Immigration
Although
human migration has existed for hundreds of thousands of years,
immigration in the modern sense refers to movement of people from one
nation-state to another, where they are not
citizens. Immigration implies long-term permanent residence by the immigrants:
tourists and short-term visitors are not considered immigrants. However, seasonal labour migration (typical for periods of less than a year) is often treated as a form of immigration. The global volume of immigration is high in absolute terms, but low in relative terms. The UN estimated 190 million international migrants in 2005, about 3% of global population. The other 97% still live in the state in which they were born, or its successor state.
The modern idea of immigration is related to the development, especially in the 19th century, of nation-states with clear citizenship criteria,
passports, permanent border controls, and a
nationality law. Citizenship of a nation-state confers an inalienable right of residence in that state, but residence of immigrants is subject to conditions set by
immigration law. The nation-state made immigration a political issue: by definition it is the homeland of a
nation defined by shared ethnicity and/or culture, and in most cases immigrants have a different ethnicity and culture. This has led to social tensions,
xenophobia, and conflicts about national identity, in many developed countries.
According to the
Report of the Secretary-General on International migration and development, most international migrants are in the high-income developed countries, 91 million in 2005. Low and lower-middle income countries have 51 million international migrants. The absolute number of international migrants is highest in the United States, 39 million. The highest percentages of migrants in the labour force are found in the
Gulf States, 90% in the
United Arab Emirates, 86% in
Qatar, 82% in
Kuwait, 64% in Oman. Migration flows are not solely from poor to rich countries: about a third of international migrants move from onedeveloping country to another. In Europe, only
Luxembourg approaches this level, with 45% of the labour force foreign. In
Switzerland, 22% of the labour force is foreign, but in other European countries less than 10% is foreign ('foreign' may not correspond to 'immigrant'). In 41 countries, over one-fifth of the population is made up of international migrants.
Theories of migration traditionally distinguish between
push factors and
pull factors. Push factors refer primarily to the motive for
emigration from the country of origin. In the case of economic migration (usually labour migration), differentials in
wage rates are prominent. Poor individuals from less developed countries
can have far higher standards of living in developed countries, than in their originating countries. Escape from
poverty is a tradition push factor, the availability of jobs is the related pull factor. This kind of migration may be
illegal immigration in the destination country (emigration is rarely illegal).
Natural disasters can amplify migration flows. The migrants may plan to send
remittances to their family. For the poor in undeveloped countries, the economic pressure to migrate can become so high that when legal means are restricted, people immigrate illegally.
For some migrants,
education is the primary pull factor (note that students on limited
visas are often not defined as immigrants).
Retirement migration from rich countries to lower-cost countries with better
climate, is a new type of international migration. An example is immigration of retired
British citizens to
SpainNon-economic push factors include
persecution (religious and otherwise),
oppression,
ethnic cleansing and even
genocide, and risks to civilians during
war. Political motives traditionally motivate refugee flows - to escape
dictatorship for instance.
Some migration is for personal reasons, based on a
relationship (e.g. to be with family or a loved one). Evasion of
criminal justice (avoiding
arrest) is a negative personal motivation.
Barriers to migration
Barriers to immigration are not only legal, natural barriers to immigration are also very powerful. Immigrants when leaving their country also leave everything familiar: their family, friends, support network, and culture. They also need to liquidate their assets often at a large cost, and incur the expense of moving. When they arrive in a new country this is often with many uncertainties including finding work, where to live, new laws, new cultural norms, language or accent issues, possible
racism and other exclusionary behaviour towards them and their family. These barriers act to limit international migration: scenarios where populations move
en masse to other continents, creating huge population surges, and their associated strain on infrastructure and services, ignore these inherent limits on migration.
Immigration is a politicised issue, in some countries the major political issue. Opposition to immigration is generally far more prominent than support for it, but that is to some extent countered by economic interests.
The two main arguments cited in support of immigration are economic arguments, usually related to labour supply, and cultural arguments appealing to the value of
cultural diversity. The four main anti-immigration themes are simple
xenophobia, economic issues (costs of immigration, and competition in the labour market), environmental issues (impact of population growth), and (especially in Europe) the impact on the national identity and the nature of the
nation-state itself.
Support for 100% open borders is limited to a minority. Some
free-market libertarians believe that a
free global labor market with no restrictions on immigration would, in the long run, boost global
prosperity. There are also groups which oppose border controls on idealistic and humanitarian grounds, given the level of global inequality.
More limited support for increased labour migration comes from economists and some business interests in the developed world. Although
multinational corporations require free movement of senior staff, they are not necessarily the main users of immigrant labour. Medium and small businesses (restaurants, farms) may be the most dependent on low-wage labour. In specific sectors, there is a business
lobby for immigration, usually in the form of
green card systems, intended to facilitate specific and limited labour flows.
