cause and effect essay about immigration

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Illegal Immigration — Causes and Effects of Immigration

Causes and Effects of Immigration

Categories: Illegal Immigration

About this sample

Words: 731 |

Published: Jan 29, 2024

Words: 731 | Pages: 2 | 4 min read

Causes of immigration, effects of immigration, a. economic factors, b. political factors, c. social factors, a. economic effects, b. social effects, c. political effects.

National Academy of Sciences. (2017). The Economic and Fiscal Consequences of Immigration .
Organisation for Economic Co-operation & Development (OECD). (2019). International Migration Outlook 2019 .
Peri, G., & Shih, K. (2019). "The Economic Contribution of Unauthorized Workers: An Industry Analysis". National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

Expert in: Social Issues

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

6 pages / 2562 words

2 pages / 1128 words

1 pages / 646 words

7 pages / 3156 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Illegal Immigration

Illegal immigration has been a long-standing and contentious aspect in the United States, and its dynamics and consequences continue to evolve. In the years 2023-2024, the landscape of illegal immigration witnessed various [...]

Refugees have become a significant issue in today's world, as millions of people are forcibly displaced from their homes due to conflict, persecution, and other human rights abuses. This essay aims to delve into the complexities [...]

In conclusion, illegal immigration is a multifaceted issue that demands our attention and careful consideration. We have explored the persuasive arguments for both stricter immigration policies and a more compassionate approach. [...]

The phenomenon of illegal immigration, a global challenge with far-reaching implications, cannot be fully grasped without considering the intricate interplay between internal and external factors. While domestic conditions [...]

The resent research indicates that illegal Immigration population is declining for the first time in the last ten years, as the nation undergoes a tough economy period discourages people from sneaking into the USA”. Illegal [...]

Illegal immigration has been a hotly debated topic in the United States for many years, and it continues to be a contentious issue today. The influx of undocumented immigrants into the country has sparked heated discussions on [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

Immigration: Causes and Effects

Introduction, economic causes, social causes, works cited.

For a long time, immigration has been a significant policy subject in the United States, with numerous reports and studies conducted on its motives and implications. Immigration is the movement or relocation of people from one country to another. Factors that promote immigration can be categorized to economic, social, and political causes. Although limited by slight economic downsides and political backlash, immigration is necessary for creating social diversity, protecting individuals’ rights and freedoms, and enhancing international relations. There are two significant groups of immigration causes: economic and social, which are associated with particular consequences.

First, the economic causes for immigration are high demand of manpower, unemployment, the desire for better entrepreneurial and employment opportunity. Income and economic status differences between resident and destination nations encourage people to migrate from poor to more prosperous countries. Developed countries have a high demand for labor unlike in less developed countries with high unemployment rates (Duan 3). The shortage of specialists in a particular profession in a specific region increases wages for this profession and stimulates the influx of migrants. The effect of the economic causes of immigration is overwhelming the available opportunities and resources. In 2019, the American Immigration Council reported a population of 44.9 million immigrants in the U.S (American Immigration Council 1). The right-wing Democratic Party in the US is opposed to immigration in effect, that unregulated inflow of foreign labor increases job competition, reduced wages, and increased unemployment. The social zeal for a better quality of life and connection to friends and families promoting immigration results in enhanced diversity, improved international relations, cross-cultural exchange, cosmopolitanism and diversity. Immigration has enhanced international relations and access to social amenities such as education.

The social rationale for immigration is aspirations for a better quality of life and connection with close family and friends. Social factors that influence the rate of immigration include crime rate, access to social amenities such as schools, and inter-cultural exchange (Duan 2). An immigrant can sponsor a family member or friend through an affidavit. Political grounds for immigration include state policies, threats of persecution, armed conflict, and humanitarian issues that force people to seek refuge in stable countries. The social causes of immigration are the inclination for a better life, while political migration is often due to unsafe conditions in the residence country. The effect of social immigration is in the occurrence of cosmopolitanism resulting from social immigration enhances the redistribution of wealth diversity and adequate co-existence of nationalities and socio-cultural exchange. Immigration protects the rights and freedoms of individuals advanced of their countries by political factors of armed conflict, state assassination, and discrimination.

Ultimately, immigration is a significant economic, social, and political factor with clashing implications. The desire for better quality of life and family bonds social causes of immigration lead to enhanced diversity, cosmopolitanism, cross-cultural exchange and international relations. Moreover, immigration protects the rights and freedoms of people threatened by political factors. On the downside the economic immigration driven by the desire for better employment and investment opportunities is characterized by high unemployment, prejudice, discrimination, and political backlash. While policymakers perceive immigration to drive slow wage growth and unemployment, Immigrants present remarkable social, economic, and political benefits. Therefore, migration significantly affects the economic and social structure of the countries. The mentioned effects are connected with the primary causes of migration.

American Immigration Council. “Immigrants in the United States.” American Immigration Council , 2021. Web.

Duan, Carson, Bernice Kotey, and Kamaljeet Sandhu. “A systematic literature review of determinants of immigrant entrepreneurship motivations.” Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship (2021): 1-33. Web.

Cite this paper

Chicago (N-B)
Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2023, September 5). Immigration: Causes and Effects. https://studycorgi.com/immigration-causes-and-effects/

"Immigration: Causes and Effects." StudyCorgi , 5 Sept. 2023, studycorgi.com/immigration-causes-and-effects/.

StudyCorgi . (2023) 'Immigration: Causes and Effects'. 5 September.

1. StudyCorgi . "Immigration: Causes and Effects." September 5, 2023. https://studycorgi.com/immigration-causes-and-effects/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Immigration: Causes and Effects." September 5, 2023. https://studycorgi.com/immigration-causes-and-effects/.

StudyCorgi . 2023. "Immigration: Causes and Effects." September 5, 2023. https://studycorgi.com/immigration-causes-and-effects/.

This paper, “Immigration: Causes and Effects”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: December 7, 2023 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

Tools and Resources
Customer Services
Contentious Politics and Political Violence
Governance/Political Change
Groups and Identities
History and Politics
International Political Economy
Policy, Administration, and Bureaucracy
Political Anthropology
Political Behavior
Political Communication
Political Economy
Political Institutions
Political Philosophy
Political Psychology
Political Sociology
Political Values, Beliefs, and Ideologies
Politics, Law, Judiciary
Post Modern/Critical Politics
Public Opinion
Qualitative Political Methodology
Quantitative Political Methodology
World Politics
Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Global migration: causes and consequences.

Benjamin Helms Benjamin Helms Department of Politics, University of Virginia
and David Leblang David Leblang Department of Politics, Frank Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy, University of Virginia
https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.631
Published online: 25 February 2019

International migration is a multifaceted process with distinct stages and decision points. An initial decision to leave one’s country of birth may be made by the individual or the family unit, and this decision may reflect a desire to reconnect with friends and family who have already moved abroad, a need to diversify the family’s access to financial capital, a demand to increase wages, or a belief that conditions abroad will provide social and/or political benefits not available in the homeland. Once the individual has decided to move abroad, the next decision is the choice of destination. Standard explanations of destination choice have focused on the physical costs associated with moving—moving shorter distances is often less expensive than moving to a destination farther away; these explanations have recently been modified to include other social, political, familial, and cultural dimensions as part of the transaction cost associated with migrating. Arrival in a host country does not mean that an émigré’s relationship with their homeland is over. Migrant networks are an engine of global economic integration—expatriates help expand trade and investment flows, they transmit skills and knowledge back to their homelands, and they remit financial and human capital. Aware of the value of their external populations, home countries have developed a range of policies that enable them to “harness” their diasporas.

immigration
international political economy
factor flows
gravity models

Introduction

The steady growth of international labor migration is an important, yet underappreciated, aspect of globalization. 1 In 1970 , just 78 million people, or about 2.1% of the global population, lived outside their country of birth. By 1990 , that number had nearly doubled to more than 150 million people, or about 2.8% of the global population (United Nations Population Division, 2012 ). Despite the growth of populist political parties and restrictionist movements in key destination countries, the growth in global migration shows no signs of slowing down, with nearly 250 million people living outside their country of birth as of 2015 . While 34% of all global migrants live in industrialized countries (with the United States and Germany leading the way), 38% of all global migration occurs between developing countries (World Bank, 2016 ).

Identifying the causes and consequences of international labor migration is essential to our broader understanding of globalization. Scholars across diverse academic fields, including economics, political science, sociology, law, and demography, have attempted to explain why individuals voluntarily leave their homelands. The dominant thread in the labor migration literature is influenced by microeconomics, which posits that individuals contemplating migration are rational, utility-maximizing actors who carefully weigh the potential costs and benefits of leaving their country of origin (e.g., Borjas, 1989 ; Portes & Böröcz, 1989 ; Grogger & Hanson, 2011 ). The act of migration, from this perspective, is typically conceptualized as an investment from which a migrant expects to receive some benefit, whether it be in the form of increased income, political freedom, or enhanced social ties (Schultz, 1961 ; Sjaastad, 1962 ; Collier & Hoeffler, 2014 ).

In this article we go beyond the treatment of migration as a single decision and conceive of it as a multifaceted process with distinct stages and decision points. We identify factors that are relevant at different stages in the migration process and highlight how and when certain factors interact with others during the migration process. Economic factors such as the wage differential between origin and destination countries, for example, may be the driving factor behind someone’s initial decision to migrate (Borjas, 1989 ). But when choosing a specific destination, economic factors may be conditioned by political or social conditions in that destination (Fitzgerald, Leblang, & Teets, 2014 ). Each stage or decision point has distinguishing features that are important in determining how (potential) migrants respond to the driving forces identified by scholars.

This is certainly not a theoretical innovation; migration has long been conceived of as a multi-step process, and scholars often identify the stage or decision point to which their argument best applies. However, most interdisciplinary syntheses of the literature on international labor migration do not provide a systematic treatment of this defining feature, instead organizing theoretical and empirical contributions by field of study, unit or level of analysis, or theoretical tradition (e.g., Portes & Böröcz, 1989 ; Massey et al., 1993 ; European Asylum Support Office, 2016 ). Such approaches are undoubtedly valuable in their own right. Our decision to organize this discussion by stage allows us to understand this as a process, rather than as a set of discrete events. As a result, we conceptualize international labor migration as three stages or decision points: (a) the decision to migrate or to remain at home, (b) the choice of destination, and (c) the manner by which expatriates re-engage—or choose not to re-engage—with their country of origin once abroad. We also use these decision points to highlight a number of potential new directions for future research in this still-evolving field.

Figure 1. Global migration intentions by educational attainment, 2008–2017.

Should I Stay or Should I Go, Now?

The massive growth in international labor migration in the age of globalization is remarkable, but the fact remains that over 95% of the world’s population never leave their country of origin (United Nations Population Division, 2012 ). Figure 1 shows the percentage of people who expressed an intention to move abroad between 2008 and 2017 by educational attainment, according to data from the Gallup World Poll. Over this time period, it appears that those who were highly educated expressed intent to migrate in greater numbers than those who had less than a college education, although these two groups have converged in recent years. What is most striking, however, is that a vast majority of people, regardless of educational attainment, expressed no desire to move abroad. Even though absolute flows of migrants have grown at a near-exponential rate, relative to their non-migrating counterparts, they remain a small minority. What factors are important in determining who decides to migrate and who decides to remain at home? 2

From Neoclassical Economics to the Mobility Transition

Neoclassical economic models posit that the primary driving factor behind migration is the expected difference in wages (discounted future income streams) between origin and destination countries (Sjaastad, 1962 ; Borjas, 1989 ; Clark, Hatton, & Williamson, 2007 ). All else equal, when the wage gap, minus the costs associated with moving between origin and destination, is high, these models predict large flows of labor migrants. In equilibrium, as more individuals move from origin to destination countries, the wage differential narrows, which in turn leads to zero net migration (Lewis, 1954 ; Harris & Todaro, 1970 ). Traditional models predict a negative monotonic relationship between the wage gap and the number of migrants (e.g., Sjaastad, 1962 ). However, the predictions of neoclassical models are not well supported by the empirical record. Empirical evidence shows that, at least in a cross-section, the relationship between economic development and migration is more akin to an inverted U. For countries with low levels of per capita income, we observe little migration due to a liquidity constraint: at this end of the income distribution, individuals do not have sufficient resources to cover even minor costs associated with moving abroad. Increasing income helps to decrease this constraint, and consequently we observe increased levels of emigration as incomes rise (de Haas, 2007 ). This effect, however, is not monotonic: as countries reach middle-income status, declining wage differentials lead to flattening rates of emigration, and then decreasing rates as countries enter later stages of economic development. 3

Some research explains this curvilinear relationship by focusing on the interaction between emigration incentives and constraints : for example, increased income initially makes migration more affordable (reduces constraints), but also simultaneously reduces the relative economic benefits of migrating as the wage differential narrows (as potential migrants now have the financial capacity to enhance local amenities) (Dao, Docquier, Parsons, & Peri, 2016 ). The theoretical underpinnings of this interaction, however, are not without controversy. Clemens identifies several classes of theory that attempt to explain this curvilinear relationship—a relationship that has been referred to in the literature as the mobility transition (Clemens, 2014 ). These theories include: demographic changes resulting from development that also favor emigration up to a point (Easterlin, 1961 ; Tomaske, 1971 ), the loosening of credit restraints on would-be migrants (Vanderkamp, 1971 ; Hatton & Williamson, 1994 ), a breakdown of information barriers via the building of transnational social networks (Epstein, 2008 ), structural economic changes in the development process that result in worker dislocation (Zelinsky, 1971 ; Massey, 1988 ), the dynamics of economic inequality and relative deprivation (Stark, 1984 ; Stark & Yitzhaki, 1988 ; Stark & Taylor, 1991 ), and changing immigration policies in destination countries toward increasingly wealthy countries (Clemens, 2014 ). While each of these play some role in the mobility transition curve, Dao et al. ( 2016 ) run an empirical horse race between numerous explanations and find that changing skill composition resulting from economic development is the most substantively important driver. Economic development is correlated with an increase in a country’s level of education; an increase in the level of education, in turn, is correlated with increased emigration. However, traditional explanations involving microeconomic drivers such as income, credit constraints, and economic inequality remain important factors (Dao et al., 2016 ). The diversity of explanations offered for the mobility transition curve indicates that while most research agrees the inverted-U relationship is an accurate empirical portrayal of the relationship between development and migration, little theoretical agreement exists on what drives this relationship. Complicating this disagreement is the difficulty of empirically disentangling highly correlated factors such as income, skill composition, and demographic trends in order to identify robust causal relationships.

Political Conditions at the Origin

While there is a scholarly consensus around the mobility transition and the role of economic conditions, emerging research suggests that the political environment in the origin country may also be salient. We do not refer here to forced migration, such as in the case of those who leave because they are fleeing political persecution or violent conflict. Rather, we focus on political conditions in the homeland that influence a potential migrant’s decision to emigrate voluntarily. Interpretations of how, and the extent to which, political conditions in origin countries (independent of economic conditions) influence the decision to migrate have been heavily influenced by Hirschman’s “Exit, Voice, and Loyalty” framework (Hirschman, 1970 , 1978 ). Hirschman argues that the opportunity to exit—to exit a firm, an organization, or a country—places pressure on the local authorities; voting with one’s feet forces organizations to reassess their operations.

When applied to the politics of emigration, Hirschman’s framework generates two different hypotheses. On the one hand, politicians may allow, encourage, or force the emigration of groups that oppose the regime as a political safety valve of sorts. This provides the government with a mechanism with which to manage potential political challengers by encouraging their exit. On the other hand, politicians—especially those in autocracies—may actively work to prevent exit because they fear the emigration of economic elites, the highly skilled, and others who have resources vital to the survival of the regime. 4

A small number of studies investigate how local-level, rather than national, political circumstances affect a potential migrant’s calculus. The limited empirical evidence currently available suggests that local conditions are substantively important determinants of the emigration decision. When individuals are highly satisfied with local amenities such as their own standard of living, quality of public services, and overall sense of physical security, they express far less intention to migrate compared with highly dissatisfied individuals (Dustmann & Okatenko, 2014 ). Furthermore, availability of public transport and access to better education facilities decreases the propensity to express an intention to emigrate (Cazzuffi & Modrego, 2018 ). This relationship holds across all levels of wealth and economic development, and there is some evidence that satisfaction with local amenities matters as much as, or even more than, income or wealth (Dustmann & Okatenko, 2014 ).

