Analysis of the Disadvantages of Human Migration

Introduction

Human migration dates back to the cradle of humanity, and human beings have been on the move ever since. Migration is a very topical issue in many countries. Migration is defined as the movement of persons from one geographical location or region to another. This migration definition can be more specific. It can be broken down into permanent, semi-permanent, seasonal and daily migration. Reasons for migration are numerous: Climatic conditions, war and displacements, economic considerations, living conditions, family and clan links, and more recently also education opportunities. Reasons of migration are manifold, hence resulting migration patterns are complex. Potential migrants do not only decide whether to migrate or stay, but they will also choose where to go. This paper attempts to shed light on the following question related to migration. What are the disadvantages?

Why Do People Migrate

Why do people migrate? Who migrates, how often and where to? And finally, what is the role of gender and family in migration patterns? Guyana has had a long tradition of internal and international migration. An uncommonly rich and unique data set of life histories and cross-sectional information on more than 15,000 men and women allows us to investigate migration motives, migration behavior and social interactions in migrations. The analytical data shows that both forms of migration are very prevalent in Guyana. However, they attract very different types of migrants, that is to say, migrants clearly self-select into certain locations. If we limited the Analysis only to internal or international migrants, we would draw wrong conclusions on who migrates and why individuals migrate. I can show that education plays a key role in the choice of Migration destination.

With the oil industries emerging presence on Guyana’s forefront transforming the country into a booming international hub of economic and human activity, Guyana has seen an influx of individuals yearning for a piece of the pie. But, irregardless of this, twice that amount is leaving the country. The author of Porous Borders: Multiracial Migrations and the Law of the U.S., Julian Lim, paints a picture of the effects of Multiracial Migration, where diverse peoples crossed multiple boundaries in search of new economic opportunities and social relations. However as these migrants came together in ways that blurred and confounded the cultural norms, new immigration policies would have to be drafted to correct any immigration deficiencies.

The last 40 years of migration research have produced many insights into internal (mostly rural-urban) migration in developing countries and emigration from developing countries. The study of emigration from developing countries mostly looked at emigration of high-skilled labour from developing to developed countries, also referred to as ’brain drain’. For a recent survey on the brain drain

Migration Motives and Patterns

Yet, being constrained by the data sources on migration which were available, the literature has shamefully neglected to study these two migration phenomena jointly. A potential migrant will not only decide whether to migrate or not, but she will also choose her destination. The choice of location becomes important when we consider individuals differing in unobserved or observed skills (for example, in terms of education) who self-select into locations according to local returns to their skills (Borjas (1987)). Examples of migration studies in a multi-location framework include Dahl (2002), Kennan and Walker (2011), Gemici (2011) and Kennan (2013) for internal migration between different locations in the US, and Fafchamps and Shilpi (2013) and Lessem (2009) for internal migration between different locations in Nepal and Malaysia, and Lessem (2013) for spousal migration between the US and Mexico. Unlike other previous papers, this chapter remains descriptive and confined to simple empirical analysis, preparing the ground for which will introduce a dynamic life cycle model of migration, education and activity choices.

After providing evidence on migration motives, the current chapter moves on to studying internal and international migration patterns in Guyana. I thus pick up on the comprehensive study of Cordell et al. (1996) on the (circular) migration system in West Africa between 1900 and 1970, extending the time line until 2000. One key aspect of this analysis is to identify the role of education in migration patterns. Indeed, there is evidence that better educated individuals are more likely to migrate and migrate more often, but they also choose different destinations. Migrants without education are relatively more likely to migrate abroad, while migrants with secondary and tertiary education are relatively more likely to migrate to Georgetown. I interpret this finding in the light of large geographical (urban-rural-international) differences in economic opportunities, schooling facilities and other factors. In the spirit of Borjas (1987) and Dahl (2002), I argue that returns to education differ across locations, leading to self-selection of migrants. The analysis on migration patterns is complemented by a short section on the incidence of seasonal and circular migration, a common feature of migration movements in West Africa (Cordell et al. (1996), Konseiga (2005)). In a last step, I also briefly discuss gender differences, social interactions and the role of the family in migration patterns (Stark (1991)).

A Short Introduction to Guyana and Its Neighbors

Historical background information on Guyana and the interaction with its neighbors. Guyana or officially the Co-operative Republic of Guyana, is a country on the northern mainland of South America. It is often considered part of the Caribbean region because of its strong cultural, historical, and political ties with other Anglo-Caribbean countries and the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). Guyana is bordered by the Atlantic Ocean to the north, Brazil to the south and southwest, Venezuela to the west, and Suriname to the east. With an area of 215,000 square kilometres (83,000 sq mi), Guyana is the third-smallest sovereign state on mainland South America after Uruguay and Suriname.

