The Migration–Development Nexus: Evidence and Policy Options

Abstract

Migration and development are linked in many ways – through the livelihood and survival strategies of individuals, households, and communities; through large and often well–targeted remittances; through investments and advocacy by migrants, refugees, diasporas and their transnational communities; and through international mobility associated with global integration, inequality, and insecurity. Until now, migration and development have constituted separate policy fields. Differing policy approaches that hinder national coordination and international cooperation mark these fields. For migration authorities, the control of migration flows to the European Union and other OECD countries are a high priority issue, as is the integration of migrants into the labour market and wider society. On the other hand, development agencies may fear that the development policy objectives are jeopardized if migration is taken into consideration. Can long–term goals of global poverty reduction be achieved if short–term migration policy interests are to be met? Can partnership with developing countries be real if preventing further migration is the principal European migration policy goal? While there may be good reasons to keep some policies separate, conflicting policies are costly and counter–productive. More importantly, there is unused potential in mutually supportive policies, that is, the constructive use of activities and interventions that are common to both fields and which may have positive effects on poverty reduction, development, prevention of violent conflicts, and international mobility. This paper focuses on positive dimensions and possibilities in the migration–development nexus. It highlights the links between migration, development, and conflict from the premise that to align policies on migration and development, migrant and refugee diasporas must be acknowledged as a development resource.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 310 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.