Human activity, such as hunting and cutting down trees
• Jerry Bentley, et al, Traditions and Encounters , Vol. 1 (New York: McGraw Hill, 2015), 284.
• Douglas L. Oliver, Polynesia in Prehistoric Times (Honolulu: Bess Press, 2002), 32-35.
• Oliver, 232, 239.

Want to join the conversation?

• Upvote Button navigates to signup page
• Downvote Button navigates to signup page
• Flag Button navigates to signup page

Essay on Migration

Students are often asked to write an essay on Migration in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Migration

Understanding migration.

Migration refers to the movement of people from one place to another. It can be within a country (internal migration) or between different countries (international migration).

Reasons for Migration

People migrate for various reasons. Some move for better job opportunities, while others might move due to conflicts or natural disasters in their home region.

Effects of Migration

Migration can have both positive and negative effects. It can lead to cultural diversity and economic growth, but it can also cause overcrowding and strain on resources.

Migration is a complex issue with many facets. It’s important to understand why people migrate and its impact on societies.

Also check:

• Advantages and Disadvantages of Migration

250 Words Essay on Migration

Introduction.

Migration, an inherent human phenomenon, has shaped societies and cultures since the dawn of civilization. It is a complex process influenced by an intricate interplay of economic, political, social, and environmental factors.

Types of Migration

Migration can be categorized broadly into internal and international. Internal migration involves movement within a country, often from rural to urban areas, driven by the pursuit of better economic opportunities. International migration, on the other hand, involves crossing national borders, often influenced by factors like conflict, persecution, or economic disparity.

The Push-Pull Theory

The push-pull theory provides a framework to understand migration. ‘Push’ factors include poverty, political instability, or environmental disasters that compel people to leave their homes. Conversely, ‘pull’ factors attract individuals to new regions, such as better job opportunities, political stability, or higher living standards.

Impacts of Migration

Migration has profound implications on both the source and destination regions. While it can lead to brain drain and demographic imbalances in the source region, it can also alleviate poverty and foster development. In destination regions, it can stimulate economic growth but may also strain resources and potentially cause social tension.

Migration, an integral part of our globalized world, presents both challenges and opportunities. It is crucial to foster policies that maximize its benefits while mitigating its potential drawbacks. Understanding the dynamics of migration can pave the way for more inclusive, equitable, and sustainable societies.

500 Words Essay on Migration

Migration is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, deeply ingrained in human history. It has been a significant driver of cultural, economic, and social evolution. It is the movement of people from one geographical location to another, either permanently or temporarily. The reasons for migration can vary from political to economic, environmental, or social.

The Driving Forces of Migration

The primary drivers of migration are often classified as push and pull factors. Push factors refer to the conditions that drive individuals to leave their homes, such as poverty, lack of opportunities, political instability, or environmental disasters. Pull factors, on the other hand, are the attractive aspects of the destination, like better economic opportunities, political stability, or higher living standards.

Migration can be categorized into different types based on various parameters. Internal migration refers to the movement within a country, while international migration involves crossing national borders. Migration can also be voluntary, where individuals choose to move, or forced, where individuals are compelled to leave due to circumstances beyond their control.

Migration has profound impacts on both the source and destination regions. For the source region, it can lead to a brain drain if skilled individuals migrate, potentially hindering the development. However, it can also alleviate pressure on resources and lead to remittances that boost the local economy.

For the destination region, migration can lead to an increase in diversity and cultural richness. It can also fill labor gaps, contributing to economic growth. However, if not managed well, it can lead to social tensions.

Migration in the Age of Globalization

In the era of globalization, migration has become more accessible and prevalent. The interconnectedness of economies has led to increased labor mobility. However, it has also exposed the stark inequalities between regions, further motivating migration. The rise of transnational communities, where migrants maintain strong ties with their home countries while integrating into the host society, is another notable trend.

Challenges and Opportunities

Migration presents both challenges and opportunities. The challenges include managing integration, ensuring migrants’ rights, and addressing social tensions. The opportunities lie in harnessing the potential of migrants for economic development, cultural exchange, and fostering global understanding.

In conclusion, migration is an inherent part of human society, driven by a complex interplay of factors. It has far-reaching impacts on individuals, communities, and nations. As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, the dynamics of migration will continue to evolve, presenting both challenges and opportunities. Understanding and managing migration effectively is crucial to building inclusive, diverse, and prosperous societies.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on Mid Day Meal
• Essay on London
• Essay on My Favourite National Leader

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Media Resources
• 2030 Agenda

Migration and Migrants: A Global Overview

World migration report 2024: chapter 2, international migration flows.

