REASONS FOR MIGRATION

Reasons for migration are, in almost every case, related to the need to improve a particular situation. Individual, family or community reasons are intimately linked with broader local and international issues, such as the economic, political or social context. In every case, expectations emerge as a significant dimension of the decisional making process of migrating. Expectations, the act of looking forward in anticipation of the future, are

understood as the process of evaluating the chances for future attainment of valued goals in the home and community (stay decision) versus the alternative locations (move decision) (De Jong, 2000). They also suggest that social norms, traditions and opportunities from the local and the foreign location, are taken into account when deciding to migrate (De Jong, 2000;

Ritsila and Ovaskainen, 2001).

In the 1970s and 1980s, two particular determinants of migration were discussed in the international literature- the emphasis on family and life-cycle aspects and the application of equilibrium versus disequilibrium migration theories (more detail later in point 2.5)

(Greenwood, 1985). Other reasons for migration reported in the literature are:

1. Economic and work reasons: by far the most commonly mentioned reasons for

migrating in the literature, and strongly connected with work opportunities and income improvements in the foreign country (Buchan and Perfilieva, 2006; Rodriguez and

67

Gonzales, 2006). Interactions between employment and migration have been reported since the early 70s (Greenwood, 1985) and have become the central aspect of debate about migration.

2. Educational reasons: less frequently reported than economic reasons, but indirectly linked, educational motives usually relate to a hope of labour and income improvement over time (Greenwood, 1985; De Jong and Gordon, 1999). Moreover, as reported by Ritsila and Ovaskainen (2001), highly educated people are more prone to move than the rest of the population. A gradient of migration has been observed through levels of education in some countries, the highest being among the most educated quintile.

3. Family reasons: women and children have historically been affected by men’s

migration, as men have represented and still represent the head of the family in several countries (Pedraza, 1991). Previous findings support the idea that family concerns are a very important aspect to be considered in the migration decision-making process (Greenwood, 1985; Polachek and Horvath, 1977; Del Rey, 2007). According to Grasmuck & Pessar (1991), the household is the social unit that makes decisions about whether migration will take place, who in the family will migrate, what resources will be allocated, whether migration will be temporary or permanent, and others.

4. Life-cycle reasons: a number of life-cycle considerations have been reported as relevant when deciding to migrate, for example, marriage, divorce, birth and raising of children, and retirement (Greenwood, 1985; Del Rey, 2007). Being married and having an employed wife in the family, for instance, have been reported as negatively

associated with the probability of moving (Graves, 1979; Sandell, 1977).

5. Social services’ reasons: expected improvements in the health services and other social services in a foreign country have been described as relevant when deciding on which country to migrate to, especially from poor countries or poor areas to developed ones (Martine, Hakkert and Guzman, 2000). The current cases of Canada and Spain, with their health care systems, are good examples of this phenomenon.

6. Gender reasons: some authors have proposed that men and women have different reasons for migrating, as a consequence of separated gender roles and the underlying hierarchy (Grieco and Boid, 1998). In several cultures, women would have had less opportunity of participating in the decision to migrate, which would depend more on other family issues. Other authors and recent data, however, have shown that women

68

have been increasing their migration rate in recent years, as a consequence of the globalization process (Hugo, 1993; UN 2002).

7. Political/war-related reasons: political refugees are historically supposed to be protected and supported all over the world. This reason for migration usually implies the movement of groups of people, often complete families that need to leave their country of origin to protect their lives (UNHCR, 1995; UNHCR, 1997). Repercussions of political refugees’ acceptance in a foreign country might be positive or negative, but certainly produce a significant effect in both the issuer and the receiver country

(UNHCR, 1995; UNHCR, 1997). A remarkable and recent example of this is the large number of refugees during the 1990s in Europe moving because of war, and estimated to be10.7 million people in 1995 (UNHCR, 1995; UNHCR, 1997).

8. Geographical reasons: described as topological, climate, and environmental amenities, such as mountains, seashore, sunshine and pollution (Greenwood, 1985). Some previous literature has suggested, for example, the relevance of climate variables when taking into account aggregated variables (such as income levels and unemployment rates)(Greenwood, 1985). In that sense, the regional and climate characteristics of both the origin area and the destination area would have a significant effect on migration behaviour (Ritsila and Ovaskainen, 2001). Others, like geographical proximity and shared language, customs and educational curricula may also affect the choice of the country of destination (Buchan and Pefilieva, 2006; Sriskandarajah and Drew, 2006).

69 2.4 CHARACTERISTICS OF MIGRATION

2.4.1 General approach: the most frequent characteristics of people who migrate

Migration affects the entire world (EESC, 2007) but occurs at a different rhythm in each continent and in each country around the world (Martine, Hakkert and Guzman, 2000) and is deeply connected to the globalization process. Most of the consequences of migration depend on particular characteristics of the individuals who migrate. According to the literature, in recent years migrants have tended to be highly educated; women and young people in some regions and countries (see Table 2.1). This is of particular importance to Chile, since previous statistics in the country have highlighted the mixed patterns of international immigrants, especially in relation to their demographic and socioeconomic conditions, including their employment status and type of occupation. Further description of this issue is presented later in section 2.6.