This kind of immigration is opposed by labour-market
protectionists, often arguing from
economic nationalism. The core of their arguments is that a nations jobs are the ‘property' of that nation, and that allowing foreigners to take them is equivalent to a loss of that property. They may also criticise immigration of this type as a form of
corporate welfare, where business is indirectly subsidised by government expenditure to promote the immigration. [
1] A more common criticism is that the immigrant
employees are almost always paid less than a non-immigrant worker in the same job, and that the immigration depresses wages - typically, immigrants are not
unionised. For some that is a reason to limit immigration. Other groups feel that the focus should be not on immigration control, but on equal rights for the immigrants, to avoid their exploitation.
Non-economic opposition to immigration is closely associated with
nationalism, in Europe ‘nationalist party' is almost a
synonym for ‘anti-immigration party'. Although traditionally, economic arguments dominated the
United States immigration debate, it has become more polarised in recent years, as evidenced by nationalist demands for the
militarisation of the US borders. The emergence of private border militias has attracted much media attention. Nevertheless, the southern border of the
European Union in the Spanish
exclaves of
Ceuta and
Melilla is at least as militarised as the US-Mexico border.
The primary argument of the nationalist opponents in Europe is that immigrants simply do not belong in a nation-state which is by definition intended for another
ethnic group. Britain, in this view, is for the British, Germany is for the Germans, and so on. Immigration is seen as altering the composition of the national population, and consequently the national identity. From the nationalist perspective, high-volume immigration simply ‘destroys their country'. Some of the support for this nationalist opposition comes from
xenophobes who instinctively fear the presence of
foreigners, but it is also consistent with the nationalist
ideology. Germany was indeed intended as a state for Germans: mass immigration was not foreseen by the 19th-century nationalist movements. Immigration has forced Germany and other western European states to re-examine their national identity: part of the population is not prepared to redefine it, to include immigrants. It is this type of opposition to immigration which generated support for anti-immigration parties such as
Vlaams Belang in Belgium, the
British National Party in Britain, the
Lega Nord in Italy, the
Front National in France, and the
Lijst Pim Fortuyn in the Netherlands.
One of the responses of nation-states to mass immigration is to promote the
cultural assimilation of immigrants into the national community, and their integration into the political, social, and economic structures. In the United States, cultural assimilation is traditionally seen as a process taking place among minorities themselves, the ‘
melting pot'. In Europe, where
nation-states have a tradition of national unification by cultural and linguistic policies, variants of these policies have been proposed to accelerate the assimilation of immigrants. The introduction of citizenship tests for immigrants is the most visible form of state-enforced assimilation. The test usually include some form of language exam, and some countries have reintroduced forms of language
prohibition. The Netherlands immigration minister,
Rita Verdonk, suggested a nationwide ban on the speaking of non-
Dutch languages in public, but withdrew the proposal after protests.
Environmentalist opposition to immigration is prominent in the
United States, which has the largest absolute numbers of immigrants. Responses to immigration are a controversial topic among environmental activists, especially within the
Sierra Club Some oppose the immigration-driven population growth in the United States as
unsustainable, and advocate immigration reduction. Other environmentalists see
overpopulation and environmental degradation as global problems, that should be addressed by other methods. In Europe, immigration does not so much contribute to population growth, as reduce population decline. The
Republic of Ireland is the only EU country, where immigration contributes substantial population growth. [
2]
The political debate about immigration is now a feature of most developed countries. Some, such as
Japan, traditionally had very little immigration, and it was not a major political issue. Some countries such as
Italy and especially the
Republic of Ireland have shifted within a generation, from traditional labour emigration, to mass immigration, and this has become a political issue. Some European countries, such as the
United Kingdom and
Germany, have seen major immigration since the 1950's, and immigration has already been a political issue, for decades. Political debates about immigration typically focus on statistics,
immigration law and policy, and the implementation of existing restrictions. In some European countries the debate in the 1990's was focussed on
asylum seekers, but restrictive policies within the
European Union have sharply reduced asylum seekers. In western Europe, the debate now focusses on immigration from the
new member states of the EU, especially from
Poland.
The politics of immigration have become increasingly associated with others issues, such as
national security,
terrorism, and in western Europe especially, with the presence of
Islam as a new major religion. Some
right-wing parties see an unassimilated, economically deprived, and generally hostile immigrant population as a threat to national stability. They fear new events such as the
2005 civil unrest in France. They point to the
Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy as an example of the value conflicts arising from immigration of
Muslims in Western Europe. Because of all these associations, immigration has become an emotional political issue in many European countries.