While data on migrant stocks are widely available, data on global migration movements (flows) are much more limited. Available UN DESA estimates on global migrant stocks are extensive and global in scope; however, the database of migration flows only encompasses 45 countries. 10 Capturing data on migration flows is extremely challenging for several reasons. First, while international migration flows are generally accepted as covering inflows and outflows into and from countries, there has been a greater focus on recording inflows. For example, while countries such as Australia and the United States record cross-border movements, many others only count entries and not departures.   11 Additionally, migration flow data in some countries are derived from administrative events related to immigration status (for example, issuance/renewal/withdrawal of a residence permit), which are then used as proxies for migration flows. Furthermore, migratory movements are often hard to separate from non-migratory travel, such as tourism or business. 12 Tracking migratory movements also requires considerable resources, infrastructure and ICT/knowledge systems. This poses particular challenges for developing countries, where the ability to collect, administer, analyse and report data on mobility, migration and other areas is often limited. Finally, many countries’ physical geographies pose tremendous challenges for collecting data on migration flows. Entry and border management, for example, is particularly challenging in some regions because of archipelagic and isolated borders, and is further complicated by traditions of informal migration for work. 13

Conflating “migration” and “migrant”

In a general sense, migration is the process of moving from one place to another. To migrate is to move, whether from a rural area to a city, from one district or province in a given country to another in that same country, or from one country to a new country. It involves action.

In contrast, a migrant is a person described as such for one or more reasons, depending on the context (see the text box on “Defining migration, migrant and other key terms” above). While in many cases “migrants” do undertake some form of migration, this is not always the case.

In some situations, people who have never undertaken migration may be referred to as migrants – children of people born overseas, for example, are commonly called second- or third-generation migrants. a This may even extend to situations involving statelessness, whereby whole groups of people are not able to access citizenship, despite being born and raised in a country. Such people may even be referred to as irregular migrants by authorities. b

There are currently two main data sets on international migration flows, both of which are derived from national statistics: UN DESA’s International Migration Flows data set and OECD’s International Migration Database. Since 2005, UN DESA has compiled data on the flows of international migrants to and from selected countries, based on nationally available statistics. At the time of writing (October 2023), there had been no update to the UN DESA flows data set, with the most current being the 2015 version. The 2015 migration flows data set comprises data from 45 countries, up from 29 countries in 2008 and 15 countries in 2005. 14

The OECD has been collecting international migration flow data since 2000, allowing for trend analysis to be conducted over a subset of major destination countries, depicted in Figure 6 (although data are not standardized, as explained in the note under the figure). The latest available data indicate that in 2020, there was a sharp decline in permanent migration inflows from the year before, a reflection of the border closures and movement restrictions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. There were more than 8 million inflows in 2019. This dropped to around 5 million in 2020, but has since risen to reach 5.9 million in 2021, comprising both labour and humanitarian migrants; some recent estimates from the OECD indicate that 2022 saw a further increase in inflows over 2021, connected mainly to humanitarian displacement 15

The federal government says Australia's intake of migrants will fall sharply — halving in two years — as it overhauls the migration system and moves to reduce pressures caused by population growth.

But experts say some of this expected drop in migration numbers is outside the government's control, and that it remains unclear whether its efforts to tighten temporary migration will impact numbers.

Budget papers showed net migration will more than halve from 528,000 to 260,000 between 2022-23 and 2024-25.

The government also announced measures aiming to draw highly skilled migrants to Australia, as it moves to overhaul the migration system.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers has linked the fall in the migration intake to measures aiming to contain inflation, saying population growth must be managed to moderate cost of living increases.

Some of the sharp drop in intake has been attributed to government policies.

"Government actions are estimated to reduce net overseas migration by 110,000 people over the forward estimates," the budget papers said.

The government said the permanent migration intake would also decrease from 190,000 this financial year to 185,000 in 2024-25.

More than 130,000 of those places will be allocated to the skill stream to "help address Australia's long-term skill needs" while the government will invest more than $18 million to "further reform" Australia's immigration system to "restore its integrity".

The government is also introducing a new ballot for the work and holiday visa program for applicants from China, Vietnam and India — at a cost of $25 for applicants — as it tries to manage demand.

A new National Innovation visa will also be established to replace the current Global Talent visa from later this year, and will target "exceptionally talented migrants who would drive growth in sectors of national importance".

'Managing the pressures'

In a post-budget address on Wednesday, Mr Chalmers framed government efforts to manage population growth as a measure against inflation.

He said there was "a fairly substantial moderation in migration built into the budget" after a post-COVID spike driven by students and "long-term tourists".

"That meant the numbers were a bit higher and now they're moderating to more normal levels," Dr Chalmers said.

