How are poverty and migration linked

Poverty and migration are both complicated, multi-faceted concepts which can be caused by, and affect each other.

There are many definitions of poverty in use, but the most common meaning equates overall poverty with deprivation of the basic human need for safe drinking water, information, access to services, insufficiency in food, housing, clothing, medical care, and other items required to maintain a decent standard of living, although there is a difference between 'absolute' poverty and relative deprivation (Gordon, 2005).It is generally accepted that poverty is a key 'push' factor causing some to migrate. Theories to explain migration are generally based on so-called 'push and pull' factors: 'the push of poverty and the pull of labour shortage'; the reasons why and who migrate; being pushed out of home and pulled by the hope of economic prospects in different countries (Stalker, 2008). Although people have always moved from one destination to another in search of new opportunities, yet, not all those who live below the poverty line migrate, to escape conflicts, persecution or the outcomes of environmental catastrophes.Castles and Miller define migration as a key dynamic part within globalization which contributes to a fundamental transformation of the international political order being an essential unit of economic and social change (Castles et al. , 2009).

Thus, migration can both influence and, at the same time, change economic, social and demographic structures bringing new cultural aspects of diversity. However, migrations, whether internal or international, forced or economic are not simple processes to describe.Rather they are complex phenomenon which include movements of both peoples and capital together with the global cultural exchange triggered by technological progress. Migration phenomena can be defined as the movement of people (also include capital and cultures) from one location to another in response to vital political or economical reasons for better conditions or an improved quality of life.Many theories attempt to explain migration will be further discussed with the main focus on economic or 'voluntary' migration. This is not to be confused with 'involuntary' migratory movements such as those of refugees or asylum seekers.

According to Skeldon the linkage which exists between poverty and migration is very tight, since migration may be seen as an escape from poverty which itself can contribute to the decision to migrate.Migration, via remittances, can also contribute to the reduction of poverty for those remaining at the place of origin. Since migration can be both creator and product of poverty, poverty itself may be a cause of immobility or mobility (Skeldon, 2002). International movement or mobility is on the whole also contributing to the reduction of poverty. In many countries the monies sent back by migrants is more beneficial to national and local economies than trade.Each year, according to official statistics, about US$ 93 billion goes to developing economies from migrant remittances - this exceeds the total of all overseas development assistance, or aid.

Additional informal transfer remittances are likely to make the figure nearer to $300 billion per year (Report, 2003-04). Thus migration can deliver economic benefits, which in turn provide poverty alleviation. Temporary migration can be viewed as a way of maximising migrant income by alleviating its risks such as unemployment, loss of income, or crop failures (Stark, 1991).However, there are still many critics, especially in recipient countries, who see migration from a different perspective as bringing more disadvantages than its contribution.

Section I Migration Theories: will present a short review of different migration theories to clarify the reasons behind why people migrate and whether it indeed is the result of poverty. Answering this question helps the understanding of how and to what extent poverty and migration are linked in the context of political reality.This author is aware that not all theories explaining migration are within the scope of our research due to lack of a clear linkage between these issues. Section II Causes and effects of poverty and migration: This section will define the causes and effects of migration which can be triggered by poverty, or vice versa; investigate the factors that influence the choice of migration for the poor; identify the roots and results of both concepts, and their connection; outline how migration serves as a livelihood strategy for some people.

Section III Costs and economic benefits of migration for sending and receiving countries: This section will explain the effects of migration on development and poverty reduction strategies; critically examine the economical benefits of migration; attempt to answer the focal question: 'Does migration encourage development of the countries of origin as well as the receiving countries? ' Section IV Impact of migration on poverty alleviation strategies and the policy-making process: will identify the extent to which migration can assist to poverty alleviation programmes;.Thethe Also focus on impact of migration particularly ton the public policy and policy-making process in particular in order to improve the possibilities for make migration to work in favour of povertyof poverty reduction. I Migration theories Today As it was mentioned before there are a lot ofmany theories explaining migratory processes which exist today, . In generally , the theories based on two factors: individual and family decisions. IWhen it comes to individual decisions to migrate it alwaysare about people who decide to invest in migration as much as they would invest in education, training etc.

