COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER Migration and Development
Date: 2011-11-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European neighbourhood policy, admission of aliens, geographical mobility, immigration, international cooperation, migrant worker, migration control

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 18.11.2011 
SEC(2011) 1353 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER 

Migration and Development 

Accompanying the document 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE CONCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTE OF THE REGIONS 

The Global Approach to Migration and Mobility 

{COM(2011) 743 final} 

EN 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
MIGRATION AND DEVELOPMENT 

1. Introduction 

2. Achievements since 2005 

2.1. Remittances sent by migrants based in the EU 

2.2. Diasporas as actors of country of origin development 

2.3. Circular migration 

2.4. Mitigating the adverse effects of brain drain 

3. Towards a migrant-centred approach: next steps on migration and 

development 

3.1.  Remaining  challenges  and  new  ideas  to  the  traditional  migration  and 
development area 

3.1.1. Remittances 
3.1.2. Diasporas 
3.1.3. Circular Migration 
3.1.4. Brain drain/brain waste/brain gain 
3.1.5.  Ensuring  better  coherence  and  synergies  between  migration  and 
development at policy and operational level 

3.2. Broadening the traditional agenda: addressing the social and human impact of 
migration on migrants, their families and communities 

3.2.1. Addressing the needs created by emigration flows in countries of origin 
3.2.2. Protecting human rights of migrants during their transit process 
3.2.3.  Integration  of  migrants  in  countries  of  destination:  building  on  good 
practices identified in the EU 
3.2.4. South-South migration 

4. The way forward: beyond the traditional agenda 

5. Conclusions 

1

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1. Introduction 

Since 2004 the EU has been reflecting and working with its partners worldwide in order to enhance 
the positive impact of international migration flows on economic, social and human development. This 
has been the objective of its active involvement in the Global Commission on International Migration 
in 2004/2005, and in the Global Forum on Migration and Development since 2007. The EU’s strong 
will to support the potential positive impact of  migration on development has been embodied in the 
Communication on Migration & Development1 of 2005 and the Communication ‘Contribution to the 
UN High Level Dialogue on Migration & Development’2 of 2006. The nexus between migration and 
development has been integrated as one of the three equally important pillars of the Global Approach 
to Migration. 

Maximising the positive impact of migration on the development of partner countries while limiting its 
negative consequences will remain a key priority of the revised Global Approach. Now it is time to 
assess the policy and operational initiatives of the last six years in order to further define the approach, 
scope and depth of what is referred to as ‘migration and development’. The actions resulting from this 
concept are related to ‘traditional domains’ (remittances, diasporas, mitigating brain drain) as well as 
to strengthened dialogue/partnership on migration issues with partner countries. 

For  many  people  increased  opportunities  for  international  migration  are  an  essential  ingredient  for 
their livelihood strategy and future well-being. Consequently, the development impact of mobility will 
be stronger if the migrants’ social, financial, human and cultural capital is recognised and if migrants 
are better protected and integrated along their migratory routes. More generally, the introduction of an 
explicitly  migrant-centred  approach  should  help  to  strengthen  the  human  and  social  dimension  of 
migration  and  development  policies.  Both  topics  have  emerged  very  strongly  in  political  dialogue 
meetings with partner countries over the last few years. 

Although  migration  and  development  is  an  important  part  of  the  Global  Approach  to  Migration,  the 
challenges faced by partner countries as regards the link between development and migration are much 
broader  and  more  complex  than  those  which  have  been  addressed  so  far.  This  calls  for  a  better 
incorporation of this dimension into the EU’s overall external cooperation. 

There is a growing need to promote migration governance in a development perspective at all levels, 
from  international  to  national,  and  to  achieve  an  improved  common  understanding  of  the  nexus 
between development and migration, including the economic, environmental and social consequences 
of migration and asylum policies or policies in other sectors. This argues in favour of a deepening of 
the current reflection process. 

This  Commission  Staff  Working  Paper  will  first  take  stock  of  the  main  initiatives  in  the  area  of 
migration  and  development  since  the  2005  Communication  on  Migration  and  Development.  It  will 
then  further  elaborate  the  current  thinking  on  the  broadening  of  the  agenda  as  reflected  in  the 
Communication  ‘Global  Approach  on  Migration  and  Mobility’,  before  making  an  analysis  of  gaps 
identified  and  introducing  the  way  forward  to  make  migration  part  of  the  development  policy  and 
process 

2. Achievements since 2005 

This issue of migration and development was addressed in a 2005 Communication that paved the way 
for  EU  action  by  identifying  concrete  orientations  in  a  number  of  areas.  Several  commitments  were 
also embodied in Council conclusions. Many lessons have been drawn concerning the progress made 
along these lines at EU level. 

1 COM 2005 (390) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2005:0390:FIN:EN:PDF. 
2 COM 2006 (409) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2006:0409:FIN:FR:PDF. 

2

 
 
 
                                                 
2.1 Remittances sent by migrants based in EU 

Since  2005,  the  EU  has  adopted  strong  remittance-related  commitments,  including  at  the  highest 
level,3 and has undertaken many efforts to have them implemented. While emphasizing their private 
nature,  the  overall  aim  has  been  to  promote  cheaper,  faster  and  more  secure  remittances,  and  to 
enhance their development impact. 

Official EU data on remittance flows have been considerably improved, especially since 2009, thanks 
to  Eurostat’s  efforts  based  on  Member  States’  consolidated  balances  of  payment  data.  The  EU  also 
publishes  annually  an  Accountability  Report  on  financing  for  development  (formerly  called  the 
Monterrey report). It enables an  assessment of the  performance  of the EU and its Member States  in 
fulfilling  joint  commitments  on  mobilising  domestic  and  international  resources  for  development, 
increasing trade capacity and investment, Official Development Assistance (ODA), innovative sources 
and  mechanisms  of  financing.  This  report  also  includes  a  section  on  remittances.  A  number  of 
Member States have also launched studies with a view to improving their knowledge about the main 
remittance channels. 

The EU also adopted a common legal framework on payments — the 2007 Directive on payment 
services4  —  which  created  a  level  playing  field  with  harmonised  licensing  provisions  for  payment 
service  providers  throughout  the  Union,  including  money  remittance.  Member  States  were  required, 
amongst  others,  to  set  up  a  register  of  all  authorised  payment  institutions  (including  money  transfer 
operators  and  smaller  operators  benefiting  from  a  lighter  regime),  updated  on  a  regular  basis  and 
publicly available for consultation, in particular online. 

While  it  focuses  on  payment  services  provided  within  the  Community,.  the  above-mentioned 
Directive  has  led  to  improved  transparency  in  the  provision  of  payment  services,  including  the 
remittance market, although only about half of the Member States decided to apply its Titles III (on 
transparency)  and IV (on rights and obligations), or only some of their provisions, to so called ‘one-
leg payments’.5 Although it is still too early to assess its impact upon competition and transfer costs, 
the Directive has improved the level of consumer protection by, inter alia, establishing a set of rules on 
transparency  (total  price  of  a  transaction,  transfer  fees  charged,  exchange  rate  applied,  speed  of  the 
service), forbidding implicit fees, and laying down rules on the execution of payments. In addition, a 
number of Member States have set up  their own remittance price comparison websites on costs and 
quality of services.  

In terms of cooperation programmes, the European Union’s Thematic programme on migration and 
asylum  provided  financial  support  to  projects  fostering  the  use  of  new  technologies.  It  also  used 
microfinance funds to support projects to improve access to banking and financial services and access 
to credits in developing countries. 

The  2005  Communication  emphasised  that  remittances  were  private  money  and  would  only  flow  to 
‘productive  investment’  if  beneficiaries  were  able  to  make  informed  choices  and  if  there  were 
appropriate  incentives  in  place.  Developing  such  incentives  and  improving  choice  in  the  receiving 
countries has been part of a more comprehensive and long-term development approach.  

3 The Stockholm Programme: An open and secure Europe serving the citizen (December 2009) 
Council Conclusions of 18 November 2009 (Policy Coherence for Development) 
Council Conclusions of 18 May 2009 (support to developing countries in coping with the crisis) 
Council Conclusions 11 November 2008 (EU position for Doha FfD Conference) 
Council  conclusions  on  the  evaluation  of  the  Global  Approach  to  Migration  and  on  the  partnership  with 
countries of origin and transit (November 2008). 
4 Directive 2007/64/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 13 November 2007 on payment services in the 
internal market http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2007:319:0001:01:EN:HTML. 
5 One-leg-out payments are transactions where either the payment account of the originator or of the beneficiary 
is located outside the Single Euro Payments Area, i.e. outside the European Economic Area, Switzerland and 
Monaco. . 