"I think most people would recognise that migration has got an important role to play in our economy but it needs to be well-managed and we need to make sure that we can manage the pressures."

Mr Chalmers said measures to increase housing and infrastructure, the end of the COVID-19 Pandemic event visa, and a reduction in international student numbers would reduce pressures caused by population growth.

"We're seeing a substantial moderation in inflation in the forecasts and in the last couple of years as well, and that is largely because of how we're managing the budget, but it will also be increasingly about how we're managing the population," he said.

Migration overhaul

The budget revealed a drop in Australia's migration intake after the government announced it would reform the migration system, including changes tightening rules for international students. 

However, some say that much of the expected fall in net migration is a result of factors outside the government's control.

Australian National University demographer Liz Allen said the government was using "smoke and mirrors" to claim credit for the expected decline.

She said the numbers reflected a rebound in the outflow of international students from Australia, balancing the inflow of new students, after the pandemic.

"We've seen a raft of changes that have increased the integrity of the migration scheme, with particular focus on international students," she said.

"But that has not and will not result in a decline of net overseas migration in real terms."

ANU migration expert Alan Gamlen said the recent surge in net overseas migration had been a result of fewer temporary migrants departing Australia.

"Arrivals are only a bit above their long-term trend, not even enough to change the long-term average," he said.

"Specifically, fewer student migrants have been departing. But that is a temporary effect of the pandemic."

Some were still in the country on COVID-19 Pandemic event visas, and as these expired, the outflow of students would increase, Dr Gamlen said.

University of Sydney global migration expert Anna Boucher said the budget showed the government wanted to reduce the migration intake.

The government was moving to reduce migration numbers by extending controls in permanent migration programs to parts of temporary migration including student migration, and working and holiday visas.

Other factors, including court delays and backlogs in court cases, can influence net overseas migration, she said.

"That's the question, whether they'll be able to achieve it, because there's a lot of variables that can influence net overseas migration."

Dr Boucher said the fall in migration would also influence how the country achieves economic growth.

"It's clear from the budget that as the net overseas migration figures drop, so too will gross domestic product.

"So it's going to put more pressure on seeking increases in gross domestic product through other mechanisms, than merely population growth, which could be very beneficial in the long term for Australia.

"But it's going to be challenging because we've relied on high population growth for a long time, including under the Coalition."

Call for more support

The Settlement Council of Australia (SCOA), which represents organisations that support new migrants and refugees, is calling for more help for skilled migrants to establish themselves in Australia.

SCOA chief executive Sandra Elhelw said migration was "more than just a number" and the quality of the settlement experience was "often overlooked" in the migration system.

She said migrants would contribute economically to Australia only if there was enough support for them.

"The more welcoming and supportive we are of migrants when they arrive, the quicker they will start filling critical shortages, paying tax, and increasing our shared quality of life," Ms Elhelw said.

"Australia lags behind countries such as Canada who have much more comprehensive services available to all permanent residents. This includes employment-related services, language training, and support to adjust to Canadian life and systems."

• X (formerly Twitter)

Related Stories

Filipino workers on temporary visas live in tiny rural towns away from their children to take care of our elderly.

'You are a liar': Chinese wannabe working holiday-makers furious over suspension of visa applications

These returnees to Tonga arrived as strangers to their own land — now they're helping fight a drug crisis

They came to Australia to make Myanmar better, now they might be forced into a bloody war

• Foreign Affairs
• Immigration Policy

Mexico is stopping nearly three times as many migrants now, helping keep U.S. border crossings down

Mexico is stopping nearly three times as many migrants who have crossed its southern border as it was a year ago, a trend that U.S. officials say has helped blunt the surge in crossings of the U.S. border usually seen at this time of year.

Biden administration officials also point to the increased help from Mexico in slowing migration as proof that their relationship with their southern neighbors is more effective than the Trump administration’s.

Former President Donald Trump has derided President Joe Biden’s record and claimed that his administration was more successful at controlling the border. 

Early last year, Mexico interdicted roughly 100,000 migrants at its southern border or inside Mexico per month, while the U.S. was apprehending over 193,000 migrants monthly at the U.S.-Mexico border. This year, more migrants are being stopped inside Mexico than in the U.S., with over 280,000 being interdicted in Mexico and 189,000 in the U.S. in March, according to figures obtained by NBC News. 

The Mexican government doesn’t publicly share its migrant interdiction numbers like the U.S. does.

The high numbers of migrants stopped in Mexico show how chaotic the U.S. border could become if Mexico cannot sustain its interdiction efforts. Another spike in border crossings could hurt Biden in the coming election. 