Political corruption, on both national and local levels, also has substantively important effects on potential migrants, especially those who are highly skilled. Broadly defined as the use of public office for political gain, political corruption operates as both a direct and an indirect factor promoting emigration. 5 Firstly, corruption may have a direct effect on the desire to emigrate in that it can decrease the political and economic power of an individual, leading to a lower standard of living and poorer quality of life in origin countries. If the reduction in life satisfaction resulting from corruption is sufficiently high—either by itself or in combination with other “push” factors—then the exit option becomes more attractive (Cooray & Schneider, 2016 ). Secondly, corruption also operates through indirect channels that influence other push factors. Given the large literature on how political corruption influences a number of development outcomes, it is conceivable that corruption affects the decision-making process of a potential migrant through its negative effect on social spending, education, and public health (Mo, 2001 ; Mauro, 1998 ; Gupta, Davoodi, & Thigonson, 2001 ).

The combination of its direct and indirect impacts means that corruption could be a significant part of a migrant’s decision-making process. At present there is limited work exploring this question, and the research does not yield a consensus. Some scholars argue that political corruption has no substantive effect on total bilateral migration, but that it does encourage migration among the highly skilled (Dimant, Krieger, & Meierrieks, 2013 ). This is the case, the argument goes, because corruption causes the greatest relative harm to the utility of those who have invested in human capital, who migrate to escape the negative effect on their fixed investment. In contrast, others find that a high level of corruption does increase emigration at the aggregate level (Poprawe, 2015 ). More nuanced arguments take into account the intensity of corruption: low to moderate levels of corruption lead to increased emigration of all groups, and especially of the highly skilled. But at high levels of corruption, emigration begins to decrease, indicating that intense corruption can act as a mobility constraint (Cooray & Schneider, 2016 ). All of these existing accounts, however, employ state-level measures of corruption by non-governmental organizations, such as those produced by Transparency International. Scholars have yet to harness micro-level survey data to explore the influence of personal corruption perception on the individual’s decision-making process.

The Land of Hopes and Dreams

Given that an individual has decided to emigrate, the next decision point is to choose a destination country. Advanced industrial democracies, such as those in the OECD, are major migrant-receiving countries, but so are Russia and several Gulf countries including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates (World Bank, 2016 ). A country’s constellation of political, economic, and social attributes is crucial to understanding an emigrant’s choice of destination. Potential migrants weigh all of these factors simultaneously when choosing a destination: will the destination allow political rights for the migrant and their children, is access to the labor market possible, and does the destination provide an opportunity for reunification with friends and family? In this section we focus on the non-economic factors that draw migrants to certain countries over others. In addition, we emphasize how skill level adds layers of complexity to a migrant’s calculus.

Political Environment, Both Formal and Informal

As noted earlier, traditional neoclassical models and their extensions place wage differentials and associated economic variables at the heart of a migrant’s choice. Gravity models posit that migrants choose a destination country based on their expected income—which itself is a function of the wage rate and the probability of finding employment in the destination—less the costs associated with moving (Ravenstein, 1885 ; Todaro, 1969 ; Borjas, 1989 ). A rigid focus on economic factors, however, blinds us to the empirical reality that a destination country’s political environment influences what destination a migrant chooses (Borjas, 1989 ). A country’s legal and political rights structure for migrants, as well as its level of tolerance for newcomers, is critical to migrants discriminating between an array of potential destinations. Fitzgerald, Leblang, and Teets ( 2014 ) argue, for example, that states with restrictive citizenship policies and strong radical right anti-immigrant parties will receive fewer migrants, while states with relatively liberal citizenship requirements and weak radical right political movements will receive more migrants. In the rational actor framework, migrants seek countries with hospitable political environments to maximize both their political representation in government and their access to labor market opportunities as a result of citizenship rights and social acceptance (Fitzgerald et al., 2014 ).

Using a broad sample of origin countries and 18 destination countries, they find that relative restrictiveness of citizenship policies and level of domestic support for the radical right are substantively important determinants of global migratory flows. Further, they find that these political variables condition a migrant’s choice of destination: the relative importance of economic factors such as the unemployment rate or the wage differential diminishes as a destination country’s political environment becomes more open for migrants. In other words, when migrants are choosing a destination country, political considerations may trump economic ones—a finding that is an important amendment to the primarily economics-focused calculus of the initial stage of the immigration decision.

However, prior to choosing and entering a destination country, a migrant must also navigate a country’s immigration policy—the regulation of both migrant entry and the rights and status of current migrants. While it is often assumed that a relatively more restrictive immigration policy deters entry, and vice versa, a lack of quantitative data has limited the ability of scholars to confirm this intuition cross-nationally. Money ( 1999 ) emphasizes that the policy output of immigration politics does not necessarily correlate with the outcome of international migrant flows. There are a number of unanswered questions in this field, including: is immigration policy a meaningful determinant of global flows of migration? Do certain kinds of immigration policies matter more than others? How does immigration policy interact with other political and economic factors, such as unemployment and social networks?

Only a handful of studies analyze whether or not immigration policy is a significant determinant of the size and character of migratory flows. Perhaps the most prominent answer to this question is the “gap hypothesis,” which posits that immigration rates continue to increase despite increasingly restrictive immigration policies in advanced countries (Cornelius & Tsuda, 2004 ). Some subsequent work seems to grant support to the gap hypothesis, indicating that immigration policy may not be a relevant factor and that national sovereignty as it relates to dictating migrant inflows has eroded significantly (Sassen, 1996 ; Castles, 2004 ). The gap hypothesis is not without its critics, with other scholars arguing that the existing empirical evidence actually lends it little or no support (Messina, 2007 ).

A more recent body of literature does indicate that immigration policy matters. Brücker and Schröder ( 2011 ), for example, find that immigration policies built to attract highly skilled migrants lead to higher admittance rates. They also show that diffusion processes cause neighboring countries to implement similar policy measures. Ortega and Peri ( 2013 ), in contrast to the gap hypothesis literature, find that restrictive immigration policy indeed reduces migrant inflows. But immigration policy can also have unintended effects on international migration: when entry requirements increase, migrant inflows decrease, but migrant outflows also decrease (Czaika & de Haas, 2016 ). This indicates that restrictive immigration policy may also lead to reduced circular migrant flows and encourage long-term settlement in destination countries.

Disaggregating immigration policy into its different components provides a clearer picture of how immigration policy may matter, and whether certain components matter more than others. Immigration policy is composed of both external and internal regulations. External regulations refer to policies that control migrant entry, such as eligibility requirements for migrants and additional conditions of entry. Internal regulations refer to policies that apply to migrants who have already gained status in the country, such as the security of a migrant’s legal status and the rights they are afforded. Helbling and Leblang ( 2017 ), using a comprehensive data set of bilateral migrant flows and the Immigration Policies in Comparison (IMPIC) data set, find that, in general, external regulations prove slightly more important in understanding migrant inflows (Helbling, Bjerre, Römer, & Zobel, 2017 ). This indicates that potential migrants focus more on how to cross borders, and less on the security of their status and rights once they settle. They do find, however, that both external and internal components of immigration are substantively important to international migrant flows.

The effects of policy, however, cannot be understood in isolation from other drivers of migration. Firstly, poor economic conditions and restrictive immigration policy are mutually reinforcing: when the unemployment rate is elevated, restrictive policies are more effective in deterring migrant flows. An increase in policy effectiveness in poor economic conditions suggests that states care more about deterring immigration when the economy is performing poorly. Secondly, a destination country’s restrictive immigration policy is more effective when migrants come from origin countries that have a common colonial heritage. This suggests that cultural similarities and migrant networks help to spread information about the immigration policy environment in the destination country. Social networks prove to be crucial in determining how much migrants know about the immigration policies of destination countries, regardless of other cultural factors such as colonial heritage or common language (Helbling & Leblang, 2017 ). In summary, more recent work supports the idea that immigration policy of destination countries exerts a significant influence on both the size and character of international migration flows. Much work remains to be done in terms of understanding the nuances of specific immigration policy components, the effect of policy change over time, and through what mechanisms immigration policy operates.

Transnational Social Networks

None of this should be taken to suggest that only political and economic considerations matter when a potential migrant contemplates a potential destination; perhaps one of the biggest contributions to the study of bilateral migration is the role played by transnational social networks. Migrating is a risky undertaking, and to minimize that risk, migrants are more likely to move to destinations where they can “readily tap into networks of co-ethnics” (Fitzgerald et al., 2014 , p. 410). Dense networks of co-ethnics not only help provide information about economic opportunities, but also serve as a social safety net which, in turn, helps decrease the risks associated with migration, including, but not limited to, finding housing and integrating into a new community (Massey, 1988 ; Portes & Böröcz, 1989 ; Portes, 1995 ; Massey et al., 1993 ; Faist, 2000 ; Sassen, 1995 ; Light, Bernard, & Kim, 1999 ). Having a transnational network of family members is quite important to destination choice; if a destination country has an immigration policy that emphasizes family reunification, migrants can use their familial connections to gain economically valuable permanent resident or citizenship status more easily than in other countries (Massey et al., 1993 , p. 450; Helbing & Leblang, 2017 ). When the migrant is comparing potential destinations, countries in which that migrant has a strong social network will be heavily favored in a cost–benefit analysis.

Note, however, that even outside of a strict rational actor framework with perfect information, transnational social networks still may be quite salient to destination choice. An interesting alternative hypothesis for the patterns we observe draws on theories from financial market behavior which focus on herding. Migrants choosing a destination observe the decisions of their co-ethnics who previously migrated and assume that those decisions were based on a relevant set of information, such as job opportunities or social tolerance of migrants. New migrants then choose the same destination as their co-ethnics not based on actual exchanges of valuable information, but based solely on the assumption that previous migration decisions were based on rational calculation (Epstein & Gang, 2006 ; Epstein, 2008 ). This is a classic example of herding, and the existing empirical evidence on the importance of transnational social networks cannot invalidate this alternative hypothesis. One could also explain social network effects through the lens of cumulative causation or feedback loops: the initial existence of connections in destination countries makes the act of migration less risky and attracts additional co-ethnics. This further expands migrant networks in a destination, further decreasing risk for future waves of migrants, and so on (Massey, 1990 ; Fussel & Massey, 2004 ; Fussel, 2010 ).

No matter the pathway by which social networks operate, the empirical evidence indicates that they are one of the most important determinants of destination choice. Potential migrants from Mexico, for example, who are able to tap into existing networks in the United States face lower direct, opportunity, and psychological costs of international migration (Massey & Garcia España, 1987 ). This same relationship holds in the European context; a study of Bulgarian and Italian migrants indicates that those with “social capital” in a destination community are more likely to migrate and to choose that particular destination (Haug, 2008 ). Studies that are more broadly cross-national in nature also confirm the social network hypothesis across a range of contexts and time periods (e.g., Clark et al., 2007 ; Hatton & Williamson, 2011 ; Fitzgerald et al., 2014 ).

Despite the importance of social networks, it is, again, important to qualify their role in framing the choice of destinations. It seems that the existence of co-ethnics in destination countries most strongly influences emigration when they are relatively few in number. Clark et al. ( 2007 ), in their study of migration to the United States, find that the “friends and relatives effect” falls to zero once the migrant stock in the United States reaches 8.3% of the source-country population. In addition, social networks alone cannot explain destination choice because their explanatory power is context-dependent. For instance, restrictive immigration policies limiting legal migration channels and family reunification may dampen the effectiveness of networks (Böcker, 1994 ; Collyer, 2006 ). Social networks are not an independent force, but also interact with economic and political realities to produce the global migration patterns we observe.

The Lens of Skill

For ease of presentation, we have up to now treated migrants as a relatively homogeneous group that faces similar push and pull factors throughout the decision-making process. Of course, not all migrants experience the same economic, political, and social incentives in the same way at each stage of the decision-making process. Perhaps the most salient differentiating feature of migrants is skill or education level. Generally, one can discuss a spectrum of skill and education level for current migrants, from relatively less educated (having attained a high school degree or less) to relatively more educated (having attained a college or post-graduate degree). The factors presented here that influence destination choice interact with a migrant’s skill level to produce differing destination choice patterns.

A migrant’s level of education, or human capital, often serves as a filter for the political treatment he or she anticipates in a particular destination country. For instance, the American public has a favorable view of highly educated migrants who hold higher-status jobs, while simultaneously having an opposite view of migrants who have less job training and do not hold a college degree (Hainmueller & Hiscox, 2010 ; Hainmueller & Hopkins, 2015 ). Indeed, the political discourse surrounding migration often emphasizes skill level and education as markers of migrants who “should be” admitted, across both countries and the ideological spectrum. 6 While political tolerance may be a condition of entry for migrants in the aggregate, the relatively privileged status of highly educated and skilled migrants in most destination countries may mean that this condition is not as salient.

While it is still an open question to what extent immigration policy influences international migration, it is clear that not all migrants face evenly applied migration restrictions. Most attractive destination countries have policies that explicitly favor highly skilled migrants, since these individuals often fill labor shortages in advanced industries such as high technology and applied science. Countries such as Australia, Canada, and New Zealand all employ so-called “points-based” immigration systems in which those with advanced degrees and needed skills are institutionally favored for legal entry (Papademetriou & Sumption, 2011 ). Meanwhile, the United States maintains the H-1B visa program, which is restricted by educational attainment and can only be used to fill jobs in which no native talent is available (USCIS). Even if destination countries decide to adopt more restrictive immigration policies, the move toward restriction has typically been focused on low-skilled migrants (Peters, 2017 ). In other words, even if immigration policy worldwide becomes more restrictive, this will almost certainly not occur at the expense of highly skilled migrants and will not prevent them choosing their most preferred destination.

Bring It on Home to Me

This article began by asserting that international labor migration is an important piece of globalization, as significant as cross-border flows of capital, goods, and services. This section argues that migrant flows enhance flows of capital and commodities. Uniquely modern conditions such as advanced telecommunications, affordable and efficient international travel, and the liberalization of financial flows mean that diasporas—populations of migrants living outside their countries of origin—and home countries often re-engage with each other (Vertovec, 2004 ; Waldinger, 2008 ). This section reviews some of the newest and most thought-provoking research on international labor migration, research that explores diaspora re-engagement and how that re-engagement alters international flows of income, portfolio and foreign direct investment (FDI), trade, and migratory flows themselves.

Remittances

As previously argued, migration is often driven by the prospect of higher wages. Rational, utility-maximizing migrants incur the cost of migration in order to earn increased income that they could not earn at home. But when migrants obtain higher wages, this additional increment to income is not always designated for individual consumption. Often, migrants use their new income to send remittances, direct transfers of money from one individual to another across national borders. Once a marginal financial flow, in 2015 remittances totaled $431 billion, far outpacing foreign aid ($135 billion) and nearly passing private debt and portfolio equity ($443 billion). More than 70% of total global remittances flow into developing countries (World Bank, 2016 ). In comparison with other financial flows such as portfolio investment and FDI, remittances are more impervious to economic crises, suggesting that they may be a countercyclical force to global downturns (Leblang, 2017 ).

Remittances represent one of the most common ways in which migrants re-engage with their homeland and alter both global income flows and distribution. Why do migrants surrender large portions of their new income, supposedly the very reason they migrated in the first place, to their families back home? New economics of labor migration (NELM) theory argues that immigration itself is motivated by a family’s need or demand for remittances—that remittances are an integral part of a family’s strategy for diversifying household financial risk (Stark & Bloom, 1985 ). Remittances “are a manifestation of informal contractual agreements between migrants and the households from which they move,” indicating that remitting is not an individual-level or purely altruistic action but rather occurs in a larger social context, that of one’s immediate or extended family (European Asylum Support Office, 2016 , p. 15).