Table 2.1 Main characteristics of people on the move around the world Characteristic Description

Highly-Educated

It is often suggested that those who migrate are not the poorest individuals in the issuer country, but those with higher education (Ritsila and Ovaskainen, 2001;

Buchan, 2007) and economic and social capacity to develop the movement to another place. However, the rate of highly qualified immigrant professionals and technicians has tended to decrease in some countries, such as the US (Brimelow, 1996; Pizarro and Villa, 2005). In addition, being “highly educated” in a poor country is not the same as being “highly educated” in a developed one. Income and social class differences between countries need further attention for a better understanding of migration processes all over the world.

Women It is estimated that the proportion of migrant women worldwide has been stable over time, around 49% (EESC, 2007; Martine, Hakkert and Guzman, 2000; UN, 2002).

However, there is a clear feminization of migration in certain continents and

countries, including women who migrate alone (autonomization of women migration) (Koser, 2007). During the 1970s and 1980s in Latin America, women migrated in a higher proportion than men, but more recently there appears to be a growing balance between genders, as more men have migrated to the US. Nevertheless, excluding the US, there is a clear feminization of migration in the South American region (UN, 2002; Pizarro and Villa, 2005). A complex gender issue related to migration has received especial consideration in the past, which is the migration of women for sexual exploitation. Numerous publications and international organizations have discussed this issue, and have developed a particular framework for its

understanding.

Young active labour force and students

People who migrate tend to be young (Greenwood, 1985) and healthy (Lu, 2008), for both temporary and long-term time periods (Buchan, 2007). Those unemployed tend to migrate more than the employed (Greenwood, 1985). Age emerged early on as a relevant variable associated with migration in cross-sectional research (Sandell, 1977). However, some recent longitudinal data reports that the relationship between age and migration disappears when economic and family reasons are included in the analysis in some populations (Sandefour and Wilbur, 1981).

Other

characteristics

Other reported dimensions of people who migrate are that they tend to be connected to others who have also migrated to the foreign country, because of job opportunities, family, friendship or refuge. Da Vanzo (1978) adds another four general

characteristics of migration: (1) the more distant the move, the higher the probability of repeated movement;(2) when unemployment motivates migration, return moves are more likely; (3) households heads who are young tend to return soon after their initial move; and (4) the best educated are likely to move on quickly.

70

2.4.2 The issuer society: brain drain and remittances between more developed and less developed countries

There are several consequences of migration in the issuer (sending) and the receiver (host or receptor) country. Even though these consequences are well described in some of the countries that are directly affected, it is also known that their repercussions might involve other countries in a broader “global” dimension. Therefore, this division is possibly

inexistent, as these factors affect both countries simultaneously. Moreover, a single nation is often to some extent both an issuer and a receiver country.

With regards to the Issuer Society in particular, there are two main consequences described in the literature, the “Brain drain” and “remittances and hometown associations”. It should be noted that the issue of remittances will not be explored in this study, because questions related to it were not included in the CASEN survey.

2.4.2.a) Brain drain

Brain drain is one of the most well described phenomena of the migration of professionals since the late 1970s (Martine, Hakkert and Guzman, 2000; Mejia, Pizurki and Royston, 1979). It has been defined as the international recruitment and migration of high skilled workers (especially health workers) as a consequence of globalization. Medical doctors, nurses and other health workers have taken the opportunity of moving across national borders “in pursuit of new opportunities and better career prospects” (Buchan and Perfilieva, 2006). In particular, there may be greater opportunities for high skilled women from poor countries, where women still face unequal access to tertiary education (Dumont, Martin and Spilevogel, 2007). In the UK in 2006, about one in three physicians in the NHS were from another country (Buchan and Perfilieva, 2006), and as Sveinsson stated in 2009 “in fact there are more nurses from Malawi working in Manchester alone than there are in Malawi.”

The brain drain rate rose between 1990 and 2000, as the worldwide average emigration rate of skilled workers increased by 0.75 percentage points over that period (Docquier and Marfouk, 2004). Since this time, a large amount of research has been developed in relation to this phenomenon, and especially how it impacts upon less developed countries, such as the Philippines and others from the Caribbean and sub-Saharan Africa (Buchan and Perfilieva, 2006; Editorial, 2007; Pritchard, 1999).

