After years of explosive growth, the number of international students in US universities has started to decline. Gaurav Khanna looks at what drove the initial boom, why it’s levelling off now, and why that matters.
CGD Policy Blogs
On World Refugee Day, we recognise the plight of the 25 million people who have been forced to flee their countries, to stand with them in solidarity and to appreciate the benefits that they have brought, or can bring to many economies. There are numerous studies that demonstrate the various economic benefits that accepting refugees can bring, and one of the most important from the receiving government’s point of view is the potential for refugees to become net fiscal contributors.
The World Cup kicks off today in Russia, and for the players who perform well, it could earn them a transformative move to a European club. Are these moves a boon for fans and development, or are they an example of how migration and money have gone too far?
Too often, migration debates focus on what the effects of immigration are: Do migrants take jobs and drive down wages of native workers? Are refugees a drain on public services, taking advantage of social welfare? Facing this challenge means asking a different and more fruitful question: how different policy choices can produce positive outcomes and avoid negative ones.
The US is going to use aid to shape migration. That’s at least how the president’s remarks seem to have laid it out at an immigration roundtable last month, when he announced his White House is “working on a plan to deduct a lot of aid” from countries whose nationals arrive at the US border. “[W]e may not just give them aid at all.”
The United States will be changing how it admits foreign farm workers. Done right, this presents a big opportunity to meet clear goals of the current administration: to reduce unauthorized migration and create US jobs. Three core tenets to keep in mind: non-seasonal work, visa portability, and bilateral cooperation.
For at least a couple of decades NGOs and others in developing countries have been designing, evaluating, tinkering, and trying to improve projects and programs that deliver specific in-kind “interventions” to targeted individuals/households in ways that raised their incomes in a sustained way.
Can Lawful Migration Channels Suppress Unlawful Migration? How US Experience Can Inform European Dilemmas
Richer countries are under pressure to respond to and suppress high levels of irregular migration reaching their borders. One prominent recommendation is for richer countries to expand opportunities for lawful or regular migration. Suppose they do. Will more regular migration simply raise migration overall, or will it substitute for and reduce irregular migration?
An increasingly common justification for European development assistance to Africa is the notion that it will reduce migration from the South. While this sounds intuitive and makes for an appealing argument, the research shows that it is highly unlikely. As communities become less poor, more people gain the abilities and wherewithal to undertake an expensive journey to a better life elsewhere. Development often increases migration—at least initially.
As world leaders convene in Davos this week, the global migration crisis finds itself buried in the agenda.