The impact of migrant remittances on countries of origin is multifaceted yet somewhat ambiguous. Most scholarly work focuses on whether remittances positively or negatively influence existing economic conditions. A number of studies find that remittances modestly reduce poverty levels in developing countries (Adams & Page, 2005 ; Yang & Martinez, 2006 ; Acosta, Calderon, Fajnzybler, & Lopez, 2008 ; Lokshin, Bontch-Osmolovski, & Glinskaya, 2010 ). On other measures of economic well-being, such as growth, inequality, and health, the literature is quite mixed and no definitive conclusions can be drawn. For instance, some studies find that remittances encourage investment in human capital (Yang, 2008 ; Adams & Cuecuecha, 2010 ), while others find no such effect and suggest that families typically spend remittances on non-productive consumption goods (Chami, Fullenkamp, & Jahjah, 2003 ). Here we can only scratch the surface of the empirical work on remittances and economic outcomes. 7

Some of the most recent research in the field argues that remittances have a distinct political dimension, affecting regime support in developing countries and altering the conditions in which elections are held. Ahmed ( 2012 ), grouping remittances with foreign aid, argues that increased remittances allow autocratic governments to extend their tenure in office. These governments can strategically channel unearned government and household income to finance political patronage networks, which leads to a reduced likelihood of autocratic turnover, regime collapse, and mass protests against the regime. More recent research posits nearly the exact opposite: remittances are linked to a greater likelihood of democratization under autocratic regimes. Escriba-Folch, Meseguer, and Wright ( 2015 ) argue that since remittances directly increase household incomes, they reduce voter reliance on political patronage networks, undermining a key tool of autocratic stability.

Remittances may also play an important role in countries with democratic institutions, yet more research is needed to fully understand the conditions under which they matter and their substantive impact. Particularly, remittances may alter the dynamics of an election as an additional and external financial flow. There is evidence of political remittance cycles : the value of remittances spikes in the run-up to elections in developing countries. The total value of remittances to the average developing country increases by 6.6% during election years, and by 12% in elections in which no incumbent or named successor is running (O’Mahony, 2012 ). The effect is even larger in the poorest of developing countries. Finer-grained tests of this hypothesis provide additional support: using monthly and quarterly data confirms the existence of political remittance cycles, as well as using subnational rather than cross-national data (Nyblade & O’Mahony, 2014 ). However, these studies do not reveal why remittances spike, or what the effects of that spike are on electoral outcomes such as vote share, campaign financing, and political strategy.

Remittances represent a massive international financial flow that warrants more scholarly attention. While there are numerous studies on the relationship between remittances and key economic indicators, there remains much room for further work on their relationship to political outcomes in developing countries. Do remittances hasten the downfall of autocratic regimes, or do they contribute to autocratic stability? In democratic contexts, do remittances substantively influence electoral outcomes, and if so, which outcomes and how? Finally, do remittances prevent even more migration because they allow one “breadwinner from abroad” to provide for the household that remains in the homeland? While data limitations are formidable, these questions are important to the study of both international and comparative political economy.

Bilateral Trade

The argument that migrant or co-ethnic networks play an important role in international economic exchange is not novel. Greif ( 1989 , 1993 ) illustrates the role that the Maghrebi traders of the 11th century played in providing informal institutional guarantees that facilitated trade. This is but a single example. Cowen’s historical survey identifies not only the Phoenicians but also the “Spanish Jews [who] were indispensable for international commerce in the Middle Ages. The Armenians controlled the overland route between the Orient and Europe as late as the nineteenth century . Lebanese Christians developed trade between the various parts of the Ottoman empire” (Cowen, 1997 , p. 170). Rauch and Trindade ( 2002 ) provide robust empirical evidence linking the Chinese diaspora to patterns of imports and exports with their home country.

A variety of case studies document the importance of migrant networks in helping overcome problems of information asymmetries. In his study of Indian expatriates residing in the United States, Kapur ( 2014 ) documents how that community provides U.S. investors with a signal of the work ethic, labor quality, and business culture that exists in India. Likewise, Weidenbaum and Hughes ( 1996 ) chronicle the Bamboo Network—the linkages between ethnic Chinese living outside mainland China and their homeland—and how these linkages provide superior access to information and opportunities for investment.

Connections between migrant communities across countries affect cross-national investment even when these connections do not provide information about investment opportunities. In his work on the Maghrebi traders of the 11th century , Greif argues that this trading network was effective because it was able to credibly threaten collective punishment by all merchants if even one of them defected (Greif, 1989 , 1993 ). Grief shows that this co-ethnic network was able to share information regarding the past actions of actors (they could communicate a reputation)—something that was essential for the efficient functioning of markets in the absence of formal legal rules. Weidenbaum and Hughes reach a similar conclusion about the effectiveness of the Bamboo Network, remarking that “if a business owner violates an agreement, he is blacklisted. This is far worse than being sued, because the entire Chinese networks will refrain from doing business with the guilty party” (Hughes, 1996 , p. 51).

Migrants not only alter the flow of income by remitting to their countries of origin, but also influence patterns of international portfolio investment and FDI. Most existing literature on international capital allocation emphasizes monadic factors such as the importance of credible commitments and state institutional quality, failing to address explicitly dyadic phenomena that may also drive investment. Diaspora networks, in particular, facilitate cross-border investment in a number of ways. They foster a higher degree of familiarity between home and host countries, leading to a greater preference for investment in specific countries. Diaspora networks can also decrease information asymmetries in highly uncertain international capital markets in two ways. Firstly, they can provide investors with salient information about their homeland, such as consumer tastes, that can influence investment decision-making. Secondly, they can share knowledge about investment opportunities, regulation and procedures, and customs that decrease transaction costs associated with cross-border investment (Leblang, 2010 ). This place of importance for migrants suggests to the broader international political economy literature the importance of non-institutional mechanisms for channeling economic activity.

Although the hypothesized link between migrants and international investment has only recently been identified, the quantitative evidence available supports that hypothesis. Leblang ( 2010 ), using dyadic cross-sectional data, finds that diaspora networks “have both a substantively significant effect and a statistically significant effect on cross-border investment,” including international portfolio investment and FDI (p. 584). The effect of bilateral migratory flows correlates positively with the degree of information asymmetry: when informational imperfections are more pervasive in a dyad, migrants (especially the highly skilled) play a disproportionately large role in international capital allocation (Kugler, Levinthal, & Rapoport, 2017 ). Other quantitative studies find substantively similar results for FDI alone (e.g., Javorcik, Özden, Spatareanu, & Neagu, 2011 ; Aubry, Rapoport, & Reshef, 2016 ).

Many questions still remain unanswered. Firstly, does the effect of migrants on investment follow the waves of the global economy, or is it countercyclical as remittances have been shown to be? Secondly, how does this additional investment, facilitated by migrants, affect socioeconomic outcomes such as inequality, poverty, and economic development (Leblang, 2010 )? Does the participation of migrants lead to more successful FDI projects in developing countries because of their ability to break down information barriers? Within portfolio investment, do migrants lead to a preference for certain asset classes over others, and if so, what are the effects on bilateral and international capital markets? These are just a few directions in an area ripe for additional research.

Return Migration and Dual Citizenship

Besides financial flows, migrants themselves directly contribute to global flows of capital by returning to their countries of origin in large numbers. This phenomenon of return migration—or circular migration—can come in a few temporal forms, including long-term migration followed by a permanent return to a country of origin, or repeat migration in which a migrant regularly moves between destination and origin countries (Dumont & Spielvogel, 2008 ). While comparable data on return migration is scarce, some reports suggest that 20% to 50% of all immigrants leave their destination country within five years after their arrival (e.g., Borjas & Bratsberg, 1996 ; Aydemir & Robinson, 2008 ; Bratsberg, Raaum, & Sørlie, 2007 ; Dustmann & Weiss, 2007 ). An independent theoretical and empirical account of return migration does not yet exist in the literature and is beyond the scope of this paper. But in the rational actor framework, motivations to return home include a failure to realize the expected benefits of migration, changing preferences toward a migrant’s home country, achievement of a savings or other economic goal, or the opening of additional employment opportunities back home due to newly acquired experience or greater levels of economic development (Dumont & Spielvogel, 2008 ).

While most migration literature treats the country of origin as a passive actor that only provides the conditions for migration, new literature on return migration gives home country policies pride of place. Origin countries can craft policies that encourage diaspora re-engagement, incentivizing individuals to return home. Dual citizenship, for example, is an extension of extraterritorial rights, allowing migrants to retain full legal status in their home country. Dual citizenship “decreases the transaction costs associated with entering a host country’s labor market and makes it easier for migrants to return home” (Leblang, 2017 , p. 77). This leads migrants to invest their financial resources in the form of remittances back home as well as their valuable human capital. When states provide such extraterritorial rights, expatriates are 10% more likely to remit and 3% more likely to return home. Dual citizenship is also associated with a doubling of the dollar amount of remittances received by a home country (Leblang, 2017 ). These striking results suggest that in addition to the power of migrants to affect cross-border flows of money and people, countries of origin can also play a significant role.

Conclusion and Future Directions

This brief article has attempted to synthesize a broad range of literature from political science, economics, sociology, migration studies, and more to construct an account of international labor migration. To do so, the migratory process was broken down into distinct stages and decision points, focusing particularly on the decision to migrate, destination choice, and the re-engagement of migrants with their homeland. In doing so, the article also discussed the interlinkages of international migration with other fields of study in international political economy, including cross-border financial flows, trade, and investment. Through a multiplicity of approaches, we have gained a greater understanding of why people decide to move, why they decide to move to one country over another, and how and why they engage with the global economy and their homeland. Despite this intellectual progress, there remain many paths for future research at each stage of the migratory process; we highlight just a few of them here.

We know that income differentials, social ties, and local political conditions are important variables influencing the migration process. Yet the question remains: why do a small but growing number of people choose to leave while the overwhelming majority of people remain in their country of birth? Here, individual- or family-level subjective characteristics may be significant. There are a handful of observational studies that explore the relationship between subjective well-being or life satisfaction and the intention to migrate, with the nascent consensus being that life dissatisfaction increases the intention to migrate (Cai, Esipova, Oppenheimer, & Feng, 2014 ; Otrachshenko & Popova, 2014 ; Nikolova & Graham, 2015 ). But more research on intrinsic or subjective measures is needed to understand (a) their independent importance more fully and (b) how they interact with objective economic, political, and social factors. For instance, do those who are more optimistic migrate in larger numbers? Do minority individuals who feel they live in an environment in which diversity is not accepted feel a greater urge to leave home? Synthesizing these types of subjective variables and perceptions with the more prominent gravity-style models could result in a more complete picture of the international migration process.

For the “typical” migrant, one who is relatively less educated than the population in the chosen destination and does not have specialized skills, social networks are key to minimizing the risk of migrating and quickly tapping into economic opportunities in destination countries. Does this remain true for those who are highly educated? Although little empirical research exists on the topic, greater human capital and often-accompanying financial resources may operate as a substitute for the advantages offered by social networks, such as housing, overcoming linguistic barriers, and finding gainful employment. This would indicate that the “friends and family effect” is not as influential for this subset of migrants. Economic considerations, such as which destination offers the largest relative wage differential, or political considerations, such as the ease of quickly acquiring full citizenship rights, may matter more for the highly skilled. Neoclassical economic models of migration may best capture the behavior of migrants who hold human capital and who have the financial resources to independently migrate in a way that maximizes income or utility more broadly.

Since we have focused on international migration as a series of discrete decision points in this article, we have perhaps underemphasized the complexity of the physical migration process. In reality, migrants often do not pick a country and travel directly there, but travel through (perhaps several) countries of transit such as Mexico, Morocco, or Turkey along the way (Angel Castillo, 2006 ; Natter, 2013 ; Icduygu, 2005 ). There is little existing theoretical work to understand the role of transit countries in the migratory process, with much of it focusing on the potential for cooperation between destination and transit countries in managing primarily illegal immigration (Kahana & Lecker, 2005 ; Djajic & Michael, 2014 ; Djajic & Michael, 2016 ). Another related strand of the literature focuses on how wealthy destination countries are “externalizing” their immigration policy, encompassing a broader part of the migratory process than simply crossing a physically demarcated border (Duvell, 2012 ; Menjivar, 2014 ). But many questions remain, such as the following: how do we understand those who desire to enter, say, the United States, but instead relocate permanently to Mexico along the way? How do countries of transit handle the pressure of transit migrants, and how does this affect economic and political outcomes in these countries?

Finally, the focus of nearly all literature on international migration (and this article as a byproduct) implicitly views advanced economies as the only prominent destinations. However, this belies the fact that 38% of all migration stays within the “Global South” (World Bank, 2016 ). While there is certainly some literature on this phenomenon (see Ratha & Shaw, 2007 ; Gindling, 2009 ; Hujo & Piper, 2007 ), international political economy scholars have yet to sufficiently tackle this topic. The overarching research question here is: do the same push and pull factors that influence the decision to migrate and destination choice apply to those who migrate within the Global South? Do we need to construct new theories of international migration with less emphasis on factors such as wage differentials and political tolerance, or are these sufficient to understand this facet of the phenomenon? If we fail to answer these questions, we may miss explaining a significant proportion of international migration with its own consequences and policy implications.