3

 
 
                                                 
The  2005  Communication  also  put  forward  the  idea  of  looking  into  partnerships  with  the  countries 
concerned  and  —  where  relevant,  in  cooperation  with  the  EIB  —  possibilities  to  enhance  financial 
intermediation in partner countries, by facilitating partnerships between micro-finance and mainstream 
financial institutions, for example. General cooperation has been achieved on financial intermediation 
between  the  Commission  and  the  European  Investment  Bank  (EIB)–  e.g.  the  EIB’s  risk  capital 
activities  in  the  Facility  for  Euro-Mediterranean  Investment  and  Partnership  (FEMIP  region),  which 
use Commission funds. Furthermore, most of the EIB’s activities (financial intermediation or not) in 
FEMIP and ACP countries are guaranteed by the EU. 

Since 2005 the EU policy on support for micro-finance initiatives has developed and the Commission 
has  made  great  efforts  in  the  area  of  microfinance  activities,  although  stronger  links  with  migrants 
remain to be established. Nowadays the EU may provide grants for capital to finance credit lines or 
guarantee  funds  under  certain  conditions,  namely  if  credit  is  a  constraint  and  there  is  a  lack  of 
alternative resources in a given market. 

Lastly,  the  EU  has  successfully  included  the  issue  of  facilitating  remittances  in  its  political 
dialogues  with  third  countries  (e.g.  the  EU-ACP  dialogue  on  migration,  the  EU  Africa  Strategic 
Partnership) and has been organising training sessions on remittances for officials from third countries. 
The  collection  of  data  on  remittances  is  also  included  in  migration  profiles  sponsored  by  the  EU  to 
assess the migration situation of partner countries. 

2.2. Diasporas as actors of country of origin development 

The  2005  Communication  on  Migration  and  Development  recognised  the  potential  of  diaspora 
organisations  to  become  prominent  actors  for  development  and  called  for  stronger  involvement  of 
voluntary diaspora members in the development of their countries of origin. 

Some  achievements  have  been  made  along  these  lines.  The  EC  has  supported  efforts  initiated  by 
source  countries  at  national  and  regional  levels  to  set  up  databases  where  members  of  the  diaspora 
communities interested in contributing to the development of their countries of origin can register. In 
addition,  the  EC  worked  to  strengthen  the  source  countries’  capacities  to  link  with  their  respective 
emigrant  communities  in  coordination  with  other  donors  and  has  funded  studies  on  the  potential  of 
diaspora organisations as partners in development cooperation. 

At both EU and Member States level, the contribution of diaspora organisations to development policy 
and practice are increasingly valued. As initiators of development projects in countries of origin, they 
have established themselves as agents for development vis-a-vis both policy makers and donors. As a 
result the latter have been gradually adjusting their funding requirements to the needs and capacities of 
diaspora  organisations.  Hence,  the  budget  line  for  Non-state  actors  and  Local  Authorities  in 
Development 6 is also open to diaspora organisations. 

Diaspora-related  issues  are  also  mainstreamed  into  the  migration  and  development  items  of  the 
political dialogues with partner countries, for instance in the context of the Prague process, the EU-
Africa  Migration,  Mobility  and  Employment  Partnership,  the  EU-ACP  dialogue  and  the  EU-LAC 
migration dialogue to name but a few. 

2.3. Circular migration 

Whereas  the  2005  Communication  on Migration  and  Development  highlighted  some  components  of 
circular migration, the guiding source at EU level was the 2007 communication (COM 248/2007) on 
mobility  partnerships  and  circular  migration,  where  circular  migration  was  defined  as  ‘a  form  of 
migration  that  is  managed  in  a  way  allowing  some  degree  of  legal  mobility back  and  forth  between 
two countries’. Circular migration encompasses two different forms of movement: 

6  More  information  can  be  found  at:  http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/finance/dci/non_state_actors_en.htm  The  Non-state 
actors  and  local  authorities  in  development  2011-2013  Strategy  Paper  specifically  states  that  ‘initiatives  and  projects  may 
have a cross-border character and/or involve national communities living abroad (such as diaspora organisations). 

4

 
 
                                                 
•  Third  country  nationals  settled  in  the  EU  who  engage  in  a  temporary  activity  (business, 
professional, voluntary or other) in their country of origin, while retaining their main residence 
in one of the Member States; 

•  Persons  residing  in  a  third  country  who  come  to  the  EU  temporarily,  mainly  for  work  or 
study, but re-establish their main residence and activity in their country of origin when their 
residence title expires. 

Circular  migration  can  be  encouraged  by  means  of  a  wide  range  of  measures,  including  legislative 
measures  and  targeted  programmes  or  schemes.  The  two  options  can  co-exist,  and  even  be 
combined. 

The EU legal migration framework incorporates measures to facilitate circular migration. The long 
term resident’s directive (2003/109/EC) allows periods of absence from the EU without forfeiting long 
term  residence  rights.  Long-term  residents  can  leave  the  country  for  a  period  of  less  than  12 
consecutive months without losing their legal status. The EU Blue Card directive on the admission of 
highly  qualified  migrants  (2009/50/EC)  allows  Blue  Card  holders  to  be  absent  for  up  to  18  months 
without losing their long term resident status as a means of further encouraging circular migration. The 
Commission’s proposal for a directive  on seasonal  workers, which was presented in July 2010, also 
incorporates provisions to facilitate circular migration.7 Provisions in national legislation in some EU 
Member States complement these efforts. In addition, at least fourteen Member States apply national 
legislation  under  which  temporary  work  and  residence  permits  may  be  issued  for  the  purposes  of 
employment.  Four  Member  States  issue  permits  targeting  seasonal  employment,  which  facilitate 
repeated back-and-forth mobility over a period of time.8 

Circular  migration  schemes  run  by  EU  Member  States  or  supported  by  the  EU  through  specific 
projects enable some lessons to be learned from past practices.9 These projects have usually been of a 
pilot nature, mostly small-scale, and mainly involving low skilled seasonal and agricultural workers. 
Many of them are therefore unlikely to make any significant development impact in source countries 
confronted  by  problems  of  high  unemployment  and  poverty.  Nevertheless,  they  can  still  contribute 
through the genuine empowerment of migrant workers and help to meet a clearly identified demand 
for  labour.  Often  embedded  in  bilateral  cooperation  frameworks,  these  schemes  remain  a  useful 
complementary  tool  to  facilitate  legal  frameworks  and  other  policy  options  to  promote  circular 
migration. A broader range of measures, which are equally important and effective, is listed in part 3 
of this document. 

Numerous  EU  funded  interventions  have  led  to  a  significant  improvement  in  labour  migration 
management capacities and tools in countries of origin, as shown by a recent evaluation of EC-funded 
labour migration projects (finalised in June 2011). However, it appears that the considerably improved 
capacity  of  third  countries  to  provide  information  about  legal  migration  rules  and  to  accompany 
potential migrants is somehow frustrated by the current narrow avenues of legal migration towards the 
EU.1  In  accordance  with  the  Stockholm  Programme,  a  large-scale  study  on  circular  migration  was 
undertaken by the European Migration Network and made available in 2011.10 The study covers 24 of 
the EU Member States and indicates that, although there is still a lack of relevant data capturing this 
phenomenon, there is some evidence of actual flows, changes in legislation and projects showing that 
circular  migration  can  play  a  role  in  responding  to  EU  labour  market  needs,  as  well  as  benefitting 
migrants and the countries of origin. 

7 COM(2010) 379. 
8 http://emn.intrasoft-intl.com/Downloads/prepareShowFiles.do;?entryTitle=03_Temporary and CIRCULAR MIGRATION: 
empirical evidence, current policy practice and future options. 
9‘Evaluation of the concrete results obtained through projects financed under AENEAS and the Thematic Programme for 
Migration and Asylum’ (published in june 2011, reference 2010/254-538.10 http://emn.intrasoft-
intl.com/Downloads/prepareShowFiles.do;?entryTitle=03_Temporary and CIRCULAR MIGRATION: empirical evidence, 
current policy practice and future options. 

5

 
 
                                                 
2.4 Mitigating the adverse effect of brain drain 

The 2005 Communication made some recommendations to help fight brain drain, especially in terms 
of human resources in the health sector. 