According to Customs and Border Protection officials, April’s figures, which have yet to be publicly released, are expected to continue to show relatively low numbers compared to the seasonal uptick typically seen in April and May.It isn’t known how many of the migrants Mexico intercepts are actually deported. Many migrants are stopped by Mexican officials at the Guatemala-Mexico border and promptly returned to Guatemala, immigration advocates told NBC News.

Many others are being stopped in northern Mexico and bused to the southern end of the country. From there, they can’t use the CBP One app on their mobile phones to make appointments for U.S. asylum hearings, since the app doesn’t work south of Mexico City, said Amy Fischer, director of refugee and migrant rights at Amnesty International USA.

“In one way, they are doing the dirty work of the U.S. in order to keep people from accessing the U.S. southern border and exercising their right to seek safety,” Fischer said.

Certain groups, like unaccompanied children and migrants traveling as families, receive special protection under Mexican law that limits their deportation.

U.S. officials say Mexico’s willingness to interdict more migrants, a costly process, is in large part due to increased dialogue between the two countries on issues like immigration, fentanyl and illegal firearms trafficking. 

Both Biden and Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, known as AMLO, recognized the severity of the problem at the end of last year when Mexico’s funding to stop migrants ran low and the number of migrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico border surged to record highs. 

At the end of December, Biden held a call with López Obrador and sent Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and Secretary of State Antony Blinken to Mexico to meet with their counterparts. Since then, Mexico has interdicted at least 270,000 migrants each month. 

“President Biden and President AMLO have developed a relationship in which they talk about the shared challenges [of migration], and they both jointly recognize the shared challenges,” a senior Biden administration official said. “They’ve had multiple conversations and multiple calls over the last couple of years tackling and talking about this issue.”

The Trump administration threatened Mexico with increased tariffs and disruptions in trade if it didn’t comply with policies like Remain in Mexico, which forced immigrants seeking asylum in the U.S. to wait in poor conditions in northern Mexico. 

“We have treated Mexico with respect as a sovereign equal,” the senior Biden administration official said. “That’s a difference with this administration’s approach.”

A history of cooperation

The Biden administration isn’t the first to work jointly with Mexico to address migration and other border issues. 

In 2008, during George W. Bush’s administration, the Merida Initiative — a security agreement between the U.S. and Mexico — was launched to reduce violence and fight drug trafficking. Congress approved $1.5 billion for the initiative over two years, enabling the purchase of equipment like helicopters and other aircraft to support the efforts of Mexican law enforcement.

During the Obama administration, the U.S. and Mexico expanded cooperation to include combating transnational criminal organizations by providing forensic equipment and training to Mexican law enforcement and improving immigration enforcement in Mexico.

The Trump administration focused on reducing synthetic drug production and refining border interdiction and port security. In 2018, it reportedly wanted to pay Mexico $20 million to help deport thousands of migrants who entered Mexico in hope of reaching the U.S. The sum, according to CNN  and  The New York Times , would be used to fund bus and airplane tickets to send migrants back to their home countries. In 2019, Trump  stopped threatening tariffs  against Mexico after it agreed to crack down on crossings of its southern border. Mexico deployed 6,000 troops to its border with Guatemala to intercept migrants. 

During the Biden administration, the U.S. and Mexico announced a new security cooperation agreement in 2021 called the Bicentennial Framework. The Bicentennial Framework replaced the Merida Initiative and emphasized preventing transborder crime by minimizing human and arms trafficking and disrupting illicit drug supply chains.

Julia Ainsley is homeland security correspondent for NBC News and covers the Department of Homeland Security and the Justice Department for the NBC News Investigative Unit.

Chloe Atkins reports for the NBC News Investigative Unit, based in New York. She frequently covers crime and courts, as well as the intersection of reproductive health, politics and policy.

Rural-Urban Migration, Its Causes and Effects Essay

Introduction.

The movement of people from rural areas to urban areas has been a concern focused on by many studies. According to the United Nations report, almost 50% of the total world population lives in urban areas, and the figure is expected to increase by 10% by the year 2030. This is an indication of the massive movement of people from rural areas to big cities. Rural to urban migration is higher in developing countries as compared to the developed nations. In Nigeria, a developing country, the population in cities is projected to rise from 1.9 billion to 3.9 billion between 2009 and 2030 (Ajaero & Onokala, 2013). This paper explains the causes and the impacts of migration of population from rural areas to large cities. Although the reasons for rural-urban migration vary from one country to another, the causes and effects are similar.