Abreu, A. (2012). The New Economics of Labor Migration: Beware of Neoclassicals Bearing Gifts. Forum for Social Economics , 41 (1), 46–67.
Acosta, P. , Calderon, C. , Fajnzybler, P. , & Lopez, H. (2008). What Is the Impact of International Remittances on Poverty and Inequality in Latin America? World Development , 36 (1), 89–114.
Adams, R., Jr. (2011). Evaluating the Economic Impact of International Remittances on Developing Countries Using Household Surveys: A Literature Review. Journal of Development Studies , 47 (6), 809–828.
Adams, R., Jr. , & Cuecuecha, A. (2010). Remittances, Household Expenditure and Investment in Guatemala. World Development , 38 (11), 1626–1641.
Adams, R., Jr. , & Page, J. (2005). Do International Migration and Remittances Reduce Poverty in Developing Countries? World Development , 33 (10), 1645–1669.
Ahmed, F. Z. (2012). The Perils of Unearned Foreign Income: Aid, Remittances, and Government Survival. American Political Science Review , 106 (1), 146–165.
Akerman, S. (1976). Theories and Methods of Migration Research. In H. Runblom & H. Norman (Eds.), From Sweden to America: A History of the Migration . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Angel Castillo, M. (2006). Mexico: Caught Between the United States and Central America . Migration Policy Institute.
Aubry, A. , Rapoport, H. , & Reshef, A. (2016). Migration, FDI, and the Margins of Trade. Mimeo . Paris School of Economics.
Aydemir, A. , & Robinson, C. (2008). Global Labour Markets, Return, and Onward Migration. Canadian Journal of Economics , 41 (4), 1285–1311.
Böcker, A. (1994). Chain Migration over Legally Closed Borders: Settled Immigrants as Bridgeheads and Gatekeepers. Netherlands Journal of Social Sciences , 30 (2), 87–106.
Borjas, G. J. (1989). Economic Theory and International Migration. International Migration Review , 23 (3), 457–485.
Borjas, G. J. , & Bratsberg, B. (1996). Who Leaves? The Outmigration of the Foreign-Born. Review of Economics and Statistics , 41 (4), 610–621.
Bratsberg, B. , Raaum, O. , & Sørlie, K. (2007). Foreign-Born Migration to and from Norway. In Ç. Özden & M. Schiff (Eds.), International Migration, Economic Development and Policy . New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Brücker, H. , & Schröder, P. J. H. (2011). Migration regulation contagion. European Union Politics , 12 (3), 315–335.
Cai, R. , Esipova, N. , Oppenheimer, M. , & Feng, S. (2014). International Migration Desires Related to Subjective Well-Being. IZA Journal of Migration , 3 (8), 1–20.
Castles, S. (2004). Why Migration Policies Fail. Ethnic and Racial Studies , 27 (2), 205–227.
Cazzuffi, C. , & Modrego, F. (2018). Place of Origin and Internal Migration Decisions in Mexico. Spatial Economic Analysis , 13 (1), 1–19.
Chami, R. , Fullenkamp, C. , & Jahjah, S. (2003). Are Immigrant Remittance Flows a Source of Capital for Development ? IMF Working Paper 03/189.
Clark, X. , Hatton, T. J. , & Williamson, J. G. (2007). Explaining US Immigration, 1971–1998. Review of Economics and Statistics , 89 (2), 359–373.
Clemens, M. A. (2014). Does Development Reduce Migration ? IZA Discussion Paper No. 8592.
Collier, P. , & Hoeffler, A. (2014). Migration, Diasporas and Culture: An Empirical Investigation . Unpublished manuscript.
Collyer, M. (2006). When Do Social Networks Fail to Explain Migration? Accounting for the Movement of Algerian Asylum-Seekers to the UK. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies , 31 (4), 699–718.
Constant, A. , & Massey, D. S. (2002). Return Migration by German Guestworkers: Neoclassical versus New Economic Theories. International Migration , 4 0(4), 5–38.
Cooray, A. , & Schneider, F. (2016). Does Corruption Promote Emigration? An Empirical Examination. Journal of Population Economics , 29 , 293–310.
Cornelius, W. A. , & Tsuda, T. (2004). Controlling Immigration: The Limits of Government Intervention . Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Cowen, R. (1997). Global Diasporas: An Introduction . London: Routledge.
Czaika, M. , & de Haas, H. (2016). The Effect of Visas on Migration Processes. International Migration Review , 51 (4), 893–926.
Dao, T. H. , Docquier, F. , Parsons, C. , & Peri, G. (2018). Migration and Development: Dissecting the Anatomy of the Mobility Transition. Journal of Development Economics , 132 , 88–101.
Dao, T. H. , Docquier, F. , Parsons, C. , & Peri, G. (2016). Migration and Development: Dissecting the Anatomy of the Mobility Transition . IZA Discussion Paper No. 10272.
De Haas, H. (2007). Turning the Tide? Why Development Will Not Stop Migration. Development and Change , 38 , 819–841.
Dimant, E. , Krieger, T. , & Meierrieks, D. (2013). The Effect of Corruption on Migration, 1985–2000. Applied Economics Letters , 20 (13), 1270–1274.
Djajic, S. , & Michael, M. S. (2014). Controlling Illegal Immigration: On the Scope for Cooperation with a Transit Country. Review of International Economics , 22 (4), 808–824.
Djajic, S. , & Michael, M. S. (2016). Illegal Immigration, Foreign Aid, and the Transit Countries. CESifo Economic Studies , 572–593.
Dumont, J.-C. , & Spielvogel, G. (2008). Return Migration: A New Perspective. International Migration Outlook 2008 . OECD, 166–212.
Dustmann, C. , & Okatenko, A. (2014). Out-Migration, Wealth Constraints, and the Quality of Local Amenities. Journal of Development Economics , 110 , 52–63.
Dustmann, C. , & Weiss, Y. (2007). Return Migration: Theory and Empirical Evidence from the UK. British Journal of Industrial Relations , 45 (2), 236–256.
Duvell, F. (2012). Transit Migration: A Blurred and Politicized Concept. Population, Space and Place , 18 , 415–427.
Easterlin, R. A. (1961). Influences in European Overseas Emigration Before World War I. Economic Development and Cultural Change , 9 (3), 331–351.
Epstein, G. (2008). Herd and Network Effects in Migration Decision-Making. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies , 34 (4), 567–583.
Epstein, G. , & Gang, I. (2006). The Influence of Others on Migration Plans. Review of Development Economics , 10 (4), 652–665.
Escriba-Folch, A. , Meseguer, C. , & Wright, J. (2015). Remittances and Democratization. International Studies Quarterly , 59 (3), 571–586.
European Asylum Support Office . (2016). The Push and Pull Factors of Asylum-Related Migration: A Literature Review .
Faist, T. (2000). The Volume and Dynamics of International Migration and Transnational Social Space . New York: Oxford University Press.
Fitzgerald, J. , Leblang, D. , & Teets, J. C. (2014). Defying the Law of Gravity: The Political Economy of International Migration. World Politics , 66 (3), 406–445.
Fussel, E. (2010). The Cumulative Causation of International Migration in Latin America. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science , 630 , 162–177.
Fussel, E. , & Massey, D. (2004). The Limits to Cumulative Causation: International Migration from Mexican Urban Areas. Demography , 41 (1), 151–171.
Gindling, T. H. (2009). South–South Migration: The Impact of Nicaraguan Immigrants on Earnings, Inequality, and Poverty in Costa Rica. World Development , 37 (1), 116–126.
Gould, J. D. (1979). European Inter-Continental Emigration 1815–1914: Patterns and Causes. Journal of European Economic History , 8 (3), 593–679.
Greif, A. (1989). Reputation and Coalitions in Medieval Trade: Evidence on the Maghribi Traders. Journal of Economic History , 49 (4), 857–882.
Greif, A. (1993). Contract Enforceability and Economic Institutions in Early Trade: The Maghribi Traders’ Coalition. American Economic Review , 83 (3), 525–548.
Grogger, J. , & Hanson, G. H. (2011). Income Maximization and the Selection and Sorting of International Migrants. Journal of Development Economics , 95 , 42–57.
Gupta, S. , Davoodi, H. , & Tiongson, E. (2001). Corruption and the Provision of Healthcare and Education Services. In A. Jain (Ed.), The Political Economy of Corruption . New York: Routledge.
Hainmueller, J. , & Hiscox, M. J. (2010). Attitudes toward Highly Skilled and Low-Skilled Immigration: Evidence from a Survey Experiment. American Political Science Review , 104 (1), 61–84.
Hainmueller, J. , & Hopkins, D. J. (2015). The Hidden Immigration Consensus: A Conjoint Analysis of Attitudes toward Immigrants. American Journal of Political Science , 59 (3), 529–548.
Harris, J. R. , & Todaro, M. P. (1970). Migration, Unemployment and Development: A Two-Sector Analysis. American Economic Review , 60 (1), 126–142.
Hatton, T. J. , & Williamson, J. G. (1994). What Drove the Mass Migrations from Europe in the Late Nineteenth Century? Population and Development Review , 20 (3), 533–559.
Hatton, T. J. , & Williamson, J. G. (2011). Are Third World Emigration Forces Abating? World Development , 39 (1), 20–32.
Haug, S. (2008). Migration Networks and Migration Decision-Making. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies , 34 (4), 585–605.
Helbling, M. , Bjerre, L. , Römer, F. , & Zobel, M. (2017). Measuring Immigration Policies: The IMPIC-Database. European Political Science, 16 (1), 79–98.
Helbling, M. , & Leblang, D. (forthcoming). Controlling Immigration? European Journal of Political Research .
Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and Sates . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hirsh, A. O. (1978). “Exit, Voice, and the State.” World Politics , 31 (1), 90–107.
Hujo, K. , & Piper, N. (2007). South–South Migration: Challenges for Development and Social Policy. Development , 50 (4), 1–7.
Icduygu, A. (2005). Transit Migration in Turkey: Trends, Patterns, and Issues . Euro-Mediterranean Consortium for Applied Research on International Migration Research Report 2005/04.
Javorcik, B. , Özden, C. , Spatareanu, M. , & Neagu, C. (2011). Migrant Networks and Foreign Direct Investment. Journal of Development Economics , 94 , 231–241.
Kahana, N. , & Lecker, T. (2005). Competition as a Track for Preventing Illegal Immigration. Economics of Governance , 6 , 33–39.
Kapur, D. (2014). Political Effects of International Migration. Annual Review of Political Science , 17 , 479–502.
Kugler, M. , Levinthal, O. , & Rapoport, H. (2017). Migration and Cross-Border Financial Flows . World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 8034.
Leblang, D. (2010). Familiarity Breeds Investment: Diaspora Networks and International Investment. American Political Science Review , 104 (3), 584–600.
Leblang, D. (2017). Harnessing the Diaspora: Dual Citizenship, Migrant Return, and Remittances. Comparative Political Studies , 50 (1), 75–101.
Lewis, A. W. (1954). Economic Development with Unlimited Supplies of Labor. The Manchester School , 22 (2), 139–191.
Lichter, D. T. (1983). Socioeconomic Returns to Migration among Married Women. Social Forces , 62 (2), 487–503.
Light, I. , Bernard, R. B. , & Kim, R. (1999). Immigrant Incorporation in the Garment Industry of Los Angeles. International Migration Review , 33 (1), 5–25.
Lokshin, M. , Bontch-Osmolovski, M. , & Glinskaya, E. (2010). Work-Related Migration and Poverty Reduction in Nepal. Review of Development Economics , 14 (2), 323–332.
Massey, D. S. (1988). Economic Development and International Migration in Comparative Perspective. Population and Development Review , 14 (3), 383–413.
Massey, D. S. (1990). Social Structure, Household Strategies, and the Cumulative Causation of Migration. Population Index , 56 (1), 3–26.
Massey, D. S. , Arango, J. , Hugo, G. , Kouaouci, A. , Pellegrino, A. , & Taylor, J. E. (1993). Theories of International Migration: A Review and Appraisal. Population and Development Review , 19 (3), 431–466.
Massey, D. S. , & Garcia España, F. (1987). The Social Process of International Migration. Science , 237 (4816), 733–738.
Mauro, P. (1998). Corruption and the Composition of Government Expenditure. Journal of Public Economics , 69 , 263–279.
Menjivar, C. (2014). Immigration Law Beyond Borders: Externalizing and Internalizing Border Controls in an Era of Securitization. Annual Review of Law and Social Science , 10 , 353–369.
Messina, A. M. (2007). The Logics and Politics of Post-WWII Migration to Western Europe . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mincer, J. (1978). Family Migration Decisions. Journal of Political Economy , 86 (51), 749–773.
Miller, M. K. , & Peters, M. E. (2018). Restraining the Huddled Masses: Migration Policy and Autocratic Survival . British Journal of Political Science .
Mo, P. H. (2001). Corruption and Economic Growth. Journal of Comparative Economics , 29 , 66–79.
Money, J. (1999). Fences and Neighbors: The Political Geography of Immigration Control . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Morrison, D. R. , & Lichter, D. T. (1988). Migration and Female Employment. Journal of Marriage and Family , 50 (1), 161–172.
Natter, K. (2013). The Formation of Morocco’s Policy Towards Irregular Migration (2000–2007): Political Rationale and Policy Processes. International Migration , 52 (5), 15–28.
Nikolova, M. , & Graham, C. (2015). Well-Being and Emigration Intentions: New Evidence from the Gallup World Poll. Unpublished manuscript.
Nyblade, B. , & O’Mahony, A. (2014). Migrants Remittances and Home Country Elections: Cross-National and Subnational Evidence. Studies in Comparative International Development , 49 (1), 44–66.
O’Mahony, A. (2012). Political Investment: Remittances and Elections. British Journal of Political Science , 43 (4), 799–820.
Ortega, F. , & Peri, G. (2013). The Effect of Income and immigration Policies on International Migration. Migration Studies , 1 (1), 47–74.
Otrachshenko, V. , & Popova, O. (2014). Life (Dis)satisfaction and the Intention to Migrate: Evidence from Central and Eastern Europe. Journal of Socio-Economics , 48 , 40–49.
Papademetriou, D. , & Sumption, M. (2011). Rethinking Points Systems and Employer-Based Selected Immigration . Migration Policy Institute.
Peters, M. (2017). Trading Barriers: Immigration and the Remaking of Globalization . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Poprawe, M. (2015). On the Relationship between Corruption and Migration: Evidence from a Gravity Model of Migration. Public Choice , 163 , 337–354.
Portes, A. (Ed.). (1995). The Economic Sociology of Immigration . New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Portes, A. , & Böröcz, J. (1989). Contemporary Immigration: Theoretical Perspectives on its Determinant and Modes of Incorporation. International Migration Review , 23 (3), 606–630.
Rapoport, H. , & Docquier, F. (2006). The Economics of Migrants’ Remittances. In S.-C. Kolm & J. M. Ythier (Eds.), Handbook on the Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity . New York: Elsevier-North Holland.
Ratha, D. , & Shaw, W. (2007). South-South Migration and Remittances . World Bank WP 102.
Rauch, J. E. , & Trindade, V. (2002). Ethnic Chinese Networks in International Trade. Review of Economics and Statistics , 84 (1), 116–130.
Ravenstein, E. G. (1885). The Laws of Migration. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society of London , 48 (2), 167–235.
Sassen, S. (1995). Immigration and Local Labour Markets. In A. Portes (Ed.), The Economic Sociology of Immigration . New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Sassen, S. (1996). Losing Control? Sovereignty in the Age of Globalization . New York: Columbia University Press.
Schultz, T. W. (1961). Investment in Human Capital. American Economic Review , 51 (1), 1–17.
Severin, T. , & Martin, M. (2018). German Parties Edge Closer to Coalition with Migration Deal . Reuters, February 2.
Sjaastad, L. A. (1962). The Costs and Returns of Human Migration. Journal of Political Economy , 70 (5), 80–93.
Stark, O. (1984). Rural-To-Urban Migration in LDCs: A Relative Deprivation Approach. Economic Development and Cultural Change , 32 (3), 475–486.
Stark, O. , & Bloom, D. E. (1985). The New Economics of Labor Migration. American Economic Review , 75 (2), 173–178.
Stark, O. , & Levhari, D. (1982). On Migration and Risk in LDCs. Economic Development and Cultural Change , 31 (1), 191–196.
Stark, O. , & Taylor, J. E. (1991). Migration Incentives, Migration Types: The Role of Relative Deprivation. The Economic Journal , 101 (408), 1163–1178.
Stark, O. , & Yitzhaki, S. (1988). Migration as a Response to Relative Deprivation. Journal of Population Economics , 1 (1), 57–70.
Taylor, J. E. (1999). The New Economics of Labour Migration and the Role of Remittances in the Migration Process. International Migration , 37 (1), 63–88.
Todaro, M. P. (1969). A Model of Labor Migration and Urban Employment in Less Developed Countries. American Economic Review , 59 (1), 138–148.
Tomaske, J. A. (1971). The Determinants of Intercountry Differences in European Emigration: 1881–1900. Journal of Economic History , 31 (4), 840–853.
Transparency International . (2018). What is corruption
United Kingdom Independence Party . (2015). UKIP Launches Immigration Policy .
United Nations Population Division . (2012). Trends in Total Migrant Stock .
United Nations Population Division . (2013). International Migration: Age and Sex Distribution. Population Facts, September.
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services . (2018). H-1B Fiscal Year 2018 Cap Season .
USA Today . (2014) (20 November). Full Text: Obama’s Immigration Speech .
Vanderkamp, J. (1971). Migration Flows, Their Determinants and the Effects of Return Migration. Journal of Political Economy , 79 (5), 1012–1031.
Vertovec, S. (2004). Migrant Transnationalism and Modes of Transformation. International Migration Review , 38 (3), 970–1001.
Waldinger, R. (2008). Between “Here” and “There”: Immigrant Cross-Border Activities and Loyalties. International Migration Review , 42 (Spring), 3–29.
Weidenbaum, M. , & Hughes, S. (1996). The Bamboo Network: How Expatriate Chinese Entrepreneurs are Creating a New Economic Superpower in Asia . New York: Martin Kessler Books.
World Bank . (2016). Migration and Remittances Factbook 2016 . 3rd ed. Washington, DC: World Bank Group.
Yang, D. (2008). International Migration, Remittances, and Household Investment: Evidence from Philippine Migrants’ Exchange Rate Shocks. The Economic Journal , 118 (528), 591–630.
Yang, D. , & Martinez, C. (2006). Remittances and Poverty in Migrants Home Areas: Evidence from the Philippines. In C. Ozden & M. Schiff (Eds.), International Migration, Remittances and the Brain Drain . Washington, DC: World Bank.
Zaiceva, A. , & Zimmerman, K. (2014). Migration and the Demographic Shift. IZA Discussion Paper #8743 .
Zelinsky, W. (1971). The Hypothesis of the Mobility Transition. Geographical Review , 61 (2), 219–249.

