Migration is currently at the centre of a debate, and of disagreement, between rich and poor countries. Governments and citizens in rich or relatively rich countries are worried about irregular migrants, the overstaying of temporary admissions, the abuse of asylum systems, and especially the tangle of repatriat- ing unsuccessful applicants.
Poor countries argue that rich countries need, but do not welcome, immi- grant workers who do the unglamorous, low-paying manual jobs which indige- nous people are increasingly reluctant to take up. Low-skilled immigrant workers, and many others who have ‘deskilled themselves’ as a survival strategy, help sustain jobs, not only those that are dirty, dangerous and poorly- paid, but also in other areas. Indeed without these immigrants some services could not function.
Immigrants are often accused of depressing the wages for locals, but this accusation is not as simple as it sounds. In reality, migrants bring with them their energy, fresh ideas and entrepreneurship. Similarly, the argument that immigrants constitute a drain on social services – on education and health in particular – seems to be exaggerated and is not always borne out by the facts (Adepoju, 2003; Heran, 2004). Many irregular immigrants, employed in several sectors of the economy, are exploited and vulnerable, and are often compelled to accept jobs irrespective of risk, physical demands, low and irregular wages, and long or unsociable working hours.
Migration and development policies might have a better chance of succeed- ing if both sides of the migratory space − circumstances in the country of origin and of that of destination − were taken into account. Indeed a critical ingredient in the formulation of a coherent migration-friendly policy is an understanding of the dynamics and underlying factors of migration both at the sub-Saharan African countries of origin, and at the destinations − mainly rich countries belonging to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Motives for migration are often misinterpreted, and the contributions migrants make to development are trivialised, resulting in persistent suspicion between migrants and their host societies. In general, migrants are a selected population compared to the non-migrant populations of their societies of origin: they are healthier, better-educated, more enterprising, with sufficient funds to defray the costs of travel, while their settlement can be softened by diaspora and other similar networks. But the positive aspects of migrants as agents of development are rarely acknowledged.
It is now being realised that, although migration poses real policy difficul- ties, it has immense potential for countries of both destination and origin, as well as for the migrants themselves. The real challenge is how to develop an
international framework to manage migration through comprehensive policies. With increased globalisation, rich countries promote and supply an easier flow of capital, goods and services, while at the same time restricting the movement of labour supplied by poor countries. Rich countries nevertheless need migrants
− to meet labour shortages in highly skilled areas, especially information technology and health services sectors, to cope with the long-term trend of ageing populations, and (as has already been said) to fill unskilled jobs that locals do not want to take on. Faced with rising domestic unemployment among ‘underutilised’ workers, rich countries are increasingly more selective, opting mainly for migrants with skills (UN, 2005; Farrant et al, 2006). These increas-
ing restrictions on regular migration merely result in a rise in irregular migra- tion.
Many poor sub-Saharan African countries regard emigration as a way of reducing domestic unemployment, the more so in that it also boosts revenue into the country through migrants’ remittances. Nevertheless, these countries are worried about the detrimental effects of the loss of skilled workers, espe- cially doctors and nurses, on achievement of the MDGs. They are equally aware that excruciating poverty, unemployment, low wages for workers, conflicts and persecution prompt people to leave their home countries to become refugees, asylum seekers and labour migrants. They lament the fact that, even after pursuing World Bank and IMF structural adjustment programmes, few jobs have been created and, in the decade 1994−2004, for example, the number of workers living on less than a dollar a day increased by 28 million in sub- Saharan Africa (ECA, 2005).
Agriculture is sub-Saharan Africa’s main employer, but incomes and productivity levels are low, and the few jobs being created are in the informal economy. The situation is made worse by the region’s disadvantaged position in international trade, where rich countries protect their farm sectors through subsidies, guaranteeing their farmers prices higher than on world markets, thus making it difficult for poor African farmers to compete. African trade ministers argue that the high tariffs and technical barriers to trade cost sub-Saharan African countries about US$20 billion yearly in lost exports.
The agricultural protectionist policies of the European Union (EU) and the USA – especially farm subsidies on cotton in the USA – which artificially spur the level of local production and depress world prices, impoverish millions of Africans. The USA spends more subsidising 25,000 cotton farmers than it does on its entire aid budget for Africa, and paid US$4 billion in subsidies on a crop worth US$3 billion, even though the World Trade Organization (WTO) ruled that the subsidies were illegal. The immediate impact was a loss of US$301 million by African exporters, with Burkina Faso, Mali and Benin each losing about 2 per cent of their GDP growth. Peasant farmers, especially cotton
producers, in these three countries are abandoning rural areas and migrating to urban unemployment, thus becoming potential emigrants. The new WTO rules, which took effect in January 2005, ended the quota system that had provided a ready market for textiles from poor African countries, and has already cost sub- Saharan Africa an additional 250,000 jobs, leaving more than a million family members in many countries (Lesotho, South Africa, Nigeria, Ghana, Mauritius, Zambia, Madagascar, Tanzania, Malawi, Namibia, Kenya) without stable incomes (UN, 2006b).
The clamour by African leaders to achieve mutually beneficial trade relations with richer countries is tied to deepening poverty. This growing poverty frustrates economic reform and efforts to improve living conditions, stimulate economic growth, and generate employment opportunities. It is in this context that African countries have, through ongoing negotiations at the WTO, been pressing industrial nations to drop barriers to the free movement of labour (UN, 2006b). They maintain that freer migration would be a quick means of increasing their benefits from globalisation. The challenge is to develop policies that are acceptable to both poor and rich countries, and also spur global economic growth.
The African Union’s Strategic Framework for a Policy on Migration (AUC, 2004), the draft African common position on migration and development (AU, 2006) and the Road Map for Action on Labour Migration and Development (ILO, 2006) serve as the basis for a comprehensive discourse of migration dynamics and an appropriate platform for mainstreaming migration into development activities at national, sub-regional and regional levels in sub- Saharan Africa. The African Union’s (AU) Strategic Framework covers key areas relating to labour migration (national labour migration policies, regional cooperation and harmonisation of policies, regional economic integration); border management; irregular migration; human rights of migrants; internal migration; migration data collection and data exchange; migration and development (brain drain, remittance transfers and Africans in the diaspora), and inter-state cooperation and partnerships. The Road Map is the outcome of the Africa-Europe inter-regional dialogue on labour migration for integration and development, and maps out ways in which labour migration contributes to development and regional integration. The common African position on migra- tion and development is designed to ensure that Africa’s concerns are properly reflected at the Africa/Europe dialogue and other international fora. These concerns would be such as those regarding the adverse consequences of the loss of its skilled manpower on the region’s development agenda.