The factors responsible for the movement of people from rural areas to large cities are characterized by either a push or a pull. People are mostly pulled to the areas with positive characteristics and pushed from those with undesirable conditions. Rural to urban migration usually occurs as people look for perceived or actual opportunities that are missing in rural settings but present in large cities. Additionally, the migration takes place as people living in rural areas escape the hostile or unfavorable living conditions. Most urban centers have the majority of wealth, economic activities, and different services as compared to rural areas (Okhankhuele & Opafunso, 2013). On the other hand, rural areas have continuously experienced neglect and degraded environment. Most of the government policies favor the development of urban areas by deliberately and constantly creating more employment and academic opportunities, healthcare facilities, transport systems, among other infrastructural amenities in the urban areas than rural parts (Ali, Shafi, Rehman, & Jadoon, 2015). As a result, the imbalance of quality of life and development between the two areas occurs, consequently increasing the rural to urban migration.

People may decide to migrate from rural to urban areas due to disrupted economy, for instance, as a result of natural disasters like floods, drought, earthquakes, soil infertility, and misfortunes such as war family/community disputes among others. According to Isaac and Raqib (2013), most of the rural-urban migration in Ghana is due to the search for employment opportunities, which are normally concentrated in the major cities. Most of the Ghanians attribute such as migration to economic purposes. The migrants, most of whom are men, are frustrated by the limited resources for livelihood in rural areas, and the scarcity compels them to look for greener pastures in large cities so that they can get enough to take care of their families. Other migrants cite harsh environmental factors as reasons for their movement from rural areas to cities. Farming, the major economic activity in most rural areas, is adversely affected by the harsh environmental conditions such as infertile soil and inadequate rain for farming. Besides, farming faces other challenges such as limited lands, high fertilizer costs, and low crop prices. All such factors negatively affect agricultural production and profitability. As a result, the youth have continued to lose interest in farming and perceive the agricultural lifestyle as a low-status career. Therefore, they move to large cities to look for seemingly more promising jobs.

Rural to urban migration affects the conditions of the rural areas as well as those in large cities where the migrants settle after moving from their original homes. First, the population of the countryside reduces significantly, and as a result, the agricultural production and development in the regions are adversely affected (Bimerew, 2015). As the youthful move to cities to look for better livelihood, the fascinating social life in the rural areas is replaced by a gloomy condition. The youthful people have energy and vitality, and their movement leaves behind weak, aging parents and young children to carry out farming activities. As a result, the agricultural output reduces, consequently leading to decreased country’s gross domestic product as well as minimal rural income, development funds, and standard of living (Jahan, 2012).

The rural development stagnates, and the areas lack vital social amenities. For instance, the Nigerian rural areas do not have social facilities like proper roads for motor vehicle transport, industries, pipe-borne water, and electricity, as well as well-paying jobs due to increased movement of people to cities. These inadequacies have seen the Nigerian rural areas undergo a vicious poverty cycle. The majority of the educated and strong people desert rural areas, leaving behind the illiterate population in the countryside who are unable to fight poverty effectively. As a result, the standards of living in rural and large cities differ significantly, the latter being better places to live in.

The movement of people from rural regions to major cities has various consequences on the basic facilities in urban areas. Cities become overcrowded, congested, and experience high food costs, a strain on social services, as well as aggravating air and water-borne diseases. The unplanned expansion of cities also leads to the inadequate supply of social amenities such as housing, transport infrastructures, electricity, and water, as well as sewerage system issues (Isaac & Raqib, 2013). The increase in the squatter settlement in cities is perhaps the most remarkable impact of rural-urban migration. The huge increase in city population as a result of the movement has made it difficult for the urban authorities to keep records of the details of the people living in the areas properly.

Attributable to the absence of proper records, the control of some criminal activities such as robbery, theft, murder, among others, becomes a complicated affair in some of the large cities (Okhankhuele & Opafunso, 2013). Besides, the farmers surrounding the expanding cities are displaced as a result of the unplanned growth of the urban areas. Consequently, the agricultural production continues to decline and the displaced people may resort to relocating to urban areas, where job opportunities are already limited, in search of better livelihood. The majority of the people who move from urban to rural areas get jobs in informal sectors, which eventually become congested, resulting in reduced productivity and minimal opportunities for eradicating poverty. Most of the new workers in the cities tend to start up their businesses for employment, and this has made self-employment in urban areas account for 71%, 63%, 61%, and 59% of the entire informal employment in sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa, Latin America, and Asia respectively.

Although the migration of people is a global phenomenon, more rural populations in the developing countries move to cities as compared to the developed nations. The migration is triggered by factors that push these people away from rural areas or opportunities and amenities in the urban regions that are not present in the countryside. Although this shift of population leads to increased self-employment in the cities, other negative impacts such as congestion, increased unemployment levels, poor drainage systems, and crime among others are caused by the scenario in urban areas. Additionally, rural areas experience low agricultural output, stagnated development, and a huge aging/weak population.

