An Analysis of Mexican Remigration to the U.S

Abstract This paper presents an analysis of Mexican migrants to the U.S. and their decisions to remigrate. We concentrate on the relative impacts of market and nonmarket factors such as income, remittances, and migration networks. We analyze the remigration decision of male, illegal migrants using data from the Mexican Migration Project. Current migration proposals are geared towards policy that would allow for some type of temporary workers. The empirical model presented here allows for a comparison of the relative impacts of market and non-market factors on the decision to choose among different remigration options. The results indicate that income, remittances, and migration networks have significant effects on the remigration decisions of male, undocumented migrants. Introduction The 2,000-mile border shared by Mexico and the U.S., as well as the extensive differences in per capita income and demographic characteristics between the two countries, has provided the setting for large migration flows throughout the past century. The migration flows from Mexico have been generally constant with the exception of the 1930s and the 1950s when there were considerable decreases in the numbers of both legal and illegal Mexican migrants to the U.S. (Briggs, 1975). U.S. policy with respect to migrants from Mexico has varied between policies that encourage temporary migration and those designed to impact the legal status of permanent migrants. For instance, the Bracero program, initiated during World War II, was based on providing rural, temporary employment for Mexican migrants. More recently, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 provided amnesty and legal status to immigrant workers who could prove they had been in the U.S. for an extended period. The current emphasis of U.S. policy appears to have shifted back toward temporary migration. (1) Migration policy is obviously important to the Mexican government as well. An aspect of immigration that receives more attention in Mexico than in the U.S. is the impact that remittances from the U.S. have on the development of the Mexican economy. Due to the fact that the remittances of migrants represent a huge inflow of money into the Mexican economy, migration policy is defacto development policy for the Mexican government. These remittances totaled $US 20 billion in 2005, equivalent to 118 percent of foreign direct investment or 71 percent of oil revenues (Mexico's largest export); in addition, remittances were equal to 25% of the wages in the formal sector that year (Bank of Mexico, 2006). (2) The issue of Mexican migration to the U.S. has been studied extensively using a variety of models and data. (3) However, most of these studies evaluate the initial migration or treat each migration decision in the same way. We analyze the remigration decision separately from initial migration decisions. The focus of this paper is to analyze the remigration decision for individuals who have already made one migration from Mexico to the U.S., concentrating on the relative impacts of market and non-market factors. Cornelius (1990) and the Binational Study on Migration (Tovar et al., 1997) used the terms "sojourner" and "settler" that have become standard in describing migrants. To most readers, these terms would indicate someone who migrates frequently (sojourner) and one that is a more permanent migrant (settler). However, the Binational Study classifies migrants as "sojourners" if they consider Mexico to be their place of residence and a "settler" if they habitually reside in the U.S. (p. 14). Cornelius (1990, p. 30) indicates that some migrants consider themselves "sojourners" even though by the standard definition they are actually "settlers." We avoid this conflicting interpretation of migrant types by constructing the following categories: Those who choose to make repeated, temporary remigrations are termed "multiple-trip migrants," while those who make a more permanent remigration are labeled "stayers. …