Countries that lose scarce skilled staff suffer a severe negative impact on their health care system (Buchan and Perfilieva, 2006; Buchan, 2007). As a consequence, several

71

international debates have developed in order to analyse the question of whether recruiting health professionals from developing countries is ethically justifiable. However, as

mentioned before, being “highly educated” in a poor country might not be the same as being

“highly educated” in a developed one. Income and social class differences between countries need further attention for a better understanding of migration and the brain drain process all over the world. A reverse effect has also been described (“reverse brain-drain” or “brain gain”), but on a smaller scale. The brain drain has been reported as a notable positive contribution to the transition to a democratic society and market economy in Europe in the 90s (Brimelow, 1996) and as a “quick fix” solution to the health-professional skill shortages in some countries (Buchan, 2007). However, it has not been clearly stated that positive aspects of brain drain overcome its severe negative consequences (Dumont, Martin and Spilevogel, 2007), as “monetary remittances from diaspora communities cannot counteract the double burden of regional disparities in health-care resources and in health needs”

(MacPherson, Gushulak and MacDonald, 2007). Moreover, there is a need to improve the available data so that the monitoring of trends in flows of health workers can be more effective, along with monitoring the effectiveness of various policy interventions that are trying to regulate international recruitment.

With relation to the brain-drain of health workers phenomenon to Chile, some insight into its magnitude can be explored by analysing the educational level of immigrants in Chile, but will not be the focus of attention. Nonetheless, I recently conducted a specific analysis to explore this phenomenon in Chile and it can be found elsewhere (Cabieses and Tunstall, 2011 in press). This study did not identify a significant brain drain of health workers to Chile, but suggested distinctive patterns of international immigration within Latin America.

2.4.2.b) Remittances and hometown associations

The second relevant consequence of migration in the issuer society is remittances and hometown-associations. They have been defined as private “non market” person-to-person income transfers, often within families and usually of a small amount of money – a few hundred dollars on average (Fellahi and De Lima, 2005; Schramm, 2006). They might appear as a positive consequence of chain migration and as an expression of solidarity between immigrants and their families and societies in the countries of origin (Orozco, 2002;

Sinisterra, 2005). Remittances can be a significant part of economic stability in developing countries. For example, it has been estimated that 18-36% of the gross domestic product (GDP) of Nicaragua is from remittances (Orozco, 2002; Martine, Hakkert and Guzman, 2000; Pritchard, 1999). Of Mexico’s GDP, 7.6% is produced by remittances, and over 2 million people live on money received from the US (Martine, Hakkert and Guzman, 2000;

72

Consejo Nacional de Poblacion, 1999). Studies in Mexico and El Salvador have reported that remittances improved national savings and indirect productive benefits, like the survival of small companies (Durand, Parrado and Massey, 1996; Chami and JahJahm 2006).

There are disagreements, however, over whether remittances really benefit vulnerable groups or contribute to reducing poverty. According to some authors, it has not been clearly defined what the family income would be if remittances did not exist, as it has been reported that most remittances are spent on basic needs and not in productive investment (Martine, Hakkert and Guzman, 2000; Consejo Nacional de Poblacion, 1999). Moreover, it has been stated that families who receive remittances in the issuer countries tend to reduce or abandon their work, which creates dependence on remittances (Joskish, 2002; Taylor, 1999; Conway and Cohen, 1998; Rubenstein 1983). This discussion continues to be a controversial debate, but beyond positive and negative consequences of remittances and hometown associations, these phenomena are clear examples of the great complexity involved in the migration process and its numerous implications.

2.4.3 The receiver society: selective policies and discrimination in the context of economic liberalism and globalisation

Similar to the main issues in issuer countries, the aspects included in this section are not analysed in this research. However, they are significant dimensions to discuss, as they give a valuable context to migration patterns in Latin America.

In relation to the Receiver Society, there are two main consequences described in the literature - “Emerging selectivity policies” and “Discrimination”. These two issues are accepted by some and rejected by others. Moreover, there seems to be no clear division between them, as selectivity policies might be caused by and produce discriminatory

attitudes. International policies in developed countries are becoming more selective about the type, competence and length of stay of immigrants (see for example recent changes made during Prime Minister David Cameron´s leadership to immigration policies in the UK). Even though all over the world immigration is required for the workforce, boundaries are often open to highly qualified professionals and some political refugees, but closed to others (Martine, Hakkert and Guzman, 2000).

International immigrants, despite often being of economic value, are not welcome in several receiver countries. This feeling tends to increase when immigrants belong to a different ethnicity and have a different language, religion, appearance or habits (Martine, Hakkert and Guzman, 2000). Immigrants in Chile are also frequently perceived as competitors for

73

employment and use of health care services by the local population (Mahroum, 2000;

Massey, 1999). Many of these perceptions are, however, not a fair expression of reality. In terms of employment, for example, immigrants tend to take places that are low-social status, poorly paid or require manual and physical effort, and that are already vacant. In many cases, immigrants are over-qualified for the job they obtain and the brain drain of high skilled immigrants do not necessarily match with their occupational opportunities in the receiving country. Higher costs associated with immigrants’ use of social services need to be seen relative to their productivity (Martine, Hakkert and Guzman, 2000; Finney & Simpson, 2009). Finally, it must be highlighted that migration itself should not necessarily imply only a negative effect. It also represents a significant contribution to cultural integration and respect for human rights principles all over the world (Simon, Moore and Ungar, 1994).