Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Europe, Migration and Development: Critical remarks on an emerging policy field

  • Dialogue
  • Published:
Development Aims and scope

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

Ferruccio Pastore examines the past and recent policy response in Europe to migration and development. He argues that targeted measures are needed in order to mitigate the negative side-impact on development of the current security-centred migration policy approaches. Given the political and economic complexities, he calls for an increase in the scope of migration and policies with institution-building in sending and transit countries as a priority.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The literature is endless; as an essential historical reference, Bade (2003); on securitization, a seminal work is Waever et al. (1993); on general features of European immigration policies, see Geddes (2002), Cornelius et al. (2003) and Guiraudon and Lahav (2006).

  2. Here too, the literature is immense; for an analysis of the main political and institutional developments, see Pastore (2004a); for an in-depth legal perspective see Peers (2006).

  3. ‘The Clinton Administration used the migration hump to argue that Congress should approve NAFTA because the additional migration – the hump – was a reasonable price to pay in the short run for less Mexico–US migration in the long run’ (Martin, 2004: 3, http://www.agecon.ucdavis.edu/outreach/update_articles/v8n2_1.pdf).

  4. Council of Ministers of the European Union, January 1999, Terms of reference of the HLWG on Asylum & Migration, doc. 5264/2/99 JAI 1 AG 1 REV 2 (Gent, 2002: 13).

  5. Particularly influential was an in-depth study commissioned during the Danish Presidency: (Nyberg Sørensen et al., 2002), ‘Migration–Development Links project’: Final papers and reports, Danish Institute for International Studies, Copenhagen; materials available at page http://www.cdr.dk/ResTHEMES/conflict/migdevfinal.htm. Revised versions of the studies were published in The Migration–Development Nexus, Special Issue 2, ‘International Migration’, Vol. 40 (5).

  6. The term ‘co-development’ is often used as a catch-phrase to express this broad concept (Chaloff, 2007).

  7. For a critical appraisal of instrumental linkages between return policy and codéveloppement measures in the French case, see Weil (2002). In the last years, French M&D policies have grown beyond their initial auxiliary relation to (restrictive) domestic immigration policies; for an official overview, see http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/fr/ministere_817/publications_827/cooperation-internationale-developpement_3030/index.html. Nevertheless, the Head of the newly established and highly controversial ‘Ministry of Immigration, Integration, National Identity and Co-Development’ (http://www.premier-ministre.gouv.fr/iminidco), Mr Brice Hortefeux, considers voluntary returns a top priority and maintains that ‘the method of transferring funds via returning immigrants to their country of origin was a better policy than providing aid for development’ (Ecran Weekly Update, 19 June 2007, France considers paying migrants to return, http://www.ecre.org/files/ECRAN_Weekly_Update_Special_19th1.pdf).

  8. The (rather bureaucratic) Conclusions are available at page http://www.maec.gov.ma/migration/Doc/359_07_Comit_de_Seguimiento_ACTA_DE_CONCLUSIONES_EN1.pdf.

  9. Final Declaration available at page http://www.eu2006.fi/news_and_documents/other_documents/vko47/en_GB/1164354155373/.

  10. Following the preparatory work of the Global Commission on International Migration (December 2003–December 2005, http://www.gcim.org/en/), the M&D debate landed in the UN environment with High Level Dialogue held during the 61st session of the General Assembly (14–15 September 2005, http://www.un.org/esa/population/hldmigration/).

  11. Cf. Council Conclusions on ‘Extending and Enhancing the Global Approach to Migration’, endorsed by the European Council of 21–22 June 2007.

References

  • Adams, Richard H. and John Page (2003) ‘International Migration, Remittances and Poverty in Developing Countries’, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 3179, December. Available online.

  • Bade, Klaus J. (2003 original ed. 2000) Migration in European History, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • CeSPI (Centro Studi di Politica Internazionale) and SID (Society for International Development) (2006) ‘European Migration Policy on Africa – Trends, effects and prospects’, Available online.

  • Chaloff, Jonathan (2006) ‘Lessons from the Italy–Albania Readmission Agreement’, in Return and Readmission to Albania: The experience of selected EU member states, Unpublished report, pp. 93–126. Tirana: International Organization for Migration (IOM).