1. Our use of the term international labor migration follows academic and legal conventions; we use the term migration to refer to the voluntary movement of people across national borders, either in a temporary or permanent fashion. This excludes any discussion of refugees, asylum seekers, or any other groups that are forced to migrate.

2. We do not have space in this article to delve into the theoretical and empirical work unpacking the effect of demographic characteristics—age, gender, marital status, household size, and so forth on the migration decision and on subsequent flows of migrants. For comprehensive reviews, see Lichter ( 1983 ), Morrison and Lichter ( 1988 ); United Nations Population Division ( 2013 ); and Zaiceva and Zimmerman ( 2014 ).

3. Zelinsky ( 1971 ) originally identified this relationship and termed it mobility transition curve . A wealth of empirical work supports Zelinsky’s descriptive theory in a number of contexts (see Akerman, 1976 ; Gould, 1979 ; Hatton & Williamson, 1994 ; and Dao et al., 2016 ).

4. For a review of the arguments as well as some empirical tests, see Miller and Peters ( 2018 ) and Docquier, Lodigiani, Rapoport, and Schiff ( 2018 ).

5. Transparency International. “What is corruption?”

6. For example, former United Kingdom Independence Party leader Nigel Farage has called for the United Kingdom to adopt an immigration system that only allows in highly skilled migrants (“UKIP launches immigration policy”). In 2014, US President Barack Obama emphasized that he wanted to attract international students to American universities and that they “create jobs, businesses, and industries right here in America” (USA Today: “Full text: Obama’s immigration speech”). A key issue in Germany’s 2018 government formation was the creation of skill-based migration laws (Severin & Martin, 2018 ).

7. For a more comprehensive review, see Rapoport and Docquier ( 2006 ); and Adams ( 2011 ).

Space, Mobility, and Legitimacy
Immigration and Foreign Policy

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Politics. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 19 June 2024

Cookie Policy
Privacy Policy
Legal Notice
Accessibility
[185.66.14.236]
185.66.14.236

Character limit 500 /500

Research Paper
Book Report
Book Review
Research Proposal
Annotated Bibliography
Answers Questions
Multiple Choice Questions
Dissertation
Proofreading
Powerpoint Presentation
Poster Presentation
Excel Exercises
Thesis Proposal
Discussion Board Post
Dissertation Abstract
Dissertation Introduction
Dissertation Literature
Dissertation Hypothesis
Dissertation Methodology
Dissertation Results
Dissertation Discussion
Dissertation Conclusion
Movie Critique
Literary Essay
Article Critique
Article Review
Blog Writing
Capstone Project
Movie Review
Response Paper
Marketing Plan
Reaction Paper
Business Plan
Grant Proposal
IB Extended Essay
Application Letter
Literature Review
Motivation Letter
Questionnaire
Scholarship Essay
White Paper

Immigration: Causes and Effects

cause and effect essay about immigration

Immigration is an act of leaving a country of permanent residence for a new country for the purpose of establishing a new settlement. Citizens of a particular country migrate to other countries mostly for political, social and economic reasons. Therefore, immigration is an ancient concept in the history of all countries and a current affair in the modern globalization. Various natural disasters caused by changing environmental conditions have led to displacement and migration of people. People also immigrate from their countries of origin, because they seek safety and protection of their human rights.

The paper is an argumentative one, and, therefore, it will try to examine immigration from historical and current dimensions. The various causes that have led to immigration of people to a particular country will be analyzed in the paper, too. It will also look into the effects of immigration in terms of where immigrants originate and how they affect countries they settle in.

Causes of Immigration

Recent reports released by the International Organization of Migration (IOM) show that there are more than 200 million migrants globally. According to research, Europe hosted the largest number of immigrants, with 70 million people in 2005.. The second largest host of immigrants was South America, with 45 million. Asia was ranked the third with more than 25 million immigrants. A report by the United Nations shows that 3% of the world population is constantly migrating from one country another, and their number is expected to rise in the future. Immigration is caused by various factors, but the main ones include social, political, environmental and economic.

Social and Economic Causes

From antiquity and up to the present, immigration has been a common practice. Unfavourable social and economic conditions were primary reasons for immigrating to another country. Slavery commonly practiced by the British government led to immigration of Africans to the United States of America and resulted in the rise of the Afro-American community. African slaves used to work on the farms and industries owned by the Britons, they facilitated reduction of cost of production, which increased profits to the royal family (Perl, 2009).

The social factors include ethnicity, religion and poverty. If a community belongs to a minority group, they may immigrate to a safer place, in case there are any community wrangles that may cause ethnic animosity. A good example is Uganda of the late 1970s where Asians were forcefully expelled by the government of Idi Amin. The religious factors include persecutions, such as those of Jews in Pakistan, which caused them to seek refuge and safety in other countries. Poverty has been a major contributing factor to immigration since antiquity and up to the present. Many people have been immigrating to countries with stronger economies and more flexible labor laws. A lot of people in developing economies experience low living standards and high poverty levels. Therefore, they immigrate to developed countries to seek better living conditions. Strategies employed by modern multinational companies have also increased immigration. The need to include expertise in running foreign branches has led to immigration of employees to these countries. Some of these employees end up seeking permanent establishment in the countries they are stationed (Murrin, et al, 2008).

Family reunification has been one of the factors that have led to immigration of people in the world. Whenever a family member immigrates to another country, he/she may seek to reunite with his/her family by helping them immigrate to that country. Dynamic and ever-changing business conditions have led to increased immigration of people around the globe. Through international business travel, businesspersons find new opportunities in other countries, which prompt them to immigrate permanently to explore these opportunities (Jonas & Thomas, 2000).

Education has been one of the leading causes of immigration in the modern world. Constantly increasing demand for better education has led people from developing countries to seek better education in the developed economies where the level of education is believed to be of higher quality. Most people seeking education opportunities in these countries end up obtaining employment or permanent settlement there. Research has shown that the majority of people in developing countries would like to obtain education in developed economies. The majority preferred the United States of America, while Great Britain was ranked the second best in terms of education and work opportunities (Morrow, 2009).

Political and Environmental Causes

The political environment of a country is a critical determinant of its inhabitation. The recent global climatic changes have led to temporary and permanent displacement of people. Politics in a given country plays an important role in determining the level of democracy in the country. The level of democracy shows respect for human rights of the citizens residing in that country. The majority of developing countries used to be dictatorial and denied their citizens basic rights and freedoms. Those who held dissenting opinions were persecuted, jailed or murdered. The oppressive rule in their countries caused the majority of human rights activists to seek political asylum in other countries. In the 1980s and 1990s, the number of people from Kenya, Algeria, Angola and Ghana, who sought asylum in Great Britain, increased sharply. Most of these asylum seekers have never returned to their countries of origin (Perl, 2009).

Elsewhere in the world, political instability leads to fighting and internal strife. Fear for their lives and lack of respect for human rights and freedoms prompts people to immigrate to safer places where their rights are observed. A good example is civil strife in Sudan that caused many people to immigrate to other countries. Even after the situation had stabilized, the majority of the people never returned to their country, since they had gained permanent residency in other countries. The issue of environmental displacement is currently a global one due to constantly happening climatic changes. The rising sea level increased floods and drought have led to temporary and permanent displacement of people, which in turn has led to immigration of the people to safer countries (Murrin, et al, 2008).

Effects of Immigration

Immigration has various effects on both a country of origin and a recipient country. As discussed above, people move from one country to another for various reasons. Immigration causes a number of effects for both countries, including social, economic and political ones. Though the reasons that make people move to other countries are different, the consequences of immigration are almost always the same. Massive immigration is in most cases caused by wars, diseases, famine or drought. People who try to escape the above have very basic needs, such as food, shelter and clothing. Therefore, they are willing to provide services or do jobs that residents of a host country consider less prestigious. Some of these odd jobs may include taking care of old people, washing toilets and bathrooms, providing security at night, taking care of small children, mining and loading and unloading vehicles. Through provision of these activities by immigrants, recipient countries’ economies benefit greatly (Purcell, 1995).

Immigrants are willing to work long hours and accept low wages or salaries. Despite being exploitive, controversial and violating human rights, this is very beneficial to a recipient country’s economy. According to an economic model by Sen. Byron Dorgan, low-skilled immigrants have increased the supply of workers in the United States, thus driving down wages at the expense of working class people. The large flow of cheaper labor has substantially displaced American workers and caused many problems in the development of technologies. Jobs in the manufacturing sector have also been substantially reduced, including a drop in the the number of trade union organizations. Therefore, apart from reducing wages and lowering employment rates, immigration has far-reaching effects on the labor market. Furthermore, lack of employment caused by immigration forces some workers to engage in antisocial activities, which ultimately lands them in prison (Morrow, 2009).

Immigration has also contributed to social integration of people. Social integration sometimes brings about improvement of culture and traditions of certain groups or races. If properly accepted in a recipient country, immigrants can contribute to social diversity and greatly improve social understanding and tolerance among people. When different communities are able to integrate and leave harmoniously, it expands social network and leads to cultural development and growth. People are able to exchange ideas that contribute to development of a community and economic growth of a country. Another major benefit of immigration is an increased pool of talents in the country. Well-educated immigrants can improve productivity and increase innovations and inventions. Increased inventions and innovations have a positive impact on the production capabilities of a country. More importantly, increased productivity in a country will mean that the living standards of people improve. Increased immigration leads to an increase in population, which labor force and leads to increased productivity (Purcell, 1995).

Negative Effects of Immigration

Negative consequences of immigration for the country of origin and the recipient country far outweigh positive ones. One of the major effects is that immigrants are exploited in a recipient country. Immigrants are taken advantage of by being given hard jobs and paid very small wages and salaries. This does not only constitute exploitation of people, but also violates human rights. People in developing countries immigrate to other countries, especially developed ones, in search of better education. Therefore, immigration has caused brain drain in developing countries (Perl, 2009).

Developing countries are seriously affected by the issue of brain drain. The governments of these countries spend a lot of money on educating students, but this has very little impact, as the knowledge is used elsewhere. The UK, for instance, is blamed for employing medical staff from developing countries. Brain drain has resulted in stagnant development in developing countries despite their heavy investment in the education and research. Immigration has led to increased crime rates, drug trafficking and corruption .Some immigrants have ill motives, while others do not have any legal ways of earning their living. For example, Somali immigrants caused a lot of insecurity and drug-related problems in the northern part of Kenya. In some countries, local residents have a perception that immigrants and refugees are getting more benefits from the government and other non-governmental organization. These kinds of feelings have created a lot of tension and hostility among the public making them feel neglected by their own government. Local residents are, therefore, less motivated to work and not willing to pay taxes, as they believe that their government will use that money to assist immigrants. Illegal immigration can lead to negative feelings among many law-abiding citizens, who always wish to contribute to the growth of their economy (Jonas & Thomas, 2000).

In conclusion, immigration results in a lot of consequences. People immigrate for various reasons, thus causing many implications for their country of origin and a host country. Countries must come up with policies that could curb the flow of immigrants and reduce implications of immigration. Some countries have put in place strict measures to fight the implications of immigration.

for more than

+1(888) 585-0586

+1(888) 216-9741

[email protected]

Aptitude Test
Multiple Choice Test
Presentation and Speech Writing
Powerpoint Presentation Poster
Dissertation chapter – Abstract
Dissertation chapter – Hypothesis
Dissertation chapter – Literature review
Dissertation chapter – Methodology
Dissertation chapter – Results
Dissertation chapter – Conclusion
Literary Analysis
Blog Article
Business Report
Motivation Letter for the University of East Anglia

Foreign Affairs
CFR Education
Newsletters

Israel-Hamas

Climate Change

Global Climate Agreements: Successes and Failures

Backgrounder by Lindsay Maizland December 5, 2023 Renewing America

Defense & Security
Diplomacy & International Institutions
Energy & Environment
Human Rights
Politics & Government
Social Issues

Myanmar’s Troubled History: Coups, Military Rule, and Ethnic Conflict

Backgrounder by Lindsay Maizland January 31, 2022

Europe & Eurasia
Global Commons
Middle East & North Africa
Sub-Saharan Africa

How New Tobacco Control Laws Could Help Close the Racial Gap on U.S. Cancer

Interactive by Olivia Angelino, Thomas J. Bollyky , Elle Ruggiero and Isabella Turilli February 1, 2023 Global Health Program

Backgrounders
Special Projects

China’s Stockpiling and Mobilization Measures for Competition and Conflict Link

Featuring Zongyuan Zoe Liu via U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission June 13, 2024

Centers & Programs
Books & Reports
Independent Task Force Program
Fellowships

Oil and Petroleum Products

Academic Webinar: The Geopolitics of Oil

Webinar with Carolyn Kissane and Irina A. Faskianos April 12, 2023

State & Local Officials
Religion Leaders
Local Journalists

The Rise in LGBTQ+ Hate and Democratic Backsliding

Event with Graeme Reid, Ari Shaw, Maria Sjödin and Nancy Yao June 4, 2024

Lectureship Series
Webinars & Conference Calls
Member Login

The U.S. Immigration Debate

A migrant boy peers through the border wall near San Diego ahead of the end of Title 42 restrictions.

The United States is home to more foreign-born residents than any other country in the world. In 2021, immigrants composed almost 14 percent of the U.S. population.
Congress has failed to agree on how to address immigration challenges, leaving many policy questions up to the courts and executive branch.
President Joe Biden has reversed many of former President Donald Trump’s restrictive policies, even as he has struggled with a historic influx of migrants.

Introduction

Immigration has been a touchstone of the U.S. political debate for decades, as policymakers have weighed economic, security, and humanitarian concerns. Congress has been unable to reach an agreement on comprehensive immigration reform for years, effectively moving some major policy decisions into the executive and judicial branches of government and fueling debate in the halls of state and municipal governments.

President Donald Trump put the issues back at the center of public debate with his unprecedented efforts to curb immigration and reshape asylum policy. President Joe Biden pledged to reverse Trump’s actions and reform the system, but the end of pandemic-related border restrictions and a historic surge in migration have complicated his plans.

What is the immigrant population in the United States?

United States

Immigration and Migration

Border and Port Security
Donald Trump

Immigrants composed 13.6 percent of the U.S. population in 2021, or about 45 million people out of a total of more than 332 million, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Together, immigrants and their U.S.-born children make up about 27 percent of U.S. inhabitants per the 2022 Current Population Survey, and the Census Bureau has predicted that the total number of immigrants living in the United States will reach 65 million by 2050. Though the share of the population that is foreign born has steadily risen since 1970, when there were fewer than 10 million immigrants in the country, today’s figure is still slightly below the record high of 14.8 percent in 1890.

As of 2021, Mexico was the most common country of origin for U.S. immigrants, with Mexicans constituting 24 percent of the total immigrant population. Other major countries of origin include India (6 percent), China (5 percent), and the Philippines (4 percent).

Undocumented immigration. The undocumented population was estimated to be about eleven million people in 2019; more recent data is not yet available due to difficulty collecting information amid the COVID-19 pandemic. This total represents a slight decrease from the population’s peak before the 2008 economic crisis [PDF], which led some migrants to return to their home countries and discouraged others from coming to the United States. In fiscal year 2022 (FY2022), Customs and Border Protection (CBP) apprehended more than 2.3 million people trying to illegally cross the southern U.S. border, a record high.

Until 2013, almost all of those trying to cross the U.S.-Mexico border were Mexican citizens, and most were individuals seeking work. Between 2013 and 2021, most immigrants came from Asia, particularly China and India. Mexico has since regained its status as the top country of origin, and Central Americans have made up an increasingly larger share of migrants at the southern U.S. border. Generally, they are coming not for work but to make asylum claims, and many of them are unaccompanied children. Some of these immigrants have different legal rights from Mexican nationals in the United States: Under a 2008 anti–human trafficking law, unaccompanied minors from noncontiguous countries have a right to a hearing before being deported to their home countries. The increase in Central American migration has strained the U.S. immigration system. At the end of FY2022, there were 1.9 million cases pending in immigration courts, and by mid-2023, that number had grown to more than 2 million, the most on record.