The Commission published in 2007 a Communication on ‘Addressing the Crisis in Human Resources 
for Health’,11 which proposed innovative responses to human resource crisis in developing countries. 
The  subsequent  EU  Programme  for  Action  to  tackle  the  critical  shortage  of  health  workers  in 
developing  countries  (2007  –  2013)  produced  a  clear  set  of  actions  to  be  supported,  aimed  at 
enhancing developing countries’ capacities to train, manage and retain their health workers. The EU 
supports 51 out of the 57 countries that have been identified by the World Health Organisation (WHO) 
as facing an all out HRH crisis. Support includes regional research, capacity building and knowledge-
generating initiatives as well as circular migration and other initiatives at global level. 

The 2010 Communication ‘the EU role in global health12’ brings out the HRH issue: ‘On migration, 
the EU Member States should ensure that their migration policies do not undermine the availability of 
health  professionals  in  third  countries  whilst  respecting  the  individual  freedom  of  movement  and 
personal and professional aspirations. (...) EU Member States should step up their efforts to ensure 
that  everyone  —  including  migrants  —  in  the  EU  has  access  to  quality  health  services  without 
discrimination’. 

With regards to disciplining recruitment, the 2005 Communication encouraged Member  States to 
develop  mechanisms  to  limit  active  recruitment  when  it  may  harm  certain  targeted  developing 
countries. Since then, the EU line has been to support the voluntary adoption and implementation of 
the  WHO  Code  of  Practice  on  the  International  Recruitment  of  Health  Personnel,  and  a  number  of 
Member  States  have  made  advances  in  that  field.  The  Commission  also  strives  to  persuade  other 
important destination countries to work towards similar arrangements. 

3. Towards a migrant-centred approach – next steps on migration and development 

Based on six years of practice in migration and development, and on the views, comments and ideas 
received  through  the  consultations  to  prepare  for  this  document,  it  is  now  time  to  reflect  on  how  to 
adopt a more migrant-centred approach. 

The need for a migrant-centered approach has emerged on the basis of a gap assessment regarding the 
micro-level  impacts  and  individual  effects  of  migration.  Human  mobility  generates  several  forms  of 
capital  —  including  social,  financial  and  human  capital.  This  requires  a  broader  focus  on  the  link 
between  migration  and  development  and  the  implementation  of  a  more  comprehensive  approach  in 
terms of transfers, which encompasses all initiatives that aim to improve their development impact. 

Transfer of Social capital: Migrants develop and maintain social ties with non-migrant actors across 
different  locations  and  they  create  networks  that  facilitate  the  flow  of  information,  skills,  financial 
resources, values, ideas, etc. Networks can link different groups, including migrant families, diaspora 
associations, or professional and business networks. 

Transfer  of  financial  capital:  Together  with  the  cost,  speed,  accessibility  and  reliability  of  transfer 
services,  the  level  of  information  and  financial  literacy  of  senders  and  recipients  influences  their 
choice of the transfer channel. However, it has also been argued that not all members of a household 
benefit equally from remittances. Remittances could also aggravate dependency relationships between 
senders  and  recipients,  reproduce  income  inequalities  between  migrant  and non-migrant  households, 
or even destabilise fragile economies.  

11 ‘EU Strategy for Action on the Crisis in Human Resources for Health in Developing countries’ COM(2005) 642 final. 
12 ‘The EU Role in Global Health’ COM(2010) 128 final. 

6

 
 
 
                                                 
Transfer  of  human  capital:  Migrants’  skills  and  knowledge  transfers  also  constitute  assets  for 
development.  These  could  translate  into  remittances,  technology  transfers,  links  to  professional 
networks,  investment  and  —  arguably  —  a  better  integration  of  origin  countries  into  the  global 
markets. Promoting knowledge circulation can be an alternative way of sharing in the gains of skilled 
mobility.  

Finally,  migrants’  contributions  to  development  depend  on  certain  capabilities  and  rights.  While 
migration  can  improve  migrants’  wellbeing  or  increase  access  to  social,  economic  and  political 
freedoms, it may sometimes also involve a decrease in wealth and well-being, e.g. as a result of the 
separation of families or the creation of external dependencies. Therefore, the benefits of migration in 
terms of well-being need to be evaluated against its potential social, political and physiological costs. 
Ensuring access to service provision and relieving the social costs of migration would be a meaningful 
first step. 

3.1 Remaining challenges and new ideas related to the ‘traditional’ migration and development 
areas 

3.1.1. Remittances 

Remittances  sent  home  by  migrants  to  developing  countries  are  extremely  important  to  receiving 
countries,  as  they  are  three  times  the  size  of  official  development  assistance  and  often  represent  a 
lifeline  for  the  poor.  In  2010,  remittances  recovered  to  the  2008  level  of  $ 325  billion  after  having 
dropped to $ 307 billion in 2009 as a result of the global financial crisis. Flows are projected to rise to 
$ 346 billion in 2011 and $ 374 billion by 2012.13      

Despite  the  considerable  efforts  made  at  EU  level  since  2005  to  facilitate  and  reduce  the  cost  of 
remittances, it is clear from the above that much remains to be done in that area, both at the internal 
European level, and at the level of cooperation programmes. 

Through the Stockholm Programme (2009-2014), the European Commission is requested to identify 
new  recommendations  by  2012  on  ‘how  to  further  ensure  efficient,  secure  and  low-cost  remittance 
transfers,  and  enhance  the  development  impact  of  remittance  transfers,  as  well  as  to  evaluate  the 
feasibility of creating a common EU portal on remittances to inform migrants about transfer costs and 
encourage competition among remittance service providers’. 

A  study  was  launched  in  September  2011  with  the  overall  objective  of  analysing  the  state  of 
implementation of existing EU commitments with regard to remittances and of developing additional 
practical proposals. The study will identify the following pending issues: improving data collection at 
both the EU and partner country levels; making estimations of informal flows; determining the needs 
of migrants and their families; making a preliminary assessment of the impact of the implementation 
of the Directive on payment services (see above point 2.1.) on transparency and cost; and assessing the 
feasibility  of  creating  an  EU-wide  remittance  portal.  Furthermore,  a  Commission  study  will  be 
launched at the end of 2011 to assess the Directive’s implementation and impact on payment services 
on the market, and addressing amongst others the possible need to extend its scope to include payment 
transactions where only one of the payment services providers is located in the Community.  

At EU level, efforts with regard to data collection must be maintained by Member States in order to 
put well informed policies and projects in place. The main reference for data compilers is usually the 
IMF’s manual ‘International Transactions in Remittances’: Guide for Compilers and Users’, which has 
not  been  adopted  by  the  majority  of  Member  States.  Lastly,  remittances  data  broken  down  by 
destination are currently transmitted to Eurostat on a voluntary basis only; reporting of these data will 
become  mandatory  from  June  2014  onwards,  in  line  with  one  of  the  recommendations  of  the  2005 
Communication.  Household  survey  instruments  could  also  be  promoted  at  EU  level  in  order  to 
embrace  informal  remittance  channels,  focusing  on  selected  bilateral  ‘remittance  corridors’  to  learn 
more about the use of remittances. 

13 Worldbank, 2010. 

7

 
 
                                                 
Greater coordination between all actors involved would also seem to be relevant, i.e. between Member 
States, the European Commission and the EEAS, the ECB and EIB, Eurostat, as well as with diaspora 
organisations and the private sector. The European Investment Bank could facilitate the securitisation 
of workers’ remittances or the issuing of diaspora bonds for the benefit of developing countries, in 
particular by helping to establish mechanisms for guaranteeing the credit quality of such instruments 
or by means  of direct purchases. The ECB  may also  be asked to do more in relation to statistics on 
remittance  flows  (as  in  many  EU  countries  remittances  are  compiled  by  Central  Banks,  as  part  of 
Balance  of  Payments),  the  efficiency  of  the  remittance  market  infrastructure,  and  supervision.  This 
would be an important aid in helping channel private funds for national development policies. 

Finally,  in  terms  of  mobilisation  and  coordination  of  available  financial  instruments,  the  European 
Commission needs to improve the linkages between migration funding for remittances and access to 
finance funding, as well as with other geographical instruments and thematic budget lines (remittances 
can contribute to financing of projects in agriculture, health, etc.…). 

With  regard  to  cooperation  projects  on  remittances  in  partner  countries  –  both  in  relation  with 
migrants  based  in  EU  and  in  a  South-South  context  —  it  seems  important  to  evaluate  the  results  of 
those projects supported by Member States and the European Commission so far, and to identify best 
practices and scale them up. In order to be more migrant-centered, a multi-dimensional approach may 
be adopted: 

•  At  the  level  of  migrants  and  those  who  receive  their  money,  communication  on  the  cost  of 
transfer  and  transmission  channels  towards  migrants  could  be  further  improved.  Financial 
literacy  was  also  clearly  put  forward  as  a  new  area  to  focus  on,  in  order  to  help  migrants 
develop  the  appropriate  financial  skills  to  identify  investment-type  projects  that  suit  their 
needs and desires. 

