doi: 10.1111/imig.

12623

Migration Governance and Policy in the

Global South: Introduction and Overview

Rachel M. Gisselquist* and Finn Tarp**

ABSTRACT

Building knowledge about migration governance and policy in the Global South is a priority
for research and policy. The studies in this special section offer both new empirical insights
and new frameworks for analysis, with key policy implications, that can enrich our discussion
of these topics. They focus on issues that relate to national and sub-national level governance
and policy, speaking both to the impact of diverse governance structures and policies on the
well-being of migrants and host communities, and of the policy-making process itself and the
factors influencing that process. In so doing, they point toward promising directions for future
work on these topics and underscore the value of multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and
cross-regional analysis. This essay provides an introduction to the studies included in this col-
lection, framing their contributions in the context of research in development and ongoing glo-
bal discussions on migration policy.

Migration is a defining feature of our time and one closely linked with processes of economic
and political development. As de Haas (2010) argues, it is a process integral to the “broader
transformation processes embodied in the term ‘development’.” Likewise, it influences and is
influenced by these processes. Considerable research has explored this interactive relationship. In
the field of development economics, for one, labour migration and urbanization have been core
topics since its foundational work in the post-war period (see Castles, 2008, Harris and Todaro,
1970). The “migration-development nexus” has also attracted considerable policy attention,
including consideration of (under)development as a root cause of migration, the relationship
between globalization and migration, and the possibilities for closer linking of migration and
development policies by donors (see Van Hear and Sørensen, 2003). With the 2015 European
refugee crisis, such discussions have received renewed focus and urgency over the last several
years (e.g., UNESCO, 2017). Likewise, migration receives attention in the Sustainable Develop-
ment Goals (SDG), in particular SDG target 10.7, which prioritizes the facilitation of “orderly,
safe, and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of
planned and well-managed migration policies.”
This special section has its origins in an international conference that we organized at the
University of Ghana in October 2017, on “Migration and Mobility: New Frontiers for Research
and Policy.” Hosted by the United Nations University, World Institute for Development Eco-
nomics Research (UNU-WIDER) and the African Research Universities Alliance (ARUA), the
conference provided an opportunity to focus on a long-cross-cutting theme in UNU-WIDER’s

* United Nations University, World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-WIDER), Finland
** Department of Economics, University of Copenhagen (UCPH), Denmark

© 2019 The Authors

International Migration © 2019 IOM
International Migration Vol. 57 (4) 2019
Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. ISSN 0020-7985
248 Gisselquist and Tarp