Ajaero, C. K., & Onokala, P. C. (2013). The effects of rural-urban migration on rural communities of southeastern Nigeria. International Journal of Population Research , 2 (13) , 1-11.

Ali, H., Shafi, M., Rehman, M., & Jadoon, M. (2015). Causes and effects of rural-urban migration in rural areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa-Pakistan. Arts and Social Sciences Journal, 6 (5), 1-6.

Bimerew, H. (2015). Rural-urban migration and its consequence on urban living: The case in Hawassa city Southern Ethiopia. Global Journal of Human-Social Science Research , 15 (4), 60-75.

Isaac, A., & Raqib, A. S. (2013). Rural-urban migration and rural community development: A case of Kpongu community of Upper West Region of Ghana. African Journal of History and Culture , 5 (4), 72.

Jahan, M. (2012). Impact of rural urban migration on physical and social environment: The case of Dhaka city. International Journal of Development and Sustainability , 1 (2), 186-194.

Okhankhuele, O. T., & Opafunso, O. Z. (2013). Causes and consequences of rural-urban migration Nigeria: A Case study of Ogun Waterside local government area of Ogun State, Nigeria. British Journal of Arts and Social Sciences, 16 (1), 185-194.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, November 8). Rural-Urban Migration, Its Causes and Effects. https://ivypanda.com/essays/rural-urban-migration-its-causes-and-effects/

"Rural-Urban Migration, Its Causes and Effects." IvyPanda , 8 Nov. 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/rural-urban-migration-its-causes-and-effects/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'Rural-Urban Migration, Its Causes and Effects'. 8 November.

IvyPanda . 2020. "Rural-Urban Migration, Its Causes and Effects." November 8, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/rural-urban-migration-its-causes-and-effects/.

1. IvyPanda . "Rural-Urban Migration, Its Causes and Effects." November 8, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/rural-urban-migration-its-causes-and-effects/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Rural-Urban Migration, Its Causes and Effects." November 8, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/rural-urban-migration-its-causes-and-effects/.

• The Industrial Revolutions and Its Effects
• Different Images of the Countryside in Literature
• Countryside in Shen Congwen's Xiaxiao, Border Town and Mo Yan's Red Sorghum
• Readings for Diversity and Social Justice: An Anthology
• Policy Changes and Social Issues
• Crowdfunding Project to Help Homeless People
• Psychoanalytic Social Work: Racial and Ethnic Background
• Information Sharing Habits

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Letter of Recommendation

What I’ve Learned From My Students’ College Essays

The genre is often maligned for being formulaic and melodramatic, but it’s more important than you think.

By Nell Freudenberger

Most high school seniors approach the college essay with dread. Either their upbringing hasn’t supplied them with several hundred words of adversity, or worse, they’re afraid that packaging the genuine trauma they’ve experienced is the only way to secure their future. The college counselor at the Brooklyn high school where I’m a writing tutor advises against trauma porn. “Keep it brief , ” she says, “and show how you rose above it.”

I started volunteering in New York City schools in my 20s, before I had kids of my own. At the time, I liked hanging out with teenagers, whom I sometimes had more interesting conversations with than I did my peers. Often I worked with students who spoke English as a second language or who used slang in their writing, and at first I was hung up on grammar. Should I correct any deviation from “standard English” to appeal to some Wizard of Oz behind the curtains of a college admissions office? Or should I encourage students to write the way they speak, in pursuit of an authentic voice, that most elusive of literary qualities?

In fact, I was missing the point. One of many lessons the students have taught me is to let the story dictate the voice of the essay. A few years ago, I worked with a boy who claimed to have nothing to write about. His life had been ordinary, he said; nothing had happened to him. I asked if he wanted to try writing about a family member, his favorite school subject, a summer job? He glanced at his phone, his posture and expression suggesting that he’d rather be anywhere but in front of a computer with me. “Hobbies?” I suggested, without much hope. He gave me a shy glance. “I like to box,” he said.

I’ve had this experience with reluctant writers again and again — when a topic clicks with a student, an essay can unfurl spontaneously. Of course the primary goal of a college essay is to help its author get an education that leads to a career. Changes in testing policies and financial aid have made applying to college more confusing than ever, but essays have remained basically the same. I would argue that they’re much more than an onerous task or rote exercise, and that unlike standardized tests they are infinitely variable and sometimes beautiful. College essays also provide an opportunity to learn precision, clarity and the process of working toward the truth through multiple revisions.