  • Chaloff, Jonathan (2007) ‘Co-Development: A myth or a workable policy approach?’, in Michael Jandl (ed.) Innovative Concepts for Alternative Migration Policies: Ten innovative approaches to the challenges of migration in the 21st century, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, Palo Alto, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornelius, Wayne A., Takeyuki Tsuda, James F. Hollifield and Philip L. Martin (eds.) (2003) (1st edn., 1995): Controlling Immigration: A global perspective, Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Haas, Hein (2006) ‘Turning the Tide? Why ‘Development Instead of Migration’ Policies are Bound to Fail’, Working Papers No. 2, International Migration Institute. Available online.

  • Düvell, Franck (2006) ‘Crossing the Fringes of Europe: Transit migration in the EU's neighbourhood’, Centre on Migration, Policy and Society (COMPAS), Working Paper No. 33, 2006, University of Oxford.

  • Einaudi, Luca (2007) Le politiche dell’immigrazione in Italia dall’Unità a oggi, Roma-Bari: Laterza.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geddes, Andrew (2002) The Politics of Migration and Immigration in Europe, London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gent, Saskia (2002) The Root Causes of Migration: Criticising the approach and finding a way forward, Working Paper No. 11, Sussex Centre for Migration Research. Available online.

  • Guiraudon, Virginie (ed.), (2007) The External Dimension of Immigration and Asylum Policies in Europe, Oxford: Berg Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guiraudon, Virginie and Gallya Lahav (eds.) (2006) Immigration Policy in Europe, London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, Philip (2004) ‘New NAFTA and Mexico–US Migration: The 2004 Policy Options’, Update – Agricultural and Resource Economics, Vol. 8, No. 2, November–December 2004. Available online.

  • Martin, Philip and J.Edward Taylor (1996) ‘The Anatomy of a Migration Hump’, in J. Edward Taylor (ed.) Development Strategy, Employment, and Migration: Insights from models pp. 43–62, Paris: OECD, Development Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Migreurop (2006) ‘Le livre noir de Ceuta et Melilla’, Available online.

  • Nyberg-Sørensen, Ninna, Nicholas Van Hear and Poul Engberg-Pedersen (2002) ‘The Migration–Development Nexus: Evidence and policy options’, International Migration 40 (5).

  • Pastore, Ferruccio (2003) ‘More Development for Less Migration’ or ‘Better Migration for more Development’? Shifting Priorities in the European Debate, MigraCtion – Periodical analysis bulletin on migration policies in Europe, Centro Studi di Politica Internazionale. Available online.

  • Pastore, Ferruccio (2004a) ‘Formation, Structure and Current Evolution of the EU Entry Control System’, in Neil Walker (ed.) Europe's Area of Freedom, Security, and Justice pp. 89–142, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pastore, Ferruccio (2004b) ‘Cooperation with Sending and Transit Countries: Beyond sticks and carrots?’, Policy brief for the Dutch Presidency Conference on Asylum, Migration and Frontiers, September 2004. Available online.

  • Peers, Steve (2006) (1st edn., 1999) EU Justice and Home Affairs Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Todaro, Michael (1969) ‘A Model of Labour Migration and Urban Unemployment in Less Developed Countries’, American Economic Review 59: 138–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Selm, Joanne (2002) ‘Immigration and Asylum or Foreign Policy: The EU's approach to migrants and their countries of origin’, in Sandra Lavenex and Emek Uçarer (eds.) Externalities of Integration: The wider impact of the developing EU migration regime, New York, Oxford: Lexington Books, Lanham – Boulder.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waever, Ole, Barry Buzan, Morten Kelstrup and Pierre Lemaitre (1993) Identity, Migration and the New Security Agenda in Europe, London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weil, Patrick (2002) ‘Towards a Coherent Policy of Co-Development’, International Migration 40 (3): 41–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zelinsky, Wilbur (1971) ‘The Hypothesis of the Mobility Transition’, Geographical Review 61 (2): 219–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Ferruccio Pastore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Outlines the shifts in European policy towards migration and development in the last years

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pastore, F. Europe, Migration and Development: Critical remarks on an emerging policy field. Development 50, 56–62 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.development.1100433

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.development.1100433

Keywords

Search

Navigation