•  At the level of households, especially on the recipient side, further reflection and proposals are 
needed  when  it  comes  to  mitigating  the  potential  negative  consequences  of  remittances  in 
social and economic terms, the separation of families, the dependency of those left behind or 
the impact on education and labour motivation. 

•  At community level, recommendations are needed on whether and how to support collective 
investment schemes which could be put in place by regions or countries of origin. The length 
of the ‘last mile’ or how to make sure that remittances can reach migrants’ families in rural 
areas could be further enhanced in cooperation projects, in connection with microfinance and 
post  offices.  Cooperation  projects  could  also  take  into  account  the  impact  that  different 
contexts  and  circumstances  -,  such  as.  disasters,  conflicts,  climate  change,  etc.  -  may  have 
upon remittances. 

•  Finally, at national level, increased support to partner countries in terms of mainstreaming the 
remittances  dimension  in  their  migration  and  development  strategies,  capacity  building  in 
terms  of  data  collection,  the  defining  of  regulatory  frameworks  by  central  banks,  links  to 
access to finance programmes and so on, would be useful. Discussions at regional level could 
also  be  supported.  Some  partner  countries  have  started  designing  strategies  aimed  at 
supporting  the  design  of  social  financial  instruments  underwritten  by  national  or  local 
authorities: pension funds, social/housing saving accounts, education saving accounts etc. 

Increasing support to information and communication technologies should be considered, as these may 
enable more rapid and secure transfers and the development of science, technology and innovation, as 
well as the dissemination of the digital era to all sections of society, as key motors of socio-economic 
growth  and  sustainable  development.  The  involvement  of  women  in  such  actions  would  be  an 
important feature, with the ultimate objective of their empowerment. 

3.1.2. Diasporas 

Although the EU has already made considerable progress in recognising and supporting the role of the 
diaspora in enhancing the development of their home countries and regions, key challenges remain to 
be addressed. Diasporas based in EU territory are heterogeneous, tend to be insufficiently organised 

8

 
 
 
and find it difficult to get their voice heard and to participate in policy formulation at EU level. Many 
diaspora organisations are not capable of presenting project proposals in response to the calls launched 
by the EC, as they are not properly equipped to handle the amounts within the range of the required 
funding threshold. 

At  the  policy  level,  both  the  Stockholm  Programme  Action  plan  for  the  period  2010-2014  and  the 
Policy  Coherence  for  Development  (PCD)  Work  Programme  for  2011-2013  highlight  the  need  to 
further include and cooperate with diaspora organisations in order to enhance the development of their 
countries of origin. This also includes the strengthening of migrant networks at EU level. 

Diaspora  groups'  integration  in  the  host  societies  has  to  be  enhanced  because  it  could  also  have  a 
positive  impact  on  their  participation  in  the  development  of  countries  of  origin.  In  this  context, 
synergies  between  the  migration  and  development  and  the  integration  agendas  could  be  further 
explored. 

Communication and coordination with local authorities, who are frequently involved in a number of 
development projects with diasporas, should be enhanced. The relevance of the specific realities where 
migrants  live,  work  and  interact  with  the  territory  underlines  the  importance  of  the  local  level  of 
administration in dealing with the issue. Similarly, a comprehensive support could be provided to third 
countries that are willing to map their diasporas, while taking into account potential sensitivities, and 
maintain transnational ties and support diaspora entrepreneurship initiatives. 

Formal or informal dialogue platforms with the diaspora to exchange views on both migration and 
development policies could be used to tap into the expertise of the diaspora as well as to disseminate 
information on funding and projects. While further capacity building could be provided to the diaspora 
in the territory of the respective Member States, strengthening the capacities of their local partners and 
improving the quality of their partnership would be even more relevant. It is also important that the EC 
should  reflect  further  on  its  instruments,  so  that  the  procedures  remain  constant  over  a  long  period 
thereby  providing  an  enabling  environment  for  non  state  actors,  such  as  diaspora  organisations, 
including women migrant organisations, to become more involved. 

The  EU  continues  to  invest  in  leveraging  the  diaspora’s  contribution  to  development  and  seeks  to 
better utilise their knowledge and expertise. Consideration will also be given to support for diaspora 
volunteering as well as diaspora funds put in place by partner countries. Through its support given to 
diaspora and migrants’ associations in transferring skills, the EU remains committed to a sustainable 
development  approach,  a  gender-conscious  dimension,  as  well  as  paying  special  attention  to  the 
unemployed and less skilled. 

3.1.3. Circular migration 

Circular  mobility  encompasses  diverse  typologies  of  migrants.  This  variety  of  situations  could  be  
reflected in a definition of circular migration that encompasses both the role of a legal framework that 
facilitates such mobility and takes into account the added value of targeted projects in some cases, e.g. 
supported through bilateral arrangements. The concept of circular migration can thus be defined as 
repeated  cycles  of  back-and-forth  mobility  over  a  period  of  time  for  the  purpose  of  economic 
activity or study, which takes place within a legal framework allowing facilitated re-entry between 
two or more countries. 

Greater efforts could be made in the future to actually achieve the ‘triple win’ situation traditionally 
associated with circular migration, while proactively doing more to avoid the potential downsides. The 
benefit  for  the  migrant  should  be  more  directly  linked  to  empowerment,  training  opportunities, 
portability  of  knowledge  and  skills,  and  enhanced  employability  upon  return.  The  risks  include 
separation of families, dependence on foreign labour markets and the lack of long-term integration in 
the destination country and reintegration in the source country. The benefits for the country of origin 
appear  to  be  quite  limited  in  terms  of  reduced  pressure  of  unemployment  on  the  domestic  labour 
market, but the positive effects greatly depend on the quality of the skills and competences ‘brought 
back’ by the migrants and on the capacity of the country to make use of them, especially by targeting 

9

 
 
identified skills gaps. The gain for the destination country, and in particular for the employer, can be 
the access to fill labour market gaps which cannot be catered for by the domestic labour force. On the 
other hand, the risks include the costs when the maximum period of employment is too short for it to 
properly  compensate  the  employer  for  the  training  investment  and  the  time  needed  in  order  to 
overcome barriers of language and culture. 

As far as circular migration aspects relating to the mobility of members of diaspora communities from 
the country of residence to the country of origin are concerned, many of the pros and cons are similar 
to what is discussed in the section on brain drain. In this regard, the legal framework at national or EU 
level should ensure that mobility is not impeded by legislative frameworks, employment conditions, 
social welfare provisions or tax regulations in either country. 

Circular migration may be more suitable for specific sectors, such as agriculture or seasonal work, but 
it  could  also  be  relevant  in  medium  or  highly  skilled  sectors  where  there  are  identified  shortages. 
Besides the importance of a legal framework at the national or EU level, measures to facilitate such 
mobility  include  close  coordination  and  cooperation  between  national  authorities,  in  particular 
employment agencies, employers and unions. 

Both  the  source  and  receiving  countries  still  need  to  improve  their  measures  (or  combination  of 
measures) aimed at promoting and supporting circular migration, such as: 

•  Legal framework allowing migrants to stay outside the receiving country for longer periods of 

time without affecting their residence status 

•  Legal  framework  allowing  migrants  to  stay  outside  the  source  country  for  longer  periods  of 

time, without losing property, voting, or working rights 

•  Multiple-entry visas for temporary work purposes 
•  Preferential re-entry procedures for the upcoming season/work period for migrants who have 

already worked legally in the country and have complied with the terms of legal stay 

•  Bilateral schemes for the joint management of labour migration flows 
•  Portability of social security rights acquired in the country of destination 
•  Strategies  and  programmes  set  up  by  the  country  of  origin  to  maintain  communication  with 
the  diaspora  and  attracting  diaspora  members  to  participate  in  community  and  country 
development,  including  by  making  available  information  on  investment  opportunities  and 
facilitating support to business start-ups and SMEs 

•  Pre-return information and support concerning investment opportunities, business know-how, 

recognition of formal qualifications and informal skills acquired abroad; 
Institutional joint programmes between schools, hospitals, or companies; 

• 

The two following aspects require specific attention and steps forward. 