Though many of the policies that aim to reduce unlawful immigration focus on enforcement at the border, individuals who arrive in the United States legally and overstay their visas comprise a significant portion of the undocumented population. A Center for Migration Studies report found that, between 2010 and 2018, individuals who overstayed their visas far outnumbered those who arrived by crossing the border illegally.

Legal immigration. The United States granted more than 740,000 individuals legal permanent residency in FY2021, down from approximately 1 million two years prior. Over 60 percent of them were admitted on the basis of family reunification. Other categories included: employment-based preferences (26 percent), refugees (5 percent), diversity (2 percent), and asylees (3 percent). In late 2022, more than four million applicants were on the State Department’s waiting list [PDF] for family- and employer-related immigrant visas, nearly a third of whom were from Mexico.

Hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals work legally in the United States under various types of nonimmigrant visas. In FY2022, the United States granted just over 206,000 visas for high-skilled workers [PDF] , known as H1B visas, and more than 298,000 visas for temporary workers in agriculture and other industries, or H2A visas. H1B visas are capped at 85,000 per fiscal year, with exceptions for certain fields .

Immigrants made up 18.1 percent of the U.S. civilian workforce [PDF] in 2022, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, up from 17.4 percent the previous year. Compared to those born in the United States, greater shares of immigrants worked in service fields (21.6 percent of all foreign-born people); production, transportation, and material moving (15.2 percent); and natural resources, construction, and maintenance (13.9 percent). Some researchers estimate that pandemic-related border closures led to a loss of about two million working-age immigrants in 2021.

How do Americans feel about immigration?

A 2022 Gallup poll found that 70 percent of Americans surveyed considered immigration to be good for the United States, a 5 percent decrease from the year prior. At the same time, however, the majority felt that illegal immigration was a “critical” threat to U.S. national security.

According to a separate poll conducted the same year by television network NewsNation and Decision Desk HQ, a website that reports election results, nearly 70 percent of voters surveyed supported a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants already living in the United States.

How has Congress tried to address the issue?

The last push for a major immigration overhaul came in 2013, following a decade in which Congress debated numerous immigration reforms, some considered comprehensive and others piecemeal. (Comprehensive immigration reform refers to omnibus legislation that attempts to address the following issues: demand for high- and low-skilled labor, the legal status of the millions of undocumented immigrants living in the country, border security, and interior enforcement.) The last comprehensive legislation to make it through Congress was under President Ronald Reagan in 1986; it granted legal amnesty to some three million undocumented residents. In 2007, President George W. Bush worked with congressional Democrats to reach a compromise on a new comprehensive bill, but it ultimately failed to win enough support in the Senate.

President Barack Obama pressed hard for a comprehensive bill that would pair a path to legalization for undocumented residents with stronger border security provisions. The Democrat-led Senate passed this legislation in 2013, but the bill stalled in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.

What was the Obama administration’s approach?

With legislation thwarted, Obama took several executive actions to provide temporary legal protections for undocumented immigrants. In 2012, his administration began a program known as DACA, or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals , which offered renewable, two-year deportation deferrals and work permits to undocumented immigrants who had arrived in the United States as children and had no criminal records.

Obama characterized the move as a “ stopgap measure ” and urged Congress to pass the DREAM Act , or Development Relief and Education for Alien Minors—legislation first introduced in 2001 that would have benefited many of the same people. Since then, more than 830,000 people have participated in DACA, and it’s estimated that almost 1.2 million more were eligible as of 2022. Obama attempted to extend similar benefits to undocumented parents of U.S. citizens and permanent residents through a program known as Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA), but the Supreme Court effectively killed it in 2016.

In 2014, Obama also grappled with a surge of more than sixty thousand unaccompanied minors at the southern border, mostly from Central America. He directed $750 million in aid to the region to improve conditions there. Meanwhile, his administration faced criticism for its enforcement policies, including detaining children in poor conditions and overseeing the deportation of more people— approximately three million —than either the Bill Clinton or George W. Bush administrations had.

What was the Trump administration’s approach?

Immigration was a signature issue for Trump and a perpetual source of controversy during his term. Blaming previous administrations for failing to secure the southern border, he advocated for sharply reducing both legal and illegal immigration. He took several steps, many through executive action, to reshape asylum, deportation, and border policy.

Border security and enforcement . Trump vowed to expand the wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, which he claimed would stop drugs and gangs from entering the country. He was unsuccessful in securing funding from Congress, leading to a federal government shutdown in 2019 and a subsequent declaration of a national emergency , which allowed him to divert funds to build the wall. Approximately 450 miles of border wall were built before the Biden administration halted construction in January 2022.

Other enforcement measures under Trump included increasing border personnel; sending thousands of active-duty troops to the border; threatening Mexico with tariffs if it did not increase its own border enforcement; and attempting to cut federal funding to so-called sanctuary cities, or jurisdictions that refuse to enforce federal immigration directives.

Trump also ratcheted up previous administrations’ deterrence efforts. He implemented a zero-tolerance policy, under which authorities arrested and prosecuted everyone caught crossing the southern border without authorization. This caused thousands of family separations , since by law children must be held apart from parents facing criminal prosecution. (Presidents Bush and Obama likewise faced criticism for child detention, but they did not make separations a matter of policy.)

DACA . Trump sought to end DACA, calling it unconstitutional. The move spurred multiple legal challenges and, in June 2020, the Supreme Court blocked Trump’s plan . A December 2020 federal court ruling forced the Trump administration to resume accepting new applicants.

Travel bans and refugee cap . Trump aimed to sharply reduce the number of refugees and other immigrants granted legal entry into the United States. In 2017, he instituted a ban on immigration and travel from several Muslim-majority countries, including Iran, Somalia, and Yemen. The original order was rejected by the courts, but the Supreme Court upheld a more limited version. Trump also lowered the cap on the number of refugees the United States accepts each year to less than fifteen thousand for FY2021—the lowest figure in the history of the U.S. refugee program . Additionally, he ended temporary protected status (TPS)—a program that allows migrants from certain crisis-stricken nations to live and work in the United States for a limited period—for several countries.

Asylum policy . Trump implemented new restrictions on asylum seekers. In 2018, the administration began “metering” asylum applications, or only accepting a limited number [PDF] each day. The next year, it launched the Migrant Protection Protocols , also known as the “Remain in Mexico” program, which required asylum seekers to wait in Mexico while their cases were processed in U.S. courts. At the same time, it sought “safe third country” agreements with several Latin American countries, which would have allowed U.S. authorities to send asylum seekers who traveled through those countries back there. Only an agreement with Guatemala was implemented before that country terminated it in 2021.

Comprehensive reform effort . Like his immediate predecessors, Trump proposed broad immigration reform . His would have created a merit-based system to replace the current one, which prioritizes family reunification. It also included an expansion of the border wall and an employment verification system known as E-Verify, but it did not address the status of current undocumented residents. However, the proposal faced strong opposition in Congress and made little headway.

How did the COVID-19 pandemic alter immigration policy?

The Trump administration further restricted immigration amid the pandemic by: curbing travel to the United States, effectively halting asylum procedures , turning away most migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border, and suspending the processing of many foreign worker visas and green cards. He also invoked Title 42, a rarely used public health law, to deny asylum on pandemic-related grounds.

The administration framed these changes as necessary to limit the risk of contagion and protect American jobs, but critics accused Trump of using the public health crisis to further his anti-immigration agenda. Some argued that the detention and deportation of migrants during the pandemic fueled the virus’s spread .

What has been Biden’s approach?

Biden campaigned on overturning almost all of Trump’s immigration policies. In its first few months, his administration took dozens of actions, including increasing the number of visas issued to immigrants and ending the controversial Title 42 border restrictions, though it did initially maintain many pandemic-related restrictions. But many of his efforts have been challenged by a historic influx of migrants at the southern U.S. border.

Biden’s steps to undo Trump-era policies have included reducing immigration enforcement inside the United States, ending the travel bans, lifting the suspension of green card processing, and halting construction of the U.S.-Mexico border wall. His administration has also expanded TPS protections, canceled safe third country agreements, and raised the refugee cap to 125,000 for fiscal years 2022 and 2023. Additionally, it has launched efforts to accelerate the reunification of migrant families, including by reinstating the Central American Minors (CAM) program, which reunites children in the so-called Northern Triangle countries with their parents in the United States, and creating a family-reunification task force.

Daily News Brief

A summary of global news developments with cfr analysis delivered to your inbox each morning. weekdays., the world this week, a weekly digest of the latest from cfr on the biggest foreign policy stories of the week, featuring briefs, opinions, and explainers. every friday., think global health.

A curation of original analyses, data visualizations, and commentaries, examining the debates and efforts to improve health worldwide. Weekly.

However, Biden has faced roadblocks. His multiple attempts to terminate the Remain in Mexico program were challenged by several states and later blocked by the Supreme Court; the administration continues to seek court approval to legally end the program. And amid ongoing legal challenges to DACA, the Department of Homeland Security continues to accept and process renewal requests .

Still, the spike in migration threatens Biden’s immigration reform plans. After a pandemic-related drop, border apprehensions spiked to more than 2.3 million in FY2022, the highest level on record. The surge in migrants, paired with the end of Title 42, prompted the administration to implement new border restrictions in April 2023; since then, illegal crossings have slowed . At the same time, Biden has faced criticism over reports that he is considering reviving the practice of detaining migrant families. The administration has also sought to address the drivers of migration from Central America, pledging $4 billion to countries in the region, though analysts say the four-year initiative has made little progress [PDF]. Similarly, Biden has worked with regional leaders to increase aid to refugee populations, improve border management, and better coordinate emergency responses.

Meanwhile, Biden’s own comprehensive immigration bill remains stalled in Congress. Other efforts to change border and immigration policy face similar roadblocks, and some experts say reform efforts will be even more contentious ahead of the U.S. presidential election in 2024.

How are state and local authorities handling these issues?

States vary widely in how they treat unauthorized immigrants. Some, including California and Massachusetts, allow undocumented immigrants to apply for drivers’ licenses, receive in-state tuition at universities, and obtain other benefits. At the other end of the spectrum are states such as Texas, where the legislature passed a law [PDF] mandating that local governments and law enforcement agencies cooperate with federal immigration officers.

The federal government is generally responsible for enforcing immigration laws, but it delegates some immigration-related duties to state and local law enforcement. However, the degree to which local officials are obliged to cooperate with federal authorities is a subject of intense debate. As of 2019, almost one-quarter of U.S. counties limit their cooperation with ICE, according to the Immigrant Legal Resource Center.

The degree to which local officials are obliged to cooperate with federal authorities is a subject of intense debate.

President Trump decried these sanctuary jurisdictions and reinstated a controversial Obama-era program known as Secure Communities, in which the FBI shares fingerprints of suspects collected by state and local law enforcement with federal immigration authorities. Under the program, state and local agencies also hand over individuals presumed to be in the country illegally. Biden terminated the program shortly after taking office.

A range of court rulings during the Trump era increased pressure on states. In 2018, the Justice Department launched a lawsuit against California over sanctuary jurisdictions, which was ultimately dismissed by the Supreme Court. It filed similar suits against New Jersey and Washington, and a federal court ruled in 2020 that the Trump administration could withhold federal funding from sanctuary jurisdictions, including New York City. Under Biden, the Justice Department has reversed this stance, leading the Supreme Court to dismiss several pending cases .

Trump’s border security policies prompted differing local reactions. After Trump called on states to deploy National Guard contingents to the southern border, several governors refused. Others, including Texas’s Greg Abbott, embraced Trump’s views and have continued to expand the border wall .

Recommended Resources

For Time magazine, John Austin of the Michigan Economic Center and former Michigan state legislator Steve Tobocman lay out seven ways to fix the U.S. immigration system .

On this episode of The President’s Inbox , CFR’s Edward Alden discusses U.S. immigration policy and the situation at the southern border .

The Migration Policy Institute’s Muzaffar Chishti and Kathleen Bush-Joseph look at Biden’s immigration record halfway through his term.

This CFR Backgrounder explains who is responsible for securing the U.S. border.

This timeline traces changes to U.S. postwar immigration policy.

For Foreign Affairs , Stanford University’s Ana Raquel Minian details the history of U.S. immigration enforcement , with a focus on U.S. policy under Presidents Trump and Biden.

Central America

Emily Lieberman, Nathalie Bussemaker, Samuel Parmer, and Danielle Renwick contributed to this Backgrounder. Will Merrow created the graphics.

How many immigrants are in the U.S.?
What has Congress done?
What was Obama’s approach?
What was Trump’s approach?
What is Biden’s approach?
What’s happening at the state and local levels?

More From Renewing America

Higher Education Webinar: Visa Challenges and Fall International Student Enrollment

Webinar with Adam Julian and Irina A. Faskianos June 22, 2021 Renewing America

More Lost Chances on Immigration Reform Hurt the U.S. Economy

Blog Post by Edward Alden and Tess Turner December 22, 2022 Renewing America

The Southern Border Poses Terrorism Risks. Homegrown Threats Still Loom Larger.

Blog Post by Jacob Ware September 26, 2023 Renewing America

Essay on Immigration Causes And Effects

Students are often asked to write an essay on Immigration Causes And Effects in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Immigration Causes And Effects

Why people move.

People move from one country to another for many reasons. Some look for better jobs to earn more money. Others want to be safe if their home country is at war or has other dangers. Many are drawn to places with better schools and hospitals. Families often move to be closer to relatives who live far away.

Good Things from Immigration

Challenges of immigration.

Sometimes, when many people move to a new place, it can be hard for that place. Schools and hospitals may become too crowded. Finding a home can be harder, and wages might go down if there are too many workers. Some people worry about their culture changing too much.

Immigration is when people move to a new country. It can help by bringing new ideas and helping the economy. But it can also create challenges like crowded schools and lower wages. It’s important to find a balance that helps everyone.

250 Words Essay on Immigration Causes And Effects

Why people move to new places, looking for work.

One big reason for immigration is to find work. In some countries, jobs are hard to find, and the pay is very low. Other countries have lots of jobs that pay more money. People go to these places so they can make a better living and help their families.

Running from Trouble

Sometimes, people leave their homes because it’s not safe. Wars, crime, or leaders who treat people unfairly can make life very hard. These people move to other countries to find peace and safety.

Joining Family

Often, people will move to be with family members who already live in a new country. They might feel lonely or want to be close to their loved ones.

Changes in the New Place

When people move to a new country, it can change that place. The new people can help the economy by working and buying things. They can also bring new foods, music, and ideas which make the culture richer.

But, immigration can also bring challenges. Sometimes there are not enough jobs for everyone, and this can make people unhappy. Also, if too many people come too quickly, it can be hard for the new country to handle.

500 Words Essay on Immigration Causes And Effects

People move from one country to another for many reasons. Some people leave their homes to find work. They might not have a job, or they might want a better job that pays more money. Other people move because they want to be safe. There might be fighting or danger in their country, and they need to go somewhere peaceful. Some parents move because they want their kids to go to good schools and have a better life. Also, some people just want to live in a new place where the weather is nicer or the cities are cleaner.

Good Things That Happen Because of Immigration

When people move to a new country, they bring their cooking, music, and stories with them. This makes the new place more interesting and fun because there are more different things to see and learn. Immigrants also work hard. They can start new businesses, like restaurants or shops, which helps the economy. This means there’s more money for the country and jobs for people. Immigrants might also do jobs that are very important but hard to find workers for. Because they help the country in these ways, the places they move to can become richer and better for everyone.

Challenges People Face When They Move

Moving to a new country can be tough. Sometimes, people in the new place are not friendly to immigrants. They might treat them badly or unfairly. Immigrants can feel lonely because they miss their old home, friends, and family. Learning a new language is hard, too. If you can’t speak the language well, it’s difficult to find a job or understand what’s happening around you. Kids might find it hard to fit in at school if they’re different from the other children.