When a topic clicks with a student, an essay can unfurl spontaneously.

Even if writing doesn’t end up being fundamental to their future professions, students learn to choose language carefully and to be suspicious of the first words that come to mind. Especially now, as college students shoulder so much of the country’s ethical responsibility for war with their protest movement, essay writing teaches prospective students an increasingly urgent lesson: that choosing their own words over ready-made phrases is the only reliable way to ensure they’re thinking for themselves.

Teenagers are ideal writers for several reasons. They’re usually free of preconceptions about writing, and they tend not to use self-consciously ‘‘literary’’ language. They’re allergic to hypocrisy and are generally unfiltered: They overshare, ask personal questions and call you out for microaggressions as well as less egregious (but still mortifying) verbal errors, such as referring to weed as ‘‘pot.’’ Most important, they have yet to put down their best stories in a finished form.

I can imagine an essay taking a risk and distinguishing itself formally — a poem or a one-act play — but most kids use a more straightforward model: a hook followed by a narrative built around “small moments” that lead to a concluding lesson or aspiration for the future. I never get tired of working with students on these essays because each one is different, and the short, rigid form sometimes makes an emotional story even more powerful. Before I read Javier Zamora’s wrenching “Solito,” I worked with a student who had been transported by a coyote into the U.S. and was reunited with his mother in the parking lot of a big-box store. I don’t remember whether this essay focused on specific skills or coping mechanisms that he gained from his ordeal. I remember only the bliss of the parent-and-child reunion in that uninspiring setting. If I were making a case to an admissions officer, I would suggest that simply being able to convey that experience demonstrates the kind of resilience that any college should admire.

The essays that have stayed with me over the years don’t follow a pattern. There are some narratives on very predictable topics — living up to the expectations of immigrant parents, or suffering from depression in 2020 — that are moving because of the attention with which the student describes the experience. One girl determined to become an engineer while watching her father build furniture from scraps after work; a boy, grieving for his mother during lockdown, began taking pictures of the sky.

If, as Lorrie Moore said, “a short story is a love affair; a novel is a marriage,” what is a college essay? Every once in a while I sit down next to a student and start reading, and I have to suppress my excitement, because there on the Google Doc in front of me is a real writer’s voice. One of the first students I ever worked with wrote about falling in love with another girl in dance class, the absolute magic of watching her move and the terror in the conflict between her feelings and the instruction of her religious middle school. She made me think that college essays are less like love than limerence: one-sided, obsessive, idiosyncratic but profound, the first draft of the most personal story their writers will ever tell.

Nell Freudenberger’s novel “The Limits” was published by Knopf last month. She volunteers through the PEN America Writers in the Schools program.

• Réseau de l´ONU sur la Migration

Ce que nous faisons

Partenariats, points forts.

• Où travaillons-nous

Travailler avec nous

Engagez-vous.

• Données et recherche
• 2030 AGENDA

À propos de la migration

Le rapport sur l’état des migrations dans le monde 2024 révèle les dernières tendances et les défis mondiaux en matière de mobilité humaine

• Les rapatriements de fonds internationaux ont augmenté de 650 %, passant de 128 milliards de dollars US à 831 milliards de dollars US entre 2000 et 2022. 
• Les rapatriements de fonds stimulent davantage le PIB des pays en développement que les investissements directs à l’étranger. 
• 281 millions de migrants internationaux dans le monde; le nombre de personnes déplacées a atteint le chiffre record de 117 millions fin 2022.  
• Pour accéder au Rapport sur l’état de la migration mondiale 2024, rendez-vous sur la page Internet du WMR . 

Dhaka/Genève, 7 mai - L'Organisation internationale pour les migrations (OIM) publie aujourd'hui son Rapport sur l’état de la migration dans le monde 2024 . Ce rapport révèle des changements importants dans les schémas migratoires mondiaux, notamment un nombre record de personnes déplacées et une augmentation importante des rapatriements de fonds internationaux. 

La Directrice générale de l'OIM, Amy Pope, a officiellement lancé la publication de ce rapport au Bangladesh, pays directement concerné par les défis migratoires, notamment l'émigration, l'immigration et les déplacements. 

« Le Rapport sur l’état de la migration dans le monde 2024 contribue à démystifier la complexité de la mobilité humaine grâce à des données et des analyses factuelles  », a déclaré Amy Pope, Directrice générale de l'OIM, à l’occasion du lancement. « Dans un monde aux prises avec l'incertitude, il est essentiel de comprendre la dynamique migratoire pour prendre des décisions éclairées et apporter des réponses politiques efficaces. Le Rapport sur l’état de la migration dans le monde améliore justement cette compréhension en expliquant les tendances ancrées et les nouveaux défis. » 

Le rapport souligne que les migrations internationales restent un moteur de développement humain et de croissance économique, comme en témoigne l'augmentation de plus de 650 % des rapatriements de fonds internationaux entre 2000 et 2022, passés de 128 milliards de dollars US à 831 milliards de dollars US. Un chiffre en augmentation donc, malgré les prédictions de nombreux analystes qui prévoyaient une diminution considérable en raison de la COVID-19. 