xpecting higher wages in return from the receiving countries.Thius creates , the basic concept of here is 'human capital': , the brightest individuals among those from the originating sending country who is in a searching for of the so called 'best' alternative country. However, Still, this approach adversely affects the sending countries who suffer causing 'brain drain'. This which in turn can further exacerbate may still contribute to the poverty rate in the country of origin. Chiswick, 2000). However, the decision to migrate is not a simple matter of choice due to the high cost rates, visas, and many other obstacles both political and economical.

obstacles nowadays. TAs the result, this neoclassical theory remainsing still pivotal in economics despite the inability to cannot produce proper evidence for to the the explanation orf important insights of the migratory process driven by the idea to alleviate poverty and be better off . ( Portes and Rumbaut, 2006).Migrants, according to Portes and Rumbaut, are not only individuals with personal skills, but the participants of social structures known as migrant networks which tie people of one origin together in their destination countries therebyof destination lowering the risk of moving to and increase ing the possibility of benefit for everyone. This is , especially true for family members, who are was involved. in such matters.

( Portes and Rumbaut, 2001996). In this respect, Massey et al. suggests that these networks can be cumulative in nature, with a .They tendency to grow and facilitate further moves, which in turn widen the network causing an expansion explaining the continuation of the initial migration process independently from the causes that led to the first prior movement.

(Massey et al. 1998). The direct predecessor of the neo-classical theory in which migration plays a pivotal role is known as the dual labour market theory. IThis t suggests that migrants involved in the same job as locals as a rule get less paid less so thusat increasing the profit for employers' profitability in the receiving countries.As the variationgaps between in wages in different countries are large and tempting, so too there are greater chances of migrants being exploited.

Nevertheless, the migrants, in most cases, from among the unskilled and poorer citizens of the originating countries, are likely to ones decide to migrate because they are more paid abroad than at home. For instance, Pwithin Europe, polish factory workers are paid around $250 per month, but if they spend their holidays in Germany picking asparagus they can earn at least $ 900 a month.Similarly, unskilled Malaysian unskilled workers can get approximately $ 100 a month but cwould earn $ 600 in Singapore. The Again, forces pushing emigrants out of the sending countries could be land shortage, gender discrimination or population pressure whereas determinants attracting immigrants flow could be a shortage of people to work at any of the so-called 'three D jobss'- dirty, dangerous and difficult with jobs, highly demand for domestic servants in some Gulf countries and , or a shrinking population in Europe. (Stalker, 2008:8, p. 27) .

An alternative One of the new theory that emerged in the 1980s ies is the new economics of labour migration which emerged in 1980s. Migration is seen as a family strategy aimed at maximising income and minimising risks of any failure or unemployment. Thus, the new economics of migration pays attention to income distribution in contrast to the neoclassical explanation. In this context it can be understood that the more unequal the distribution of income in a sending country, the more greater the likelihood thaty people wilould suffer from poverty and deprivation which, consequently, will leads to increased further migration. Stark, 1991).

The ideaThe idea that developedthat developed economies need low paid foreign labourers to work for low payment in some certain areas divisions of the economy isare shared by both the dependency theory in Marxist political economy and world system theory. These theories have much in common, as both see mMigration as, in accordance with these theories which has much in common stemingstemming s from the inequalitiesy that arise when core countries intervene in peripheral ones in search of raw materials and a cheap labour force.In the past this kind of penetration was assisted by colonial regimes, ; in the present by multinational corporations, and direct foreign investment. (Massey et al. , 1998).

. It is worth mentioning to the point Arango who argues that theories have aimed at explaining whyexplaining why people move, or whator what determines the volume of migration fail to constitute proximate determinants as the contribution of theories to the knowledge of migration is still so limited despite so far, more than what could be reasonably expected from such theories (Arango, 2000).He proceeds with the view that none of these such above-stated theories ( as neo-classical theory, world system theory, dual labour market, the new economics of migration, and 'push-pull' framework), can explain the true motives of people moving sinceas the relatively short history of theorising about migration takes the form of a string of separate, generally unconnected theories . On this basis, So, according to his claim even the classic pair 'push-' and 'pull' framework should at least be balanced complemented with 'retain-' and 'repel'.