Migration and ethnicity

Mobility is important for the functioning of markets and society. Contributions to this subject area deal with issues of national and international mobility, such as demand and supply, and what migration means for natives and migrants and for sending and receiving countries.

  • How to attract international students? Updated

    Studying abroad benefits the students, the host country, and those remaining at home

    Arnaud Chevalier, May 2022
    In knowledge-based economies, attracting and retaining international students can help expand the skilled workforce. Empirical evidence suggests that open migration policies and labor markets, whereby students can remain in the host country post-study, as well as good quality higher education institutions are crucial for successfully attracting international students. Student migration can positively affect economic growth in both sending and receiving countries, even though migrants themselves reap most of the gains, mainly through higher earnings.
  • Economic effects of natural disasters

    Natural disasters cause significant short-term disruptions, but longer-term economic impacts are more complex

    Tatyana Deryugina, April 2022
    Extreme weather events are increasing in frequency and intensity, threatening lives and livelihoods around the world. Understanding the short- and long-term effects of such events is necessary for crafting optimal policy. The short-term economic impacts of natural disasters can be severe, suggesting that policies that better insure against consumption losses during this time would be beneficial. Longer-term economic impacts are more complex and depend on the characteristics of the affected population and the affected area, changes in migration patterns, and public policy.
  • Does emigration increase the wages of non-emigrants in sending countries Updated

    Emigration can increase the wages of non-emigrants, but may eventually lead to lower productivity and wage losses

    Benjamin Elsner, March 2022
    How migration affects labor markets in receiving countries is well understood, but less is known about how migration affects labor markets in sending countries, particularly the wages of workers who do not emigrate. Most studies find that emigration increases wages in the sending country but only for non-emigrants with substitutable skills similar to those of emigrants; non-emigrants with different (complementary) skills lose. These wage reactions are short-term effects, however. If a country loses many highly educated workers, the economy can become less productive altogether, leading to lower wages for everyone in the long term.
  • Ethnic enclaves and immigrant economic integration Updated

    High-quality enclave networks encourage labor market success for newly arriving immigrants

    Immigrants tend to live in clusters within host countries. Does clustering in ethnic enclaves explain the persistent differences in skill, employment rates, and earnings between immigrants and the native population? Empirical studies consistently find that residing in an enclave can increase earnings. While it is ambiguous whether employment probabilities are also affected or whether earnings benefits accrue to all immigrants, irrespective of their skill levels, it is clear that effects are driven by enclave “quality” (in terms of income, education, and employment) rather than enclave size.
  • The labor market impact of Covid-19 on immigrants

    Job loss from Covid-19 was greater among immigrants than the native-born in most developed countries

    Hugh Cassidy, February 2022
    The labor market disruptions due to the Covid-19 pandemic and lockdowns impacted immigrant workers more severely than native-born workers in the US, Canada, Australia, and most EU countries. Immigrant workers in most of these countries were more vulnerable to the pandemic since they were more likely to be employed in jobs that are not as easy to perform remotely. The labor market recovery for both groups in the US was rapid, and by Fall 2020, the employment gaps between immigrant and native-born workers, both for men and women, had returned to pre-pandemic levels.
  • Refugee children’s earnings in adulthood

    Refugee status and country of origin shape the economic outcomes of newcomer children later in life

    The number of refugees has increased worldwide, and about half of them are children and youth. These refugee children arrive in resettlement countries with a unique set of challenges caused by, for instance, extreme stress and trauma that call for specific policies to address their needs. Yet, the long-term effect of refugee status on newcomer children's economic trajectories varies by country of origin, signaling the need for effective resettlement support and initiatives to tackle broader systemic barriers for newcomer children, beyond refugees. Such findings challenge the commonly held notion of refugees as a distinctive, relatively homogeneous group with similar trajectories.
  • Firms, sorting, and the immigrant–native earnings gap

    The immigrant–native earnings gap is due in part to firm-specific factors resulting from differential sorting of workers into firms

    Benoit Dostie, January 2022
    Recent research has tried to quantify how firms contribute to the immigrant–native earnings gap. Findings from several countries show that around 20% of the gap is due to firm policies that lead to a systematic underrepresentation of immigrants at higher-paying firms. Results also show that some of the closing of the gap over time is attributable to the reallocation of immigrants toward higher-paying employers. This pattern is especially pronounced for immigrants coming from disadvantaged countries, who face several barriers at initial entry, including language difficulties and lack of recognition of their educational credentials.
  • Who benefits from return migration to developing countries? Updated

    Despite returnees being a potential resource, not all low- and middle-income countries benefit from their return

    Jackline Wahba, December 2021
    Return migration can have multiple benefits. It allows migrants who have accumulated savings abroad to ease credit constraints at home and set up a business. Also, emigrants from low- and middle-income countries who have invested in their human capital may earn higher wages when they return. However, whether the home country benefits from return migrants depends on the migrant's success in accumulating savings and human capital and on the home country's ability to make use of returnees’ skills and investment. To benefit from returnees, home countries need policies that encourage returnees’ investment and labor market reintegration.
  • How immigration affects investment and productivity in host and home countries Updated

    Immigration may boost foreign direct investment, productivity, and housing investment

    Volker Grossmann, October 2021
    Migration policies need to consider how immigration affects investment behavior and productivity, and how these effects vary with the type of migration. College-educated immigrants may do more to stimulate foreign direct investment and research and development than low-skilled immigrants, and productivity effects would be expected to be highest for immigrants in scientific and engineering fields. By raising the demand for housing, immigration also spurs residential investment. However, residential investment is unlikely to expand enough to prevent housing costs from rising, which has important distributional implications.
  • Can market mechanisms solve the refugee crisis? Updated

    The combination of tradable quotas and matching would benefit host countries as well as refugees

    Ever since the major inflow of refugees (the “refugee crisis”) in 2015 and 2016, there has been heated debate about the appropriate distribution of refugees in the EU. Current policies revolve around mandatory quotas, which disregard the preferences of EU members and refugees alike. This problem can be addressed with two market mechanisms. First, tradable quotas minimize the cost of asylum provision for host countries. Second, a matching system gives refugees more discretion over where they are sheltered. While this proposal is theoretically appealing, it has yet to be tested in practice.
show more