Lack of portability of social security rights is a key constraint to circular labour migration, and to 
labour mobility more generally, as it can significantly influence crucial decisions by migrants, such as 
those  related  to  the  choice  between  migrating  and  working  legally  or  irregularly,  or  related  to  the 
sustainability  of  return  and  reintegration.  In  order  to  ensure  fair  treatment  for  third  country  national 
migrants, there are certain EU instruments covering the right of migrants to receive acquired statutory 
pensions from a Member State when moving to a third-country under the same conditions and rates as 
the  nationals  of  the  Member  State  concerned.  These  equal  treatment  provisions  are  found  in  the 
Researchers’  directive,  the  EU  Blue  Card  directive,  and  the  proposal  for  a  Single  Permit  directive. 
These directives impose on Member States the principle of equal treatment in the export of acquired 
pension  rights  to  third  countries.  However,  if  nationals  of  the  EU  Member  State  in  question  have 
limited  rights  to  export  pensions  to  third  countries,  the  same  rules  apply  equally  to  third  country 
nationals. 

Access  to  specific  integration  measures  for  temporary/circular  migrants  still  needs  to  be  improved, 
taking into account the total duration of time spent in the country of destination. The implications of 
temporary  and  circular  migration  schemes  on  migrants’  rights  and  protection  are  a  major  cause  for 

10

 
 
 
concern in some countries. As temporary/circular migrants are often not eligible for any integration 
support, this may adversely affect their economic integration and the protection of their rights. 

3.1.4. Brain drain/brain waste/brain gain 

In the PCD 2011-2013 work programme, the EU set itself the target to combat brain drain by applying 
relevant  codes  of  conduct  on  ethical  recruitment,  by  assisting  developing  countries  with  the 
development  of  human  resource  strategies  and  the  promotion  of  a  safe  and  attractive  work 
environment,  by  facilitating  the  temporary  and  permanent  return  of  migrants  as  well  as  their 
reintegration,  and  by  supporting  cooperation  in  areas  such  as  local  employment,  education  and 
vocational  training.  Further  initiatives  included  extending  the  good  practices  on  ‘brain  circulation’ 
from the Moldova Mobility Partnership to other Mobility Partnerships and including conditions for the 
retention  of  highly  educated  individuals  in  higher  education  mobility  programmes,  such  as  the 
Erasmus Mundus and Nyerere programmes 

While  the  EU  work  is  guided  by  these  principles,  lessons  learnt  from  past  initiatives  allow  further 
areas for reflection to be identified with regard to: 

•  Extending  the  sector  specific  approach  on  health  that  has  so  far  been  promoted  to  include 

other sectors. 

•  Assisting ‘drained countries’ in defining and implementing a more comprehensive policy mix, 
looking  at  both  the  retention  of  qualified  staff  still  in  the  country,  as  well  as  the  return  and 
professional  reintegration  of  qualified  staff  working  abroad.  Studies  should  be  launched  in 
order  to  learn  lessons  from  and  possibly  replicate  the  various  experiences  of  third  countries 
which  have  succeeded  in  transforming  brain  drain  into  brain  gain  (IT  sector  in  India)  or  in 
retaining higher numbers of highly skilled workers in key sectors (health workers in Ghana). 
In  relation  to  the  point  above,  supporting  partner  origin  countries  in  their  efforts  to  address 
underlying  structural  problems  such  as  low  pay,  inadequate  financing,  poor  working 
environments and weak labour prospects. 

• 

•  Further cost/benefit evaluation of brain drain, in particular in countries voluntarily training a 
surplus of highly skilled workforce for export, and  the return they receive in terms of social 
vulnerability could be assessed more effectively. 

•  The  impact  of  measures  in  that  field  would  be  further  strengthened  by  incorporating  a  clear 

gender dimension. 

It  would  also  be  interesting  to  develop  measures  against  ‘brain  waste’,  which  is  another  challenge 
facing  migrants  that  has  not  been  adequately  addressed  by  EU  policy  and  does  not  appear  in  the 
Stockholm programme, although it may become a spin-off of the migration process. 

To conclude this part, supporting labour market policies and decent work in partner countries is also 
an important strategy to help them attract and retain skilled workers, especially health professionals. 
The  incorporation  of  strategies  to  retain  skilled  workers  in  political  dialogues  on  migration  with 
partner countries should be considered. 

3.1.5.  Ensuring  better  coherence  and  synergies  between  migration  and  development  at 
policy and operational level 

Going beyond what was proposed in the 2005 Communication on migration and development, one key 
achievement  of  the  EU’s  efforts  to  enhance  the  synergies  between  migration  and  development  has 
been related to the mainstreaming of development concerns into migration policy, and vice versa, at 
policy and operational level. 

Migration has become one of the five priorities of the Policy Coherence for Development Agenda and 
of  the  2011-2013  Action  Plan.  Extended  Migration  Profiles  have  been  put  in  place  in  order  to 
produce  an  improved  and  sustainable  evidence-base  on  the  migration  and  development  nexus  by 
collecting necessary data and analysis on migration and development, as well as to contribute to policy 

11

 
 
 
 
 
coherence  by  bringing  together  a  wide  range  of  relevant  governmental  and  nongovernmental 
stakeholders. 

With  regard  to  policy  formulation,  development  concerns  are  taken  increasingly  into  account  when 
formulating  EU  migration  policy.  The  EU  Blue  Card  directive,  for  instance,  contains  safeguards 
against the risk of brain drain effects, enabling Member States to reject an application for a Blue Card 
in order to ensure ethical recruitment in sectors that are suffering from a shortage of qualified workers 
in the countries of origin. The European Commission has also made considerable efforts in research 
and  information  gathering  on  migration,  which  have  contributed  to  the  formulation  of  migration 
policy.  Wherever  possible  and  appropriate,  the  perspectives  and  insights  of  migrants  have  been 
included when framing research questions and methodologies 

As regards incorporating migration issues into EU external cooperation, there is clear progress to be 
seen  in  both  the  geographic  and  the  thematic  programmes.  Between  2004  and  2006,  the  AENEAS 
Programme  devoted  € 120  million  to  the  financing  of  migration  related  projects.  Following  the 
overhaul of the financial instruments for the EU’s international cooperation, the Commission has been 
implementing a Thematic Programme entitled ‘Cooperation with Third Countries in the areas of 
Migration and Asylum’ since 2007.14 With the DCI regulation as its legal basis, it complements the 
contribution of the ‘geographical financial instruments’ by assisting third countries in their efforts on 
migration and asylum matters. Migration and development actions have been an essential part of both 
the AENEAS programme and its successor ‘Thematic programme’. 

In  addition,  migration-related  activities  are  increasingly  being  financed  under  other  financial 
instruments,  including  geographical  instruments  (DCI,  EDF,  ENPI).  This  has  allowed  the  EU  to 
support  the  integration  of  migration  into  Country  and  Regional  Strategy  Papers  of  those  partners 
which  had  identified  the  topic  as  a  priority,  such  as  Gambia,  Ghana,  Mali,  Mauritania,  Nigeria, 
Senegal and West Africa under 10th EDF. A € 25 Million ACP migration facility was set up under the 
9th EDF, and a sum of € 40 million is earmarked under the 10th EDF. 

Through its external cooperation and policy dialogues, the EU is now increasingly providing support 
to  the  mainstreaming  of  migration  and  asylum  in  national  development  frameworks  of  third 
countries (i.e. the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper — PRSP). Specific actions aimed at improving 
consistency between development and migration policy and the mainstreaming of migration concerns 
into  strategies  on  poverty  reduction  and  sustainable  development  (including  climate  change)  have 
already  been  implemented.  The  EU  has  been  providing  support  for  mainstreaming  exercises  in 
Morocco and Ghana. Similar technical assistance for better integration of migration into other sector 
policies, funded through geographical instruments, is ongoing in Mali and is being considered for the 
Philippines. 

3.2. Broadening the traditional agenda: addressing the social and human impact of migration on 
migrants, their families and communities 

Recent  studies  conducted  by  the  OECD,  UNICEF  and  the  WHO  have  also  addressed  the  social 
consequences  of  migration.  At  the  end  of  2009,  the  topic  was  included  in  the  Human  Development 
Report,  which  was  explicitly  dedicated  to  the  link  between  mobility  and  human  development.  The 
same  focus  was  also  chosen  for  the  2010  Global  Forum  on  Migration  and  Development.  Based  on 
such  deliberations  it  is  clear  that  the  specific  social  needs  and  challenges  in  the  countries  of  origin, 
transit and destination need to be properly addressed. 

3.2.1. Addressing the needs created by emigration flows in countries of origin 

The  extent  to  which  migration  can  make  a  positive  contribution  to  the  social  dimension  of 
development  in  countries  of  origin  is  contingent  on  the  presence  of  a  supportive  national  policy 

14 Since its inception in 2007, more than 130 projects have been approved for funding under the Thematic Programme on 
Migration  and  Asylum.  Migration  and  Development  is  the  second  biggest  thematic  intervention  area,  receiving 
approximately 30-35 % of the allocated funds. . 