The region known as 'the Guianas' consists of the large shield landmass north of the Amazon River and east of the Orinoco River known as the 'land of many waters'. Major rivers in Guyana include the Essequibo, the Berbice, and the Demerara. Originally inhabited by many indigenous groups, Guyana was settled by the Dutch before coming under British control in the late 18th century. It was governed as British Guiana, with a mostly plantation-style economy until the 1950s. It gained independence in 1966, and officially became a republic within the Commonwealth of Nations in 1970. The legacy of British rule is reflected in the country's political administration and diverse population, which includes Indian, African, Amerindian, and multiracial groups.

Guyana is the only South American nation in which English is the official language. The majority of the population, however, speak Guyanese Creole, an English-based creole language, as a first language. Guyana is part of the Anglophone Caribbean. CARICOM, of which Guyana is a member, is headquartered in Guyana's capital and largest city, Georgetown. In 2008, the country joined the Union of South American Nations as a founding member.

Migration Motives and Patterns

While first moves are to a large extent motivated by work/money or by educational issues, the reasons for return migrations back to the origin are more varied. For those with low or no education, motives of work/money, family and return are almost equally important. For those with higher education, study motives dominate, followed by work/money and family considerations. The large share of study-motivated return migrations is driven by individuals who had migrated away from their origin to continue their education and return home once they have completed their education. In contrast to work/money-related first moves which are fuelled by hopes of improved economic conditions in a new location, more than half of work/money-motivated return migration are driven by push factors (not shown). This evidence suggests that while out-migration is mostly voluntary and optimistic, some of the return migration is based on unfulfilled expectations. Are return migrations driven by target earning motives? Return migration needs not necessarily be driven by disillusioned hopes, unexpected shocks (such as the death of a family member) but might have been anticipated since the beginning. Dustmann (2001) presents different reasons why it can be optimal for an individual to return home even if wages in the destination location continue to be higher than in the origin.

White and Lindstrom (2005) point out that some theoretical models on circular migration replace the assumption of income maximizing behavior of migrants by target earning, i.e. the migrant returns as soon as he has saved the targeted amount. If target earning is a major explanation for return migration in Guyana, I would need to develop a model which explicitly includes savings and differences in purchasing power and/or location-consumption complementarities. To quantify the incidence of target earning. All in all, the incidence of target earning behavior in Guyana seems to be relatively small, for individuals with higher education it is irrelevant. The most often cited ’pull’ factors are namely, ’Look for work’, ’Look for money and get to know life’s difficulties’, ’find a paying job’ and ’learn a trade’.

These push factors include the end of a limited-term contract, relocation, too low income or job loss. These include a combination of accumulation of human capital which is only earning-effective in the origin, differences in purchasing power and complementarities between consumption and the location of consumption. These include the following monetary motives: ’I have had what I wanted’, ’I have had the necessary’ and ’starting capital’. Unspecified return motives and marriage compose this group. If the individual knew that he wanted to get married (at home) and migrated to work for a higher wage in order to save the necessary amount to get married, we may consider it to be target earning.

Migration Patterns

It is a well-known feature that higher educated individuals in developed countries are more likely to migrate and move more often. Evidence on developing countries is scarcer, both the probability of (internal) migration and the number of (internal) moves per migrant are increasing in education in Guyana. The figure below presents the share of migrants (left panel) and the number of moves per migrant (right panel) of men in Guyana.

Overall, I find a negative relationship between migration and education. The probability of being a migrant increases with the education level of an individual, so does the average number of migrations per migrant but it also decreases the amount of qualified individuals in a Guyana. For individuals Georgetown, the migration probability is not monotonically decreasing reaching a minimum for individuals with primary education.

Migration and Population

The WikiLeaks revelation that the US had issued 73,000 immigrant visas to Guyanese between 1992 and 2004 should not have raised too many eyebrows. Every Guyanese family (at least on the coast) has at least one relative that has migrated during that time – and more importantly, have more than that with their “papers” filed. The US, of course, while being the destination of choice for most migrants, is more than matched by Canada and the illegal migration to a host of destinations. By any measure, the number of migrants verify that it is the dominant explanation why the Guyanese population has remained almost stagnant between 1980 (759,566) and the last census of 2002 (751,233). During that interval, if one were to have extrapolated the population growth from the average births over deaths (around 14,000 annually), then the population should have increased by some 300,000 by 2002.