Although
freedom of movement is often recognised as a
civil right, the freedom applies to movement within national borders: it may be guaranteed by the
constitution, or by human rights legislation. Additionally, this freedom is often limited to
citizens and excludes others. No
state currently allows full freedom of movement across its borders, and international
human rights treaties do not confer a general right to enter another state. According to Article 13 of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, citizens may not be forbidden to leave their country. There is no similar provision regarding entry of non-citizens. Those who reject this distinction on ethical grounds, argue that the freedom of movement both within and between countries is a basic human right, and that the restrictive immigration policies, typical of nation-states, violate this human right of freedom of movement. Note that a right to freedom of entry would not, in itself, guarantee immigrants a job, housing, health care, or citizenship.
Where immigration is permitted, it is typically selective. Ethnic selection, such as the
White Australia policy, has generally disappeared, but priority is usually given to the educated, skilled, and wealthy. Less privileged individuals, including the mass of poor people in low-income countries, can not avail of these immigration opportunities. This inequality has also been criticised as conflicting with the principle of
equal opportunities, which apply (at least in theory) within democratic nation-states. The fact that the door is closed for the the unskilled, while at the same many developed countries have a huge demand for unskilled labour, is a major factor in
illegal immigration. The contradictory nature of this policy - which specifically disadvantages the unskilled immigrants while exploiting their labour - has also been criticised on ethical grounds.
Immigration polices, which selectively grant freedom of movement, to targeted individuals, are intended to produce a net economic gain for the host country. They can also mean net loss for a poor donor country through the loss of the educated minority -the
brain drain. This can exacerbate the
global inequality in
standards of living, that provided the motivation for the individual to migrate in the first place. An example of the ‘competition for skilled labour' is active recruitment of health workers by
First World countries, from the
Third World.
General immigration topics
*
2006 U.S. immigration reform protests*
Anti-immigration*
Asylum*
Benefit tourism*
Brain drain*
Diaspora*
Émigré*
Emigration*
Exile*
Foot voting*
Foreign worker*
Foreign Worker Visa*
Human Migration*
Illegal immigration*
Immigration policy*
International Organization for Migration*
Multiculturalism*
Nationalism*
Nativism*
Overpopulation*
People smuggling*
Pluralism*
Political migration*
Population transfer*
Right of foreigners to vote*
Refugee*
Rural Migration*
Saskia Sassen*
Settlement*
Trafficking in human beings*
Xenophobia*
ZugereisterLegal instruments
*
International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their FamiliesImmigration by country
*
Immigration in Argentina*
Immigration to Mexico*
Immigration to Canada*
:Category:Immigration to Canada*
Immigration in Brazil*
Immigration to France*
Immigration to GermanyAustralia
*
Australian immigration*
History of immigration to Australia*
White Australia policyPuerto Rico
*
Corsican immigration to Puerto Rico*
Dominican immigration to Puerto Rico*
French immigration to Puerto Rico*
German immigration to Puerto Rico*
Irish immigration to Puerto Rico*
Royal Decree of Graces of 1815United Kingdom
*
Immigration to the United Kingdom*
Ireland Act 1949*
British nationality law*
Asylum and Immigration Tribunal*
Becoming a UK citizenUnited States
*
Immigration to the United States*
Illegal immigration to the United States*
List of United States Immigration Acts*
Naturalization*
Puerto Rican immigration to New York*
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (formerly
Immigration and Naturalization Service INS)
*
Immigration and Customs Enforcement*
Immigration reductionism*
Demographics of the United StatesUnited Nations General Assembly. International migration and development. Report of the Secretary-General, 18 May 2006.
See individual "Immigration to..." articles for country-specific links.*
Stalker's Guide to International Migration - Comprehensive interactive website on migration
*
Casahistoria - European emigration since 1800 - links to 19th & 20th century global European emigration
*
Eurasylum Many relevant documents on immigration, asylum and refugee policy, and human trafficking/smuggling internationally
*
Forced Migration Review*
International Organisation for Migration *
UNESCO Programme on International Migration and Multicultural Policies*
BBC News Factfile: Global migration*
Not Giving Up, Just Seeking New Tactics - Commentary on how some immigration is beneficial to society, while other immigration is not; looks to provide a fairly equal view of things.
*
The Foreigner and the Right to Justice in the Aftermath of September 11th François Crépeau, Canada Research Chair in International Migration Law University of Montreal
*
Immigration Newspaper Archive A collection of more than 50,000 searchable newspaper articles on Immigration.
*
Diplomacy Monitor - Migration*
A world map with territory sizes adjusted to the number of immigrants living in those countries*
Vdare.com - Website critical of current US immigration law