12

 
 
                                                 
context. Remittances alone cannot compensate for inadequate national policies and the adverse social 
impacts of migration. International partnerships for development should therefore focus on promoting 
favourable policies across the full range of relevant areas. 

1) Impact on families and households 

The impacts of migration on households and children left behind are  many and varied, as family 
configurations  naturally  vary  by  region,  culture,  religious  beliefs,  social  class  and  other  factors. 
Nevertheless, there are common challenges that can be identified, and it is clear that the needs of 
those families deserve to be better addressed through social policy and enhanced cooperation with 
civil society and local authorities.  

One  of  the  main  concerns  is  likely  to  be  the  situation  of  children  left  behind  in  households, 
especially when both parents are abroad. There are often no systematic actions by government to 
mitigate  the  consequences  of  migration  or  to  assist  those  who  are  taking  care  of  such  children, 
especially  in  multi-generational  households.  Consistency  in  government  policies  on  migration, 
education, health, child protection and social protection is imperative in order to mitigate the risks 
borne by children as a result of the absence of their parents. Measures could be considered to limit 
the potential negative impacts of remittances (dependence, dropping out of school) and to harness 
the potential benefits of remittances for the development of children and the family by setting up 
long  term  social  investment  instruments,  saving  and  insurance  schemes.  For  all  family  members 
who stay behind, it should be possible to develop targeted support services, including psychosocial 
services and measures, aimed at improving the access to long distance communication tools. 

The well-being and empowerment of women who stay behind while their spouses migrate to find 
work requires targeted attention in the area of development cooperation. Whereas mothers seem to 
take  over  the  main  responsibilities  for  the  household  and  child  care  when  their  spouses  leave, 
fathers  tend  instead  to  rely  on  other  family  members.  Moreover,  male  migration  does  not 
necessarily lead to more autonomy or empowerment for the women who stay behind, nor does it 
always allow them to become head of their household. This all depends on the social and cultural 
context in the respective country. Gender roles are usually a precursor to migration, and in fact tend 
to  be  reinforced  rather  than  changed  by  it.  The  departure  of  a  parent  may  allocate  additional 
household burdens to daughters and mothers left behind and might restrict their right of access to 
paid  work  and  higher  education.  The  greater  vulnerability  of  transnational  family  structures  has 
been highlighted, bringing with it increased risks of  abandonment of the family left behind. 

Moreover, female migrants might be more prone to sacrifice their own well-being while they are 
abroad in order to cater for their children or husband at home, and the share of remittances being 
sent  back  might  be  at  the  expense  of  their  own  situation  abroad  in  terms  of  housing,  health, 
insurance and integration measures. 

In  countries  where  the  social  security  systems  area  is  very  weak  or  non-existent,  most  elderly 
people rely on family solidarity, for both financial subsistence and daily caretaking. This important 
social  role  of  families  in  developing  countries  might  be  undermined  by  the  absence  of  the 
economically active descendants, especially if they are in charge of younger children who are left 
behind. 

2) Impact on social cohesion and human development 

The impact of emigration on social cohesion needs to be further addressed, especially the need to 
adapt  public  policies  to  the  social  gap  created  by  unequal  access  of  households  to  financial 
transfers. This should also be the case when addressing the socio-economic impact of local large-
scale emigration by people of working age, particularly in rural and isolated areas where the only 
alternative to this workforce consists of women, the young and the elderly. 

In  developing  countries,  social  policy  systems  with  weak  universal  basic  social  services  rely 
heavily  for  welfare  provision  on  informal  community-based  institutions  and  on  family. 
Community and family networks often fill the void left by the State in providing protection to the 

13

 
 
poor. Moreover, in many regions the fiscal crisis of the state has meant that important roles have 
been assigned to community based organisations to implement targeted social programs. However, 
these  organisations  lack  the  capacity  to  ‘replace’  state  institutions;  moreover,  they  frequently 
reproduce local vertical hierarchies, thereby perpetuating social and power disparities. 

Another aspect of this social impact analysis is the importance of addressing the specific needs of 
voluntary  returning  migrants.  Returnees  pose  specific  social  and  labour-related  challenges  that 
need to be taken into account. There may be a need to put in place mechanisms for the assessment 
of the skills acquired abroad, including those gained in an informal manner. There may be a need 
to reinforce capacities of the third countries' relevant authorities to provide retraining modules for 
those  who  didn’t  work  abroad  at  a  level  corresponding  to  their  qualifications.  It  is  clear  that 
sustainable  social  and  economic  reintegration  options  need  to  be  streamlined  and  better 
integrated into overall social cohesion policies. 

Finally, from a structural perspective, migration may discourage economic and social reforms and 
contribute to continuing emigration. In poor households, remittances may act as a disincentive to 
making  claims  from  the  state,  thereby  reducing  the  pressure  on  state  obligations  or  even  public 
investment in infrastructure and social services. On the other hand, some partner countries may see 
migration  as  a  way  of  relieving  the  pressure  on  the  labour  market  by  lowering  unemployment, 
although the research shows that this impact is very limited. 

3.2.2. Protecting the human rights of all migrants during their transit process 

Respect  for  the  Charter  of  Fundamental  Rights  of  the  EU  is  a  key  component  of  EU  policies  on 
migration. Impacts on fundamental rights of any new EU initiatives shall be thoroughly assessed.15  

The  adoption  of  a  migrant-centred  approach  reflects  this  need  to  ensure  the  protection  of  human 
rights of all migrants along the migratory routes, in countries of origin, transit and destination. This 
would  encompass  measures  aimed  at  ensuring  a  better  protection  for  vulnerable  migrants,  such  as 
unaccompanied minors, asylum seekers, victims of trafficking, and stranded migrants, and the specific 
challenges  of  migrant  women.  A  migrant-centred  approach  is  also  about  empowering  migrants,  and 
ensuring  that  they  have  access  to  all  relevant  information  about  the  opportunities  provided  by  legal 
migration channels and the risks of irregular migration. 

With specific reference to transit countries, the main areas of need are related to the capacity building 
of  law  enforcement  personnel,  assistance  in  managing  mixed  migration  flows  including  through 
proper identification and registration of persons in need of protection, and the establishment of referral 
systems.  The  prevention,  protection  and  prosecution  of  criminal  acts  and  human  rights  violations 
committed  against  migrants,  especially  those  travelling  irregularly,  constitute  a  further  priority. 
Specific attention should be paid to the specific needs of unaccompanied minors, as well as migrant 
women and the incidence of gender violence. 

Lastly,  there  is  a  need  to  ensure  decent  living  conditions  for  migrants  in  reception  centres  in  third 
countries, including apprehended irregular migrants, in order  to meet their essential humanitarian and 
health needs, and to provide basic health care and nutrition assistance. 

This  strengthened  emphasis  would  be  in  line  with  one  of  the  main  conclusions  of  the  Mid  Term 
Evaluation  of  the  Thematic  Programme  on  Migration  and  Asylum  2007-2013,  which  underlined  the 
fact  that  the  EC  had  provided  high  quality  technical  assistance  and  capacity  building  to  combat 
irregular  migration, but that it could do better when it came to  mainstreaming democratic principles 
and  human  rights.  Migrants  may  indeed  be  vulnerable  to  abuses  during  recruitment,  travel  and 
employment abroad. Moreover, the money paid by irregular migrants to organised crime, smugglers 
and  traffickers  causes  a  considerable  loss  to  development.  Increased  cooperation  between  all  of  the 

15 Strategy for the effective implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights by the European Union, 
COM(2010) 573 final. 

14

 
 
                                                 
states involved, i.e. countries of origin, transit and destination, should be supported in order to mitigate 
these risks effectively. 

3.2.3. Integration of migrants in countries of destination: building on good practices 
identified in the EU  

Across the world, policy coherence is a key issue at national level for countries of both emigration and 
immigration.  There  is  a  need  to  combine  the  internal  and  external  dimension  of  donors’  policies, 
labour market policies and immigration laws, as well as migration and development strategies. 