Emigration is not a new phenomenon for Guyana, but it was never on the scale to rival its neighbours in the Caribbean – especially Jamaica and Barbados – that started in the early decades of the last century. Our exodus began in the 1960s, which ironically, had been the beneficiary of the WWII baby boom – the largest in our history. The business class – made skittish by the left-wing politics then dominant – and led by the Portuguese, were in the forefront of that move: to Canada and not to Britain that had been the traditional destination. By then the British had begun to pull the shutters down on “coloured” immigration. But the emigration took on a life of its own during the seventies, so that between 1970 and 1980, the population grew by a mere 8.2% as apposed to 25.2% in the previous decade. The trend accelerated and by 1991, Guyana witnessed its first overall fall in population – a decrease of 35,894 or 4.7% – compared to the 1980 numbers. These were the years, of course, that experienced the precipitous decline of the Guyanese economy under the policies of the Co-operative Republic.

At the macro level, there have been several views expressed on the almost static Guyanese population occasioned by the high migration levels. One, of course, was that for a country as large as ours, with its resources so widely distributed, the population would have to be increased for sustainable development. There has been talk that if the migration cannot be reversed, for whatever reason, then the government would have to institute a comprehensive programme to encourage immigration. From a political perspective, another view has been that during the late seventies and eighties, the high rate of migration served as a safety valve for the then administration, acting as it did to reduce the pressures from a frustrated populace.

The migrants were considered to be those from the educated middle classes, from which rebels and activists have traditionally sprung. There are some who believe that once again, migration is playing such a role. Events unfolding in the US and Canada, however, appear to be replicating that of the sixties in Britain and which led to the closing off of that country as a migration destination. There are the collapse of the manufacturing sector, high unemployment rates, widespread poverty (comparatively, of course) and the almost obligatory backlash against “immigrants”. Policy makers should deliberate as to the consequences of such a shutdown of the “safety valve.”

Analysis

THE news that 93% of persons migrating from Guyana have a tertiary education cannot be comforting. As Education Minister Dr. Rupert Roopnaraine opined, it is a national tragedy. This matter represents more than a brain drain; it is a serious drain on the very lifeblood of the country. It is instructive that Guyana is followed by Haiti and Trinidad and Tobago in this regard. The problem seems to be both local and regional; it brings into focus some of the very structural problems which Guyana and the rest of our Caribbean family inherited at the time of independence. Any country that cannot keep its most skilled workers at home would have great difficulty overcoming structural underdevelopment. That country runs the risk of reproducing mediocrity, while its young people would have very few role models to emulate in the professions. Guyana would not be able to adequately compete regionally and globally. Where would our scientists, engineers, economists, geologists, teachers and broadcasters with the requisite skills come from?

It is clear that the Caribbean has invested in education as a means to the desired end of lifting its countries out of ‘plantation hood’; but if the rate of migration of Caribbean graduates is as high as Guyana’s, then it is equally clear that the Caribbean has not created an enabling environment for making maximum use of the products of that education policy. Our narrow economic base, inability to pay adequate wages and salaries, substandard working conditions and inadequate health care system have all been cited as factors that influence this high migration rate. Minister Roopnaraine is on target when he suggests that the government needs to do something to arrest this outflow of skills. He calls for improvements not only of financial remuneration, but of what he refers to as “non-financial” incentives for workers. This has to be an urgent undertaking by the government, as the effects of the situation have consequences for multiple areas of national life. When we bemoan standards in the public service, for example, or the very quality of education delivered by our institutions, one can trace the source right back to this problem.

We feel there are, within the control of the government, areas which, if improved, can put a break on this migration of our tertiary-educated citizens. Clearly, the government can do something to improve the wages paid to workers. There has to be a commitment to investing in our people beyond the bare minimum. We are aware that fiscal challenges in countries such as ours mean that we cannot afford extravagant wage bills; but if we were to prioritize and plan strategically, we may be able to do better than we are doing at the moment. We also have to begin to think of the “non-financial” incentives thrown out by Minister Roopnaraine. How about low-cost housing, or providing free house lots for qualified workers? These would go a long way towards increasing the value of their paychecks. How about investing in a modern health care system, so that our workers would not be forced to go abroad for care? If we were to make these changes, not only would our skilled workers not be so pressed to leave, but we would also be able to entice those who have left to return.

Conclusion

This chapter has presented descriptive evidence on the question of why people migrate and what are the disadvantages of migration. It has also briefly discussed evidence on gender differences and social interactions in migration behavior. The analysis on migration has revealed that migration and education decisions are endogenous to each other. Indeed, a considerable part of migrations in teenage years and those in their early twenties are driven by education plans, individuals migrate in order to continue their studies. Many of them return once they have completed their education. One key finding of this paper is that not only higher migration probabilities and more moves per migrant are associated with higher education, education also impacts migration destinations. The better educated an individuals is, the more likely he is to migrate to big city. Education thus shapes both the reasons why people migrate but also their migration pattern in terms of migration probability and migration destination.