Problems in the Original and New Countries

Immigration is when people move from one country to another. There are many reasons why they do this, like finding work or being safe. Immigration can make the new place better because it brings different cultures and helps the economy. But it can also be hard for the immigrants and cause problems in both the old and new countries. It’s important to remember that immigrants are just people trying to make a better life for themselves and their families. By understanding why people move and what happens when they do, we can help everyone get along and make our communities stronger.

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

New name. Same mission.

LIRS is now Global Refuge .

Welcoming newcomers since 1939.

The browser you are using is not supported. Please consider using a modern browser .

News // Immigration and Asylum

Why do People Immigrate? – The Different Causes of Immigration

X (formerly Twitter)
Copy to Clipboard Copied!

Global Refuge Staff

July 14, 2021

Immigration — and its dynamic effect on global development — has been the subject of many reports, studies, and debates. Its economic implications have shaped global industries for years and are changing the world for the better.

Global migration is a large-scale topic. Currently, there are an estimated 272 million international migrants, which account for 3.5% of the world’s population. While the percentage may seem relatively low, the number of migrants already surpasses some projections for 2050.

In a 2020 report by United Nations (UN), it was revealed that one in every 30 people is an international migrant. Europe and Asia alone host around 82 to 84 million immigrants. These regions were followed by North America, which houses almost 52 million international migrants.

Every year, the percentage of international citizens traversing borders increases and drastically impacts a country’s population size, cultural diversity, and economic productivity.

With the constant wave of settlers and refugees around the world today, a significant question arises — what exactly are the causes of immigration?

The Roots of Immigration

Immigration, in its simplest definition, is the movement of people from one place or country into another one. It is a simple yet fundamental aspect of human history.

Immigration is a concept that pre-dates existing laws. Long ago, nomadic tribes traveled from place to place to find fresh and fertile lands, pastures for their livestock, and rich areas for hunting and fishing.

In modern times, immigration still continues all over the world. In the past decade , the demographic composition of people traversing borders has significantly changed. This can be attributed to a wide range of factors that we can categorize into two groups — push and pull factors.

It is essential to examine these factors in order to perfectly understand the increase of global migration throughout the years.

Push and Pull Factors

To reach well-developed immigration and foreign policy solutions, it is important to recognize the driving factors that prompt individuals to migrate.

People around the globe immigrate for a wide array of reasons that we conceptualize as “push” and “pull” factors.

Push factors are reasons that compel or push people to leave the area of where they reside and settle someplace else. Common factors can include armed conflict, disaster exposure, gender inequality, lack of job opportunities, political corruption, and lack of access to competent healthcare and education. In simple terms, push factors are negative reasons that prompt individuals to leave.

Pull factors are, on the other hand, the exact opposite of push factors. They attract or pull people to move and settle in a particular area. Common pull factors may include better work opportunities, greater security, and access to adequate healthcare and education. Simply put, pull factors are positive reasons that prompt individuals to move.

Immigration, however, is not as simple as being pulled and pushed for merely a few reasons. The push and pull framework is a combination of factors that encourage a person to leave a place of origin and factors that draw a person to a destination.

Push and pull factors are never the same for everyone, and the reasons for immigration are unique to each individual.

However, even though factors can change depending on age, gender, health, social class, and ethnicity, a push or pull factor may describe a pattern that can be attributed to many different reasons.

Quality of Life Factors

Conditions that influence an individual’s quality of life vary from person to person, but may be the leading factors leading to immigration. These can include labor standards, poverty, and the overall state of a country to provide a quality life.

In most cases, people are pulled by work opportunities in a certain area which aren’t available in their place of origin. Data analysis has even shown that there is an increase in the immigrant’s quality of life due to migration that is reflected in financial status and job satisfaction.

People from places like Syria (which has a high unemployment rate of 50%) often immigrate to escape poverty and lack of work opportunities. Numerous developed countries, including the United States, provide a network or social platform that proves to be advantageous for people hailing from less developed countries.

Immigrant workers (people who migrate to pursue work) represent nearly two-thirds of the international migrants in 2017 — standing at roughly 164 million worldwide.

Another large factor involving an individual’s quality of life is access to a proper education and to medical services that are otherwise inaccessible in their country.

War-Torn Country Factors

A major socio-political factor pushing individuals to leave their place of origin is the presence of war and conflict.

Oppression because of one’s ethnicity, religion, gender, race, and culture poses a significant risk to quality of life, which increases the odds of an individual settling elsewhere.

People fleeing conflict zones, human rights violations, and government persecution are asylum seekers that desire international protection and a safer region. Individuals who are forcibly displaced because of external factors, such as war, are refugees.

In recent times, a large number of people have fled to Europe to escape conflict, persecution, and terror in their homeland. Over a quarter of asylum seekers from Syria were granted protection status, with those from Afghanistan and Iraq following respectively.

Environmental Factors

Natural disasters and climate change are environmental factors that disproportionately affect impoverished families, especially in less developed countries.

Individuals that experience regular occurrences of floods, hurricanes, and earthquakes are most likely to immigrate. Additionally, climate change is expected to worsen weather events, leading to an increase in immigration flow.

Environmental immigrants are obliged to leave their point of origin, be it temporarily or permanently, and either move within their country or abroad to avoid the adversities of nature.

According to the United Nations Environment Programme ’s statement on climate change and immigration, these are the three environmental factors that can affect immigration in a significant way:

Effects of Warming: Constant warming in certain areas will slowly bring down agricultural productivity which may lead to a lack of fertile soil and clean water.
Increase in Extreme Weather Events: Extreme weather events caused by the change in climate, such as violent storms and resulting flash floods, may displace millions of people.
Rising of Sea Level: The constant sea level rise poses an extreme environmental danger to low-lying coastal areas and may result in the permanent displacement of more than a million individuals.

Why Do People Immigrate to the US?

According to the UN’s World Migration Report of 2020 , the United States of America has been the primary destination for foreign migrants since 1970.

In less than 50 years, the number of foreign-born residents of the country has more than quadrupled — from less than 12 million to close to 51 million.

The reasons why so many people immigrate to the US have changed throughout the years, but the country’s core pull factors are what make it the leading destination for immigration.

The United States ranks as one of the most desirable countries to immigrate to because of the better living conditions provided.

The country has an active economy with a wide array of work opportunities for everyone. Wages are higher than most countries, with a relatively low cost of living. Individuals coming from a more collective society prefer American individualistic values.

People that are employed in the United States who have long-distance families are great examples of what compels families to immigrate. When these people gain their green cards, they want their children to move from their native country to the United States to be with them.

Moreover, the United States has access to healthcare and quality education that is not available in many countries.

The Impacts of Immigration

As the number of immigrants increases by the year, the patterns and factors involved become harder to analyze and evaluate. With the dynamic change and demands that immigration brings, it is important to take note of its impacts.

So what exactly are the causes and effects of immigration?

Economic Output Growth: Net immigration can lead to an increase in the labor force and productive capacity of the economy. When this happens, there is an increase in living standards with a decline in the dependency ratio . Immigration leads to stronger economic growth and, as a result, higher tax revenues, allowing for more national spending options.
Better Workforce: Because of immigration, the economy of certain countries, like the UK , attracts highly skilled professionals that fill job vacancies, which contributes even more to higher tax revenues. This is due to the fact that immigrants are more likely to have higher educational and skill levels.
A Flexible Labor Market: Immigrants move to economies when the wages are high, which increases labor demands. The immigrants’ high mobility keeps a booming economy from overheating by providing labor to meet expanding demand.
Filling In for Undesirable Job Opportunities: Due to low earnings or the lack of prestige associated with some positions, native-born individuals have a tough time filling them. Businesses and employers who rely on flexible labor to fill job vacancies profit from immigration. Furthermore, when low-skilled positions are filled by migrants, native-born people can seek higher-skilled work elsewhere.

A growing scarcity of workers is widely acknowledged as one of the world’s most critically significant barriers to sustained economic growth amidst increasingly tight labor markets.

Immigration, without fail, is the reason behind the development and prosperity of most businesses and fills the increasing shortage of workers in labor markets.

There are numerous drivers behind an individual’s immigration, and such a complex process needs good research, political will, and most importantly, collective action from the citizens.

Immigrants are breathing new life into rural and urban communities, shaping labor markets, and building a dynamic society — all of which begins with a simple “push” and “pull”.

Immigration and Asylum

Press Release

June 18, 2024

Global Refuge Commends Executive Order Protecting Certain Immigrant Families

Washington, D.C. – The Biden administration announced today an executive order that will protect certain immigrant spouses and children of U.S. citizens without status currently living in the United States from being removed from the country.

June 4, 2024

Biden administration announces additional asylum restrictions

The Biden administration announced today a proclamation to further restrict asylum eligibility at the southern border for people who cross between official U.S. ports of entry.

May 23, 2024

U.S. Senate renews push for immigration reform

The United States Senate is poised to vote on immigration legislation this Thursday in an effort to revive reforms previously negotiated by Democratic and Republican senators.

May 15, 2024

Empowering our new neighbors on the journey to healing

Global Refuge supports refugee and immigrant mental health through holistic programming.

News · Empowering Refugees

May 14, 2024

Breaking Barriers to Mental Healthcare

In celebration of Mental Health Awareness Month this May, we are spotlighting Margie Hartman LMSW, one of our dedicated clinicians who play a vital role in Global Refuge’s Mental Health Services program.

News · Foster Care

Looking Back on 2023

December 20th

News · Immigration and Asylum

Unsung Heroes: Immigrants in the U.S. Military

November 10th

Celebrating Hispanic Culture Means Recognizing the Breadth of the Hispanic Immigrant Experience in the U.S.  

October 16th

Causes and Effects of Illegal Immigration

When you move across borders from your country to another country, you need to have certain legal documents and follow defined immigration laws of the destination country.

If you move into the country without the necessary legal documents or violates the immigration laws, then you will have committed illegal immigration. You will be termed as an illegal migrant.

So, Illegal immigration is the movement of foreign nationals into a country without requisite legal documents or in any way that flouts the destination country’s immigration laws.

Illegal immigration can occur for a number of reasons, and its effects are wide-ranging. In this article, we explore the various causes of illegal immigration and also look at some of its major impacts .

Let’s dive in.

Causes of Illegal Immigration

There are numerous reasons as to why people move to foreign countries without following the proper channels, these are the most common reasons:

1. Trade Liberalization

Lately, developing countries have embraced measures to liberalize trade in the spirit of pursuing the benefits of globalization.

However, rapid opening of domestic markets could result in the displacement of large numbers of unskilled workers, who are highly likely to seek employment and better living standards through illegal immigration.

Past events have shown that increases in poverty, particularly when associated with ongoing crises, can raise the likelihood of illegal immigration.

A good example is the 1994 economic crisis after the establishment of the North American Free Trade Agreement ( NAFTA ). This crisis was associated with pervasive poverty and a lower valuation for the Mexican peso against the U.S. dollar.

The economic crisis saw the number of illegal Mexican migrants in the U.S. increase annually from the mid-1990’s to the mid-2000’s. Natural disasters and overpopulation are other common causes of poverty-driven illegal immigration.

3. Family Reunification

You could be a legal resident or naturalized citizen of a country and you are looking to bring your loved ones into the country legally.

In this case, you may need to apply for reunification visas. However, these visas are normally limited in number and subject to annual quotas. Consequently, your loved ones may be forced to enter the destination country illegally to be reunited with you.

4. Overpopulation

Overpopulation occurs when population growth outstrips the carrying capacity of an area. Human population explosions can lead to problems such as water shortages , pollution , and poverty. These problems may cause people to flee their homeland to foreign countries illegally.

For example, most illegal immigrants coming to the U.S. are from Mexico. Mexico has a poor economy and the drug cartels in the country are known to kill at least 80,000 people every year.

Conversely, the U.S. enjoys a relatively more stable economy and a safe environment. That is what attracts the Mexicans.

5. Wars and Asylum

Illegal immigration could be caused by the need to flee from a war-torn or repressive country. However, if you escape such a situation, you will not be termed as an undocumented or illegal migrant in most countries.

If you apply for asylum in the destination country and are granted refugee status you will have the right to stay permanently. If the country denies you any kind of legal protection statues, then you may be forced to leave the country.

Another option is to stay as an illegal migrant. And that’s how illegal immigration comes in. Let’s now look at the effects of illegal immigration

Effects of Illegal Immigration

The effects of illegal immigration may come out as positive or negative depending on how you look at them. Here are some of the major effects:

1. A strain on Public Utilities

Illegal immigrants normally use the public services such as health facilities, public schools, transportation, parks and every other public utility you can think of. However, they don’t pay taxes for the building and maintenance of these utilities.

2. Ready Supply of Cheap Labor

Illegal immigrants are normally desperate for a source of income and don’t mind working for less pay. Hence, employers in the destination country don’t have to hire workers whom they must pay the standard rates.

Moreover, illegal workers can take up just about any kind of work as long it guarantees a steady income. It doesn’t matter how hard or hazardous it is.

Conversely, citizens of most destination countries, especially the U.S., are normally choosy. They also don’t hesitate to file lawsuits or worker’s compensation in case of an injury or perceived injustice. Illegal immigrants can’t sue and hardly complain about work-related issues.

3. Loss of Jobs for Citizens

In light of the fact that illegal immigrants are usually ready to work on lowest pay, they take away jobs meant for locals. You should also be alive to the fact that all natives deserve the jobs before legal or undocumented immigrants.

While employers are normally happy about this situation, it can be frustrating to citizens who can’t find reasonably paying jobs.

4. Loss of Tax Revenue

Employing illegal immigrants means the employer gets away without paying requisite taxes. This leads to significant savings. And consumers could end up enjoying cheaper products and services, thanks to lowers costs of production.

That sounds like a positive impact. However, the loss of tax revenue could undermine government programs.

Without the tax money that employers should remit for jobs held by illegal immigrants, government projects that are beneficial to all of us may end up stalling. That hurts everyone to benefit a few.

5. Injury and Illness

The pursuit of better quality life is the primary cause of illegal immigration. This is mostly achieved through employment in the destination country. And the desperation for employment drives illegal migrants to work in dangerous industries such as construction and agriculture.

Moreover, illegal workers have limited ability to uphold safety at work, thanks to the complex web of consequences that shroud illegal migrant status.

Besides the physical dangers that illegal immigrants are exposed to at work, the choice to move across borders in search of employment normally entails work-related lifestyle factors that affect the physical, social, and mental well-being of immigrants and their loved ones.

6. Rise in Criminal and Terrorist Activities

While most of the illegal immigrants are only looking for employment opportunities, there is a good number among them that are involved in criminal activities.

The MS-13 gang , which comprised of Central American immigrants, is a good example of illegal immigrant turned criminals. In fact, it has been christened “the most dangerous gang in the world.”

Without proper monitoring of those who are entering a country illegally, criminals and terrorists could also find their way into the country. This creates danger for law-abiding residents. Moreover, it is not easy to track and prosecute illegal criminals.

7. Reduced Motivation for Legal Immigration

Many people are keen to follow the right procedures for immigration. However, they could decide to take shortcuts if they are convinced that it is possible, and perhaps even more rewarding, to get into the country illegally.

Bottom Line

Foreign nationals require permission from the destination country before they can come in and stay. Violation of the country’s defined immigration laws would render them illegal migrants. Illegal immigration is caused by many factors, including poverty, overpopulation, trade liberalization, and wars in countries of origin. It can have serious impacts on the economy of the destination country as well as on the lives of the illegal migrants themselves.

Photo by: StockSnap

I am Sonia Madaan, a mother with a passion for science, computing, and environmental issues. Motivated by my passion and education, I started a website to spread awareness about climate change and its causes, like rising greenhouse gas levels. You can read more about me here .

What are Causes and Effects of Environmental Degradation?