Integrating migration into national development strategies is an issue that concerns not only countries 
of  origin,  but  also  countries  of  destination  and  transit.  Often,  developing  destination  countries  are 
unable to ensure adequate protection of migrants’ rights. Although the absence of adequate legislation 
in line with international standards concerning the rights of migrants and the protection of workers is a 
key factor in many countries, even where there are proper legislative frameworks in place, factors such 
as weak enforcement of the rule of law, a lack of administrative capacity to implement it and a failure 
to  acknowledge  abuse  of  migrants  or  to  take  an  interest  in  migrant  protection  conspire  to  leave 
migrants vulnerable to risks and exploitation. Initiatives aimed to improve respect for migrant rights 
should  include  a  wide  variety  of  partners,  from  civil  society  to  local  administrations,  the  business 
sector and labour unions. Wherever possible, initiatives should target the rights of both nationals and 
migrants; otherwise, problems of racism and xenophobia may be exacerbated. 

At  the  national  level,  migration  is  usually  dealt  with  by  a  number  of  different  state  institutions. 
However, these actors get together only seldom to discuss the issues at stake. Systematic coordination 
among  government  offices  and  inclusive  dialogue  with  other  stakeholders  should  be  encouraged  in 
order to further adapt social policies, especially in access to Health, Social Protection and Education. It 
is clearly essential that an inclusive economic development strategy in countries receiving migrants to 
should be more effective in addressing the integration of the foreign workforce into the local labour 
market,  so  as  to  avoid  ad  hoc  recruitment  through  the  informal  economy,  and  to  support 
entrepreneurship  initiatives  and  actions  aimed  at  socio-economic  empowerment  of  migrant  women. 
Social  exclusion  has  to  be  countered  by  involving  migrant  communities  more  effectively  into  local 
life, including local decision making. 

Decent  work  and  core  labour  standards,  as  advocated  by  ILO,  could  be  further  promoted  in  many 
countries around the world where standards at the worksite or in regard of the working conditions are 
not respected, and where there are weak institutions or weak labour markets. 

Any  functional  policy  for  the  integration  of  migrants  must  be  human  rights  based,  and  combating 
racist or xenophobic hate speech and hate crime, as well as discrimination, gender based violence and 
labour exploitation, must be mainstreamed into national human rights’ strategies. Access to justice for 
migrants  and  enforceability  of  rights  are  key  issues.  Achieving  this  objective  will  mainly  involve 
raising  awareness  and  building  up  the  capacity  of  law  enforcement  authorities,  labour  inspection 
services and judicial systems. National and local authorities particular attention to vulnerable groups − 
especially  unaccompanied  minors,  victims  of  trafficking  or  of  gender  based  violence  −  as  well  as 
asylum seekers and refugees. 

A comprehensive strategy on the integration of South-South migrants (see below) should also ensure a 
greater  involvement  by  countries  of  origin,  and  a  dialogue  with  countries  of  destination.  It  could 
support diaspora groups and consular services of countries of origin in third countries of destination, 
so that they can better attend to the needs of their communities and bridge the gap between them and 
the  local  authorities.  This  is  one  of  the  main  elements  for  ensuring  the  enforceability  of  human  and 
social rights, and strengthening positive outcomes from south-south migration for both countries. 

15

 
 
 
 
 
 
The European Agenda for Integration of Third Country Nationals (adopted by the Commission in July 
2011),16  emphasises  the  need  for  effective  integration  measures  to  fully  realise  the  potential  of 
migration, and it also proposes that countries of origin should be involved in supporting the integration 
process.  Best  practices  on  integration  in  EU  Member  States  could  be  shared  with  non-EU  partner 
countries. 

3.2.4. South-South migration 

The South-South dimension is a traditional component of development cooperation policy and has to 
be seen as providing support to cooperation between third countries at intra- and inter-regional level. 

Current  estimates  indicate  that  40-60%  of  the  migrants  from  developing  countries  reside  in  other 
developing  countries.  Almost  80%  of  South-South  migration  is  estimated  to  take  place  between 
countries  with  contiguous  borders;  most  appears  to  occur  between  countries  with  relatively  small 
differences  in  income.  For  instance,  African  countries  welcome  around  19  millions  international 
migrants,  mainly  Africans,  creating  opportunities  but  also  new  challenges  to  manage  for  developing 
countries. 

Estimates  of  South-South  remittances  range  between  9  and  30 %  of  the  developing  countries’ 
remittance receipts.17 The impact of South-South migration on the income of migrants and natives is 
smaller than for South-North migration. However, even small increases in income can have substantial 
welfare  implications  for  the  poor,  and  cross-migration  can  improve  the  match  between  skills  and 
requirements in the countries involved, thereby raising efficiency and improving welfare. 

These  findings  suggest  that  policy  makers  should  pay  attention  to  the  complex  challenges  faced  by 
developing countries, not only as countries of origin of migrants, but also as countries of destination. 
However,  designing  appropriate  policies  will  require  considerable  efforts  to  improve  data,  and  a 
careful  analysis  of  the  socioeconomic  impact  of  migration  on  wages,  income  distribution,  climate 
change, environment, gender, health, and migrants’ rights. 

The  South-South  dimension  of  migration  is  indeed  a  component  that  cuts  across  all  of  the  areas 
mentioned earlier and should be properly taken into account in the EU dialogue with partner countries 
and  regions,  as  well  as  properly  addressed  through  development  cooperation  actions,  including  by 
facilitating exchanges between our partner countries on migration issues. 

4. The way forward on Development and Migration: 

Whether explicitly or implicitly, migration issues are part of various sectoral policies of any country, 
whether  they  be  related  to  justice  and  home  affairs  polices,  economic  (including  sustainable  natural 
resource  use)  or  social  policies.  The  governments  of  developing  countries  take  decisions  to  foster 
economic development or ease labour market tensions by means of immigration or emigration. At the 
same time, many countries do not have the strategic policies in place, but still need immigration and 
emigration  for  their  economic  development.  The  lack  of  a  comprehensive  policy  framework  may 
result in ad hoc and arbitrary regulations and substandard protection of migrants. 

Many countries lack an awareness of the synergies and interdependencies between migration and other 
policy areas. However, in times of economic crisis, societal instability or even post-conflict situations, 
migration flows can stabilise or destabilise an economy and can impact on the social cohesion of the 
country. From an employment point of view, the scale of the informal sector in developing countries 
makes  labour  migrants  prone  to  exploitation,  trafficking  and  smuggling,  but  also  to  social  dumping. 
Furthermore, the social costs of migration are considerable and, if left unattended, may outweigh the 
economic gains of overseas employment. 

16 COM(2011) 455,. 
17 World Bank data, 2008. 

16

 
 
                                                 
To tackle this complex set of challenges effectively, the adoption of a migrant-centred approach is an 
important step forward that needs yet to be developed further in a comprehensive and coherent manner 
in order to harness the potential of migration as a key driver of economic growth. 

More specifically, it will be necessary to: 

• 

• 

• 

continue  and  deepen  Migration  and  Mobility  Dialogues  with  third  countries,  where 
appropriate in the context of regional processes, so as to exchange information, identify shared 
objectives and agree on common goals and actions; 

further assess the economic and social costs of migration; 

study/support  the  adaptation  of  economic  development  models  to  a  global  and  evolving 
context in countries that are increasingly feeling the significant effect of migration flows; 

•  deepen the discussions on the link between migration and trade; 

• 

further evaluate the experience of the coherence between national employment policies and 
active  promotion  of  labour  emigration  and  the  extent  to  which  global  or  regional 
mismatches  between  labour  demand  and  supply  may  trigger  international  migration  of 
workers; assess the influence of public policies on migration. 

More focused attention should be paid to the debate on the connection between forced displacement 
and  development,  in  particular  the  links  between  migration,  climate  change  and  environmental 
degradation.  Poor  management  of  forced  displacement  and  inadequate  efforts  to  achieve  durable 
solutions for refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) may have a destabilising effect on weak 
national and local institutions, generate tensions between displaced and local communities, and lead to 
conflict,  violence  and  further  displacement.  The  search  for  durable  solutions  needs  to  address  the 
development  needs  of  refugees  and  IDPs,  such  as  the  loss  of  housing,  land,  property,  resilience  to 
adverse  impacts  of  climate  change,  and  a  healthy  environment,  and  to  re-establish  livelihoods  and 
promote  access  to  public  services  such  as  health  and  education.  Past  experience  has  highlighted  the 
importance of supporting an integrated approach which offers development assistance to those who are 
forcibly displaced, returnees and the local communities. 

The  potential  development  opportunities  of  forced  displacement  for  receiving  communities  in  areas 
such  as  economic  linkages  between  displaced  and  host  communities,  including  trade,  as  well  as 
improved  access  to  services  and  infrastructures  in  remote  areas  of  the  country  benefiting  from 
development assistance should also be acknowledge and encouraged. 