Sur ces 831 milliards de rapatriements de fonds, 647 milliards ont été envoyés par des migrants dans des pays à revenu faible ou intermédiaire. Ces rapatriements de fonds peuvent représenter une part importante du PIB de ces pays et, à l'échelle mondiale, ils dépassent désormais les investissements directs à l’étranger. 

Parmi ses principales conclusions, le rapport révèle que si les migrations internationales continuent d'être un moteur de développement humain, des défis persistent. Alors que l'on estime à 281 millions le nombre de migrants internationaux dans le monde, le nombre de personnes déplacées en raison de conflits, de violences, de catastrophes et d'autres raisons a atteint le niveau le plus élevé jamais enregistré dans l'histoire moderne, soit 117 millions, ce qui souligne l'urgence de remédier aux crises liées aux déplacements. 

La migration, qui fait partie intégrante de l'histoire de l'humanité, est souvent associée à des histoires sensationnalistes. Cependant, la réalité est bien plus nuancée que veulent bien le laisser croire les unes des journaux. La plupart des migrations sont régulières, sûres et régionales, directement liées aux opportunités et aux moyens de subsistance. Pourtant, la désinformation et la politisation ont rendu nébuleux le discours public, d’où la nécessité d’une représentation claire et précise de la dynamique migratoire. 

En choisissant Dhaka pour le lancement du rapport, l'OIM reconnait les efforts déployés par le Bangladesh pour venir en aide aux migrants vulnérables et favoriser les voies de migration régulière. Par ce choix, l’OIM remercie également le pays pour le rôle important qu’il a joué dans l'élaboration d’un discours et de politiques migratoires mondiaux. 

En tant que « pays champion » du Pacte mondial pour des migrations sûres, ordonnées et régulières, le Bangladesh a fait preuve d'un engagement fort pour traiter les questions migratoires et mettre en œuvre des politiques de protection des droits des migrants. 

Cet engagement proactif est une parfaite application des objectifs stratégiques de l'OIM, faisant du Bangladesh un lieu idéal pour lancer le Rapport sur l’état de la migration dans le monde 2024. 

Le Rapport sur l’état de la migration dans le monde de l'OIM, avec ses outils numériques innovants et son analyse complète, vise à déconstruire les mythes, à fournir des informations précises et à inspirer des actions concrètes pour relever les défis et saisir les opportunités de la mobilité humaine. 

« Nous espérons que ce rapport inspirera des initiatives de collaboration pour exploiter le potentiel de la migration en tant que moteur de développement humain et de prospérité mondiale » a déclaré la DG Amy Pope. 

« En tant que pays Champion du GCM, le Bangladesh continuera non seulement à agir sur les engagements qu'il a pris dans le cadre de son contexte intérieur, mais prendra également en charge les questions émergentes et les défis liés à la migration et au développement pour des délibérations éclairées au niveau international » a déclaré le Dr Hasan Mahmud, ministre des Affaires étrangères honorable de la République populaire du Bangladesh.

Notes aux rédacteurs : 

• Ce lancement fait partie de la première visite de trois jours de la Directrice générale de l'OIM au Bangladesh. 

Pour plus d'informations, veuillez contacter : 

Marie McAuliffe, Rédactrice en chef du Rapport sur l’état de la migration dans le monde à l’adresse : [email protected]  

Pour les demandes de renseignements médias, veuillez contacter : Florence Kim à l’adresse : [email protected]  

COMMUNIQUÉS CONNEXES

Déclaration conjointe du japon, de la norvège, de la suède, de la suisse et des états-unis suite à leur visite dans les camps de réfugiés rohingyas de cox's bazar, au bangladesh, 75,9 millions de personnes se sont déplacées à l'intérieur de leur propre pays en 2023 : rapport de l'idmc, la directrice de l'oim se rend au bangladesh et obtient des engagements financiers pour les réfugiés rohingyas, les inondations déplacent des milliers de personnes en afrique de l'est ; l'oim demande plus d’efforts pour faire face à la mobilité climatique.

Mises à jour sur la migration 

Abonnez-vous à la newsletter de l’OIM pour recevoir les dernières informations et histoires sur la migration.