Environmental degradation comes about due to erosion and decline of the quality of the natural environment. It is caused directly or indirectly by anthropogenic activities that extract various environmental resources at a faster rate than they are replaced, and thus depleting them. On this regard, degradation means damage or reduction in quality of environmental features,…

Natural and Man-Made Causes of Global Warming

Global warming is the most common term that comes up when we talk about climate change or pollution. Global warming is the result of increase in the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. As we consume more fossil fuels, cut down trees, use more toxic fertilizers in the agriculture, and multiply human population, we…

Causes, Effects and Solutions to Water Scarcity

Water scarcity or water crisis or water shortage is the deficiency of adequate water resources that can meet the water demands for a particular region. Whenever there is a lack of access to potable and fresh water for drinking and sanitation, the situation means that the water is scarce. Water scarcity thus pertains to a…

What is Overpopulation and Problems of Overpopulation?

Overpopulation is the state whereby the human population rises to an extent exceeding the carrying capacity of the ecological setting. In an overpopulated environment, the numbers of people might be more than the available essential materials for survival such as transport, water, shelter, food or social amenities. This regularly contributes to environmental deterioration, worsening in…

What is Ecological Footprint and Ways to Reduce it

Ecological footprint is a terminology that attempts to gauge the extent of human impact on the earth’s ecosystems. There are many ways humans deplete environment capital just from our basic lifestyles to resource exploitation, environmental degradation, and pollution. As our consumption increases due to overpopulation, it is important for us to measure nature’s capacity to…

What are Natural Resources, Types and Threats to Natural Resources

Natural resources refer to the things that exist freely in nature for human use and don’t necessarily need the action of mankind for their generation or production. The key aspect of natural resources is that they dictate the survival of humans and other life forms on earth. These resources include land, rocks, forests (vegetation), water…

Factor that Cause Immigration Cause and Effect Essay

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

Economic pressures are the primary reason for international migration. Citizens of developing countries leave their nations in order to find decent wages and work in foreign countries. The United Nations estimates that slightly over half a billion employed people survive on less than a dollar a day; most of these workers are trapped in the cycle of poverty. Others are unemployed and willing to do anything to get a reasonable job. Consequently, many of these individuals will leave their countries for the promise of better pay in foreign nations.

Their families expect them to send remittances that boost their wellbeing. A case in point is the issue of US migrant workers from Latin America. Almost 10% of the GDP in the Latin American region comes from US immigrant workers. Sometimes immigrants subject themselves to great risk when they move to developed nations, but this risk is often worth it. A Haitian worker can earn his annual salary in one week if he relocated to the US, even if he is unskilled and undocumented.

Receiving countries also experience economic pressure to host immigrants. Many developed nations have aging populations that cannot be adequately replaced after retirement. Consequently, a gap is created in the workforce that can only be replaced by external workers. Some countries depend on immigrant workers to meet their labor needs. Furthermore, certain low-skill jobs may have very few prospects in economically prosperous nations. Immigrants are willing to do them, and will be content with low pay for their service. As a result, economic gaps in rich nations necessitate replacement workers from the international community.

The second most important factor is cultural perceptions people in developing countries have about immigrations and First world immigrant receiving countries. If developed nations have a negative cultural perception about a certain group, they could affect political decisions and hence immigration policies.

A case in point was the case of South African citizens who protested and attacked foreign nationals from other African nations. The overall perception was that these immigrants were coming to use their resources. Immigrants from other parts of the world were not targeted regardless of the existence of freeloaders amongst them too. The xenophobic attacks in South Africa illustrate how cultural perceptions have an important role to play in determination of migration patterns.

Cultural perceptions about a certain group often cause politicians to use them as scapegoats for a country’s own problems. For instance, they may claim that their country is being attacked or under threat from a large group of immigrants. These sentiments fuel stereotypical perceptions about that particular group and pressure legislators to make laws that disfavor members of the group.

In the mid 1960s, many Indian immigrants entered the United Kingdom and set up small shops and businesses there. Their entry sparked off a lot of outrage from locals who felt that their culture was too alien from theirs. They despised their business practices and claimed that the UK were going back to their past. A lot of those perceptions prevented more Indian immigrants from entering the country as they feared for their safety or their chances of success.

Conversely developing nations perceive first world countries as accommodating and full of great promise. Many people think that living in the US is easy because it is multicultural and open to change. Such perceptions have cause immigrants to target the country and many others like it.

Economic Factors and International Migration
Immigration's Influence on the USA
Immigration and Its Effects to the Middle East
Are negative public opinion toward immigrants is justified?
Positive Economic Consequences of Immigration vs. Negative Socioeconomic Consequences of Unskilled Immigrants
The Issue of Illegal Immigration
Americanization
Coming to America: An Exploration of Immigration
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, November 6). Factor that Cause Immigration. https://ivypanda.com/essays/factor-that-cause-immigration/

"Factor that Cause Immigration." IvyPanda , 6 Nov. 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/factor-that-cause-immigration/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'Factor that Cause Immigration'. 6 November.

IvyPanda . 2018. "Factor that Cause Immigration." November 6, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/factor-that-cause-immigration/.

1. IvyPanda . "Factor that Cause Immigration." November 6, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/factor-that-cause-immigration/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Factor that Cause Immigration." November 6, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/factor-that-cause-immigration/.

Skip to main content
Skip to secondary menu
Skip to primary sidebar
Skip to footer

Study Today

Largest Compilation of Structured Essays and Exams

Essay on Immigration | Causes & Effects

December 4, 2017 by Study Mentor Leave a Comment

Table of Contents

What do you mean by immigration?

Immigration refers to the movement in which people from one country move to another country for various reasons. They go to another country where they do not have the right to citizenship. This means that they are not the natives of that country.

They move to a new country so that they can settle there, become the citizens of that country, be a worker there and many other reasons. In the history we can see that even animals have moved to another place along with the humans on the early age.

The terms migration, immigration and emigration revolve around the same thing but have different meanings. There has been an increase in the count of people involved in immigration. US has been the destination of most immigrants. Mostly these immigrants have come from Europe or Asia.

The factors which encourage immigration come under two categories. These two categories are known as push and pull factors. From the terms itself, it can be easily understood what they mean. The push factors mean the people are going away from their place to another because of these factors.

These factors may be like low wage, unemployment, illegal activities, oppression, no technology, improper facilities of life and many other factors. Due to factors like these people leave their country. While the pull factors are the ones which bring people towards them.

These countries may have more facilities than the people’s own country. The country might have advanced facilities and technology. Even though these factors may affect a person’s decision to move to another place, there may be many barriers which a person has to face while moving.

These can be legal and political problems which one has to face. Moreover, a person will take time to get habituated with the new place.

Reasons responsible for immigration

Immigration takes place because of the push and pull factors. They are the positive and negative factors respectively. Immigration has been taking place from the time human first came on this planet. During that time people used to migrate in search of food and new places.

After this they wanted better place like for example better lands for settlement and cultivation. After this they started to move to another place for better facilities of their life. In order to have a proper happy life they have been moving from one place to another.

Sometimes people even move to other places due to natural disasters. They may not feel safe because these natural disasters. That is why for their safety they shift to another place. Very often some of the countries face a lot of political and religious problems.

In order to be free from all these problems they decide to shift to another place. Mostly the young and middle adulthood are the ones who are the subject of immigration. They want to get better jobs, earning opportunities and good life. They move to such a place where they think their life will be stable and they will get all the facilities necessary for their life.

How does immigration affect the society and economy ?

Immigration affects the society and economy. It has both positive and negative impacts. When the people move to another country, they are referred there as immigrants. The citizens of that country feel that these immigrants are a burden for them.

This is because these new people in their country can take away their job opportunities and other facilities. According to them these immigrants act as a threat to them. But due to immigration there is economic growth, existence of dynamic and variety society and also the skills for various types of work is met.

When people with enough skills move to another country, that particular country gets a benefit because of them. Due to the payment of the taxes by the immigrants, there is increase in the collection of taxes by the government for their country. The immigrants are always ready to pay these taxes to get many services benefits in return. There is an increase in the different workplace as well.

More people are there for a particular job. This helps to increase the production in a short period of time. The economic growth of the country will increase if there are more immigrants. But if that country has problems in its borders and there are problems for outsiders to enter that country, there will not be so much of economic growth there.

Moreover, the country from where these people are shifting incurs loss in all areas. There is a fall in the economic growth and workforce diversity as well. But when people from low productivity areas shift to the areas which have high productivity the overall impact is a positive one for both the countries.

Most often the countries where these immigrants shift get all the benefits. When people who possess a lot of skills shift to another country, there is a variety in the production of goods in that country. This variety of production will satisfy the citizens of that country.

Moreover, people who have good education qualification and work experience get the best jobs of the country. But it does not mean that the other immigrants do not get jobs. Even they get jobs but that is according to their qualification and work experience.

When the immigrants start working in a new place, they are not paid in a high amount. As the different workplaces are not spending so much on labor for the various types of work, they start to reduce the price of the goods. This acts as a benefit for the consumers. But when people shift to another country because of easily accessible facilities, that country faces problems in providing services to the public.

The ability to give service and support the people of the country reduces. Moreover, when the society becomes heterogeneous because of immigrants there might be a variety of goods for the people. But this leads to a fall in the production of the public goods of that particular country.

But despite the advantages and disadvantages of immigration, people will not stop from moving to a new place. This is a continuous cycle. Every single day at least one person shifts to a new place. This process of immigration will not be stopping ever. No matter how many problems are there with immigration still this process will continue.

What is the difference between immigration, emigration and migration?

People often confuse what are immigration, emigration and migration. But there is more confusion between immigration and emigration. Both these words have a very similar meaning. This is the reason why people make mistakes while using these words. But before moving into immigration and emigration, it is important to know what migration is. Migration means to move from one place to another in order to settle there.

Migration is the bigger term to define immigration and emigration. Immigrate means a person is entering to a new country while emigrate means a person is leaving country. Immigration can also be referred as inward migration and emigration can be known as outward migration. In a simpler way to explain this, immigration means “in” and emigration means “out”.

A person can be called as immigrant and emigrant at the same time. This because when he leaves his country he will be called as an emigrant. But when he enters to a new country he will called as an immigrant. This means he is emigrant for the origin country and immigrant for the destination country. Even though these two terms have different meanings, the reasons due to which these takes place are the same.

But people who are entering into a new country have to face more problems because of the rules of the new country. It is not at all easy for a person to shift to a new place. The most common problem is the language. It will be very difficult for a person to reside at a place whose language one does not know.

They will not be able to converse with the people around them. Social interaction will be very less. Knowing the language of the new country is very important because it will be helpful to get a job in that place. No matter how advanced the place is, any person will take time to get habituated to that new place.

Reader Interactions

Top Trending Essays in March 2021

Essay on Pollution
Essay on my School
Summer Season
My favourite teacher
World heritage day quotes
my family speech
importance of trees essay
autobiography of a pen
honesty is the best policy essay
essay on building a great india
my favourite book essay
essay on caa
my favourite player
autobiography of a river
farewell speech for class 10 by class 9
essay my favourite teacher 200 words
internet influence on kids essay
my favourite cartoon character

Brilliantly

Content & links.

Verified by Sur.ly

Essay for Students

Essay for Class 1 to 5 Students

Scholarships for Students

Class 1 Students Scholarship
Class 2 Students Scholarship
Class 3 Students Scholarship
Class 4 Students Scholarship
Class 5 students Scholarship
Class 6 Students Scholarship
Class 7 students Scholarship
Class 8 Students Scholarship
Class 9 Students Scholarship
Class 10 Students Scholarship
Class 11 Students Scholarship
Class 12 Students Scholarship

STAY CONNECTED

About Study Today
Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions

Scholarships

Apj Abdul Kalam Scholarship
Ashirwad Scholarship
Bihar Scholarship
Canara Bank Scholarship
Colgate Scholarship
Dr Ambedkar Scholarship
E District Scholarship
Epass Karnataka Scholarship
Fair And Lovely Scholarship
Floridas John Mckay Scholarship
Inspire Scholarship
Jio Scholarship
Karnataka Minority Scholarship
Lic Scholarship
Maulana Azad Scholarship
Medhavi Scholarship
Minority Scholarship
Moma Scholarship
Mp Scholarship
Muslim Minority Scholarship
Nsp Scholarship
Oasis Scholarship
Obc Scholarship
Odisha Scholarship
Pfms Scholarship
Post Matric Scholarship
Pre Matric Scholarship
Prerana Scholarship
Prime Minister Scholarship
Rajasthan Scholarship
Santoor Scholarship
Sitaram Jindal Scholarship
Ssp Scholarship
Swami Vivekananda Scholarship
Ts Epass Scholarship
Up Scholarship
Vidhyasaarathi Scholarship
Wbmdfc Scholarship
West Bengal Minority Scholarship
Click Here Now!!

Mobile Number

Have you Burn Crackers this Diwali ? Yes No

Home / Essay Samples / Social Issues / Illegal Immigration / Causes and Effects of Illegal Immigration

Causes and Effects of Illegal Immigration

Category: Social Issues
Topic: Illegal Immigration , Immigration in America

Pages: 1 (467 words)

Downloads: -->

Causes of Illegal Immigration

Effects of illegal immigration, complex interplay and solutions.

--> ⚠️ Remember: This essay was written and uploaded by an--> click here.

Found a great essay sample but want a unique one?

are ready to help you with your essay

You won’t be charged yet!

2Nd Amendment Essays

Privacy Essays

Civil Rights Essays

Affirmative Action Essays

Daca Essays

Related Essays

We are glad that you like it, but you cannot copy from our website. Just insert your email and this sample will be sent to you.

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Your essay sample has been sent.

In fact, there is a way to get an original essay! Turn to our writers and order a plagiarism-free paper.

samplius.com uses cookies to offer you the best service possible.By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .--> -->

Causes and Effects of Immigration

Table of contents

Cite this Essay

Related Essays

Still can’t find what you need?

Related Essays on Illegal Immigration

Related Topics

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

Immigration: Causes and Effects

Article contents

Introduction

Should I Stay or Should I Go, Now?

From Neoclassical Economics to the Mobility Transition

Political Conditions at the Origin

The Land of Hopes and Dreams

Political Environment, Both Formal and Informal

Transnational Social Networks

The Lens of Skill

Bring It on Home to Me

Remittances

Bilateral Trade

Return Migration and Dual Citizenship

Conclusion and Future Directions

Related Articles

Immigration: Causes and Effects

The U.S. Immigration Debate

Introduction

What is the immigrant population in the United States?

How do Americans feel about immigration?

How has Congress tried to address the issue?

What was the Obama administration’s approach?

What was the Trump administration’s approach?

How did the COVID-19 pandemic alter immigration policy?

What has been Biden’s approach?

Daily News Brief

How are state and local authorities handling these issues?

Recommended Resources

More From Renewing America

Top Stories on CFR

Essay on Immigration Causes And Effects

100 Words Essay on Immigration Causes And Effects

Good Things from Immigration

250 Words Essay on Immigration Causes And Effects

Running from Trouble

Joining Family

Changes in the New Place

500 Words Essay on Immigration Causes And Effects

Good Things That Happen Because of Immigration

Challenges People Face When They Move

Problems in the Original and New Countries

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

New name. Same mission.

Why do People Immigrate? – The Different Causes of Immigration

The Roots of Immigration

Push and Pull Factors

Quality of Life Factors

War-Torn Country Factors

Environmental Factors

Why Do People Immigrate to the US?

The Impacts of Immigration

Global Refuge Commends Executive Order Protecting Certain Immigrant Families

Biden administration announces additional asylum restrictions

U.S. Senate renews push for immigration reform

Empowering our new neighbors on the journey to healing

Breaking Barriers to Mental Healthcare

Related Posts

Looking Back on 2023

Unsung Heroes: Immigrants in the U.S. Military

Celebrating Hispanic Culture Means Recognizing the Breadth of the Hispanic Immigrant Experience in the U.S.

Causes and Effects of Illegal Immigration

Causes of Illegal Immigration

1. Trade Liberalization

3. Family Reunification

4. Overpopulation

5. Wars and Asylum

Effects of Illegal Immigration

1. A strain on Public Utilities

2. Ready Supply of Cheap Labor

3. Loss of Jobs for Citizens

4. Loss of Tax Revenue

Celebrating Hispanic Culture Means Recognizing the Breadth of the Hispanic Immigrant Experience in the U.S.  