Best Free Reference
Web Site 2007
TOP 10 MIGRATION ISSUES OF 2007
Issue #9: Migration and Development Issues: No Longer a Novelty in Policy Discussions
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon was among the attendees of the Global Forum on Migration and Development in Brussels this past summer.
The language of migration and development — remittances, diaspora, brain drain,
circular migration — has become standard among researchers and NGOs interested
in development issues. In 2007, that language formally became part of the migration
policy agenda, particularly in Europe.
The EU Blue Card proposal released in October is designed to encourage highly
skilled migration. But it also advocates ethical recruitment standards to limit
— if not ban — active recruitment in developing countries already suffering
from serious brain drain (see Issue #3: Wanted More Than Ever: The Highly Skilled).
In the immigration law France passed in 2006 (which went into force in 2007),
the French government agreed to give "skills and talents" visas to
qualified immigrants from a developing country only if the sending country
has signed a "co-development" agreement with France or if the immigrants
in question agree to return to their country of origin within six years.
The European Commission's communication on mobility partnerships in May made
clear that third countries could ask for measures to address brain drain and
mechanisms to encourage circular migration (see Issue #8: Mobility Partnerships, the Latest Policy Fashion).
A turning point for the migration and development policy agenda came in July,
when Belgium hosted the first Global Forum on Migration and Development, a
consultative process that followed up last year's UN High-Level Dialogue (UNHLD)
on International Migration and Development. On the agenda: human capital development
and labor mobility, remittances and other disapora resources, and enhancing
institutional/policy coherence and promoting partnerships.
In all, 200 civil-society actors participated in the Global Forum's Civil
Society Day and representatives of 155 countries gathered in Brussels. None
of the countries had to formally agree to anything, but several announced the
launch of projects based on forum discussions; others declared their intentions
to take on a variety of initiatives, many related to easing the flow of and reducing
the costs of remittances.
Perhaps most importantly, Global Forum participants declared their intention
to continue this unique multilateral meeting. The Philippines will host the
2008 Global Forum.
In her closing address, Global Forum organizer Ambassador Régine De Clercq
said, "It is fair to say that our meeting of the last three days heralds
a new common vision on migration and development, based on cooperation and
partnership, rather than on confrontation."
The impact of the UNHLD and the Global Forum in 2007 extended to smaller groups,
which used the forum as a reason to hold their own events on migration and
The Hague Process on Refugees and Migration held a cities-oriented event in
The Hague in late January that included Ambassador De Clercq. Among its intentions
was to feed its findings into the Global Forum.
In October, the Austrian government collaborated with the United Nations
Information Service and the Vienna office of the International Organization
for Migration (IOM) to host a one-day conference on migration and development.
The conference reunited some of the players from the Global Forum, and, judging
by the event's subtitle ("Progressing from Brussels 2007 to Manila 2008"),
it was clearly positioned as a stepping stone.
Noticeably absent from the Global Forum was the United States, where immigration
reform debates focused on the unauthorized population and a temporary worker
program, with hardly a mention of migration and development issues.
In a "sense of Congress" resolution, the Senate bill that ultimately failed
(see Issue #1: Political Paralysis: The Failure of US Immigration Reform) stated that the United States should help
Mexico generate economic growth to reduce migration and should encourage the
Mexican government to create incentives for Mexicans citizens to return. However,
such resolutions only express the opinion of Congress — they do not create
law and are not enforceable.
With migration and development issues now a "normal" part of migration policy
discussions, the question of what will actually change in both sending
and receiving countries remains.
Back to the top
If you have questions or comments about this article, contact us at
2002-2013 Migration Policy Institute.
All rights reserved.
Migration Information Source, ISSN 1946-4037
MPI · 1400 16th St. NW, Suite 300 · Washington, DC 20036
ph: (001) 202-266-1940 · fax: (001) 202-266-1900