While  not  exhaustively,  the  above  mentioned  challenges  demonstrate  a  broadening  of  the  ongoing 
reflection. This goes hand in hand with the continued integration between the EU’s external migration 
policy and the cooperation framework, and vice versa, in order to arrive at a balanced approach which 
corresponds  to  the  EU  development  policy  objectives.  For  these  reasons  the  European  Commission 
will continue its work on migration and development both at policy and at operational level. 

5. CONCLUSION 

The  migration  and  development  pillar  of  the  Global  Approach  is  still  taking  shape,  but  significant 
results have already been achieved. The Stockholm Programme has provided for an Action Plan up to 
2014  which can  be  supplemented  with  new  ideas  that  have  emerged  during  the  public  consultations 
and the assessment of the activities implemented so far. This document therefore suggests deepening 
the traditional areas of the agenda and broadening it to embrace a more migrant-centred approach. 

Beyond the traditional agenda, the current reflection focuses on the need for a new paradigm  which 
encompasses migration as a factor of development and economic growth in the medium and long term, 
and  hence  as  a  component  of  EU  development  policy  alongside  other  sectors  such  as  education,  or 
health. 

17

 
 
 
 
1) As to the traditional migration and development agenda, significant results have been achieved 
so far, but further challenges remain to be tackled: 

•  Migration  has  become  an  integral  part  of  a  number  of  national  and  regional  development 
strategies.  Several  partner  countries  and  regions  have  received  support  to  develop  and 
implement  their  own  migration  strategies,  to  gather  and  analyse  migration  data,  and  also  to 
strengthen  the  capacities  of  the  relevant  institutions.  The  EU  will  continue  supporting  these 
efforts  to  manage  migration  as  part  of  a  coherent  development  framework  and  in  line  with 
local specificities and priorities. 

•  Development objectives are being increasingly taken into account in the migration policies of 
the  EU  and  its  partner  countries.  At  the  same  time,  the  migration  dimension  is  being 
increasingly  taken  into  account  within  development  strategies.  The  EU  will  continue  to 
promote  the  Policy  Coherence  for  Development  agenda,  with  a  view  to  identifying  the 
remaining barriers in EU legislation and policy, as well strengthening development capacities 
and mechanisms in third countries. 

•  The  EU  is  widely  recognised  as  a  major  player  at  international  level  when  it  comes  to 
facilitating  cheaper  and  more  secure  private  flows  of  remittances  to  developing  countries, 
while strengthening their development impact. The EC has launched a study to help propose 
new recommendations, and to assess the opportunity and feasibility of a common EU portal 
on  remittances.  More  efforts  should  also  be  invested  in  capacity  building  with  respect  to 
partner  countries  interested  in  designing  regulatory frameworks,  as  well  as  financial  literacy 
and new technologies. 

•  The EU has strengthened its efforts to support and work with diasporas based in Europe that 
are  willing  to  contribute  to  development  projects  in  their  countries  of  origin.  It  also 
increasingly  supports  similar  efforts  by  partner  countries.  The  EU  will  continue  to  invest  in 
leveraging the contribution of diaspora communities to development and endeavour to better 
utilise  their  knowledge  and  expertise.  The  EU  will  also  assess  how  to  contribute  more 
effectively  to  enhancing  the  value  of  migrants’  skills  and  a  knowledge  in  their  countries  of 
origin, as well as whether to support diaspora volunteering and diaspora funds put in place by 
partner countries. 

•  Some progress has been achieved in mitigating brain drain’, especially in the health sector, 
while  support  for  labour  market  policies  and  decent  work  in  partner  countries  is  also  an 
important  strategy  to  help  these  countries  attract  and  retain  skilled  workers.  The  EU  will 
further analyse examples of ‘brain gain’  and assess how to scale up successful examples, as 
well as how to fight brain waste’. Including retention strategies of skilled workers in political 
dialogues with partner countries could be an option to consider. on migration issues. 

•  Circular mobility has been encouraged by means of a number of national and EU legislative 
measures, as well as by specific projects. In future, greater efforts will be invested in actually 
achieving’ the ‘triple win’ scenario traditionally associated with circular migration. The ‘win’ 
for  the  migrant  would  be  more  directly  linked  to  empowerment,  training  opportunities, 
portability of knowledge and skills, and enhanced employability upon their return. The ‘win’ 
for  the  country  of  origin  appears  to  be  quite  limited  in  terms  of  reduced  pressure  of 
unemployment  on  the  domestic  labour  market;  it  depends  very  much  on  the  quality  of  the 
skills  and  competences  ‘repatriated’  by  the  migrants  and  on  the  capacity  of  the  country  to 
make use of them. Even the gain for the destination country, and particularly for the employer, 
appears  to  be  limited  when  the  maximum  period  of  employment  is  too  short  to  represent  a 
good pay-off to the employer for the investment training and the time required to overcome 
language  and  cultural  barriers.  Increased  portability  of  social  security  rights  should  be 
promoted  as  a  key  incentive  to  circular  migration  and,  more  generally,  to  legal  labour 
mobility. 

18

 
 
 
 
2)  Broadening  the  traditional  agenda,  the  EU  is  working  towards  putting  in  place  a  more 
comprehensive framework to accompany and protect the migrant along his/her migratory route, which 
should also take into account the social consequences of migration. 

•  This includes addressing the needs created by emigration flows in the countries of origin, in 
particular by increasing knowledge about by children, women and families left behind. and 
mitigating  the  adverse  effects  they  face,  while  not  ignoring  the  potentially  negative  social 
impact  of  remittances  on  families  and  communities.  The  EU  also  believes  that  additional 
efforts could be invested in accompanying sustainable return. 

•  This approach also encompasses the protection of the human rights of all migrants during 
their  transit  process  by  devolving  efforts  to  protecting  vulnerable  migrants  (unaccompanied 
minors, asylum seekers, victims of trafficking, stranded migrants) and to the specific needs of 
women;  supporting  the  capacity  building  of  law  enforcement  forces  and  referral  systems; 
supporting  the  prevention,  protection  and  prosecution  of  criminal  acts  and  human  rights’ 
violations  committed  against  migrants,  including  those  travelling  irregularly;  and  ensuring 
decent living conditions for migrants in reception centres in third countries. 

•  Lastly,  strengthening  efforts  related  to  the  improved integration  of  migrants  in  countries  of 
destination is a key component of this approach. There needs to be an improvement in both 
understanding and action in relation to social integration and the adaptation of social policies 
(especially  health  and  education),  environmental  sustainability,  economic  and  labour 
integration,  women’s  empowerment  and  gender  equality,  and  combating  xenophobia  and 
social exclusion. In this regard, the mainstreaming of the specific needs of forced migrants in 
the development policies of third countries should be enhanced.  

In  order  to  make  operational  cooperation  more  efficient  and  to  achieve  these  goals,  efforts  will  be 
made  to  support  EU  delegations,  including  through  specific  training  and  exchanges  of  knowledge 
and  experience  on  migration  issues,  to  better  coordinate  and  mobilise  available  EU  financial 
instruments,  including  through  more  exchanges  with  Member  States  on  their  own  migration  and 
development projects. 

The recent consultations held by the Commission confirm that the reality and the challenges faced by 
partner countries as far as the link between development and migration is concerned are much broader 
and more complex than the areas already addressed so far. 

Migration  has  a  significant  impact  on  the  development  of  non-EU  countries.  Several  governments 
have  based  their  economic  development  model  partly  on  immigration  or  on  emigration,  often 
disregarding the economic and social costs and consequences that this choice entails as well as the cost 
effectiveness  of  migration  in  terms  of  growth  and  sustainable  development.  Numerous  non-EU 
countries face migration flows that are essential for their economies, but lack a structured and targeted 
policy  framework.  Awareness  about  synergies  and  interdependencies  between  migration  and  other 
policies, such as domestic employment policy or trade agreements, is often lacking. The influence of a 
number of public policies on migration patterns is usually overlooked. In case of crises or conflicts, 
variations  in  flows  are  difficult  to  cope  with  and  could  destabilise  economies  and  weaken  social 
cohesion.  The  predominance  of  the  informal  sector  in  many  developing  countries  contributes  to 
employment  of  irregular  workers  with  all  the  subsequent  problems  of  exploitation,  trafficking, 
smuggling and social consequences or creates conditions for social dumping. 

There is a growing need to promote migration governance in a development perspective at all levels, 
from international to national ones, and to improve a common understanding of the development and 
migration  nexus,  including  the  economic  and  social  consequences  of  policies,  be  they  in 
migration/asylum or in other sectors. This argues in favor of a deepening of the current reflection. 

19