research in development. We cast a wide net in terms of topics and approaches – considering
voluntary as well as involuntary migration, regular and irregular, and internal and cross-border
migration. We focused on work dealing with these topics in the Global South, with special atten-
tion to research by Southern scholars and support for international research exchange (Gisselquist,
2017). One of the conclusions that we drew from these two days of discussions – including two
keynote addresses, 57 presentations in 18 parallel sessions, and 24 posters – was the value of
continuing research attention in work on migration to domestic policy, politics, and governance
in the Global South. In many ways, we see this conclusion as closely related to current calls in
the field of development to better “take politics into account” and incorporate political economy
approaches into research and policy in our field (see Carothers and de Gramont, 2013; Dasandi
et al., 2019).
The importance of paying better attention to migration governance and policy at the national
level in Southern countries also resonates with global discussions. As Sachs (2016), among others,
has argued, “the current international regime on migration urgently needs reform” (see also Parvi-
ainen and Tarp, 2016, Betts, 2012). The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration
(GCM), an intergovernmentally negotiated agreement signed in December 2018, is a key interna-
tional effort to meet such calls. In the GCM, UN Member States have agreed on a set of 23 non-
binding objectives for safe, orderly, and regular migration, with implications for the management
of migration at local, national, regional and global levels.
The studies in this collection, most of which were presented in early iteration at our conference
in Ghana, speak to a number of these objectives, including issues of data and the collection of
accurate information, drivers of migration, pathways for regular migration and decent work, vulner-
abilities in migration, trafficking in persons, inclusion and social cohesion in host societies, and
contributions by migrants and diasporas to sustainable development in all countries. Collectively,
they offer both new empirical insights and new frameworks for analysis, with key policy implica-
tions, that can enrich our discussion of these topics. They focus on issues that relate to national
and sub-national level governance and policy, speaking both to the impact of diverse governance
structures and policies on the well-being of migrants and host communities, and of the policy-mak-
ing process itself and the factors influencing that process. In so doing, they point toward promising
directions for future work on these topics.
More broadly, they contribute to the literature in several ways. First, they add to the emerging
body of research on migration governance and policy in Southern countries. While there are studies
on these issues in the Global South (e.g., Diedhiou, 2015, Hansen, 2012, Hofmann et al., 2016,
Hugo, 2009, Raimundo, 2009), research in this area remains more developed for Northern countries
(e.g., Adepoju et al., 2010, Cerna, 2014, Filindra and Kov
acs, 2012, Finotelli and Echeverr
ıa,
2017, Koslowski, 2014, Collinson, 1993, Guiraudon, 2000). And, the sheer volume of migration in
Southern countries calls for more research attention, with recent analyses suggesting, for instance,
that South-South migration slightly exceeded South-North migration in 2015 (IOM, 2018). (For a
critique of such classifications, see Ingleby et al., 2019) as Palmary et al. (2019) argue in this col-
lection, frameworks and findings from this latter literature may not carry very well outside Western
Europe and North America (see also Asis et al., 2010; Piper, 2006).
Second, the studies in this collection underscore the value of multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary,
and cross-regional work on these topics. Contributions are grounded in multiple disciplines, includ-
ing economics, political science, sociology, and migration studies. They employ a variety of quali-
tative and quantitative techniques. Collectively, they draw on research conducted in or with
migrants from Bangladesh, China, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, India, Lebanon,
Rwanda, Singapore, South Africa, Syria, and Turkey.

© 2019 The Authors. International Migration © 2019 IOM

 Migration governance in the global south 249

THE ARTICLES

Ingrid Palmary’s keynote address in Ghana provided a useful frame for our conference discussions,
urging us toward focus on politics, policy-making, and governance. The first article in this special
section originated in this keynote.
A starting point for Palmary et al. (2019)’s analysis is that existing frameworks for consideration
of migration policymaking are developed largely with reference to European and North American
contexts and thus should be reconsidered in the light of evidence from post-colonial cases. As they
note, contextual factors that influence policy change – political and legislative arrangements, as
well as social norms and public expectations – may differ dramatically across such diverse con-
texts. Using the method of structured comparison, they build on three case studies of migration
policies intended to protect the rights of vulnerable migrant women: the Domestic Workers Protec-
tion and Welfare Policy, approved by the government of Bangladesh in 2015; the mandatory day-
off policy for foreign domestic workers introduced by Singapore’s Ministry of Manpower in 2014;
and the Trafficking in Persons Act in South Africa, which came into effect in 2015. Each of these
studies was conducted by local research partners – based at the Refugee and Migratory Movements
Research Unit, University of Dhaka, Bangladesh; the Asia Research Institute, National University
of Singapore; and the African Centre for Migration and Society, University of the Witwatersrand,
South Africa.
As the cases illustrate, the content of these policies and their intended recipients shape the policy
making process in important ways. In particular, as echoed in many of the studies in this special
section, policies to support migrants are often “unpopular” because they may be linked to public
concerns about financial burdens and fairness in the distribution of public resources, as well as
security risks. Through the three case studies, Palmary et al. (2019) consider and compare four
broad factors shaping the process of policy change: role players, key debates, the role of research,
and the political context. Several key points emerge from this analysis that might help advocates
and policymakers to influence policy change more effectively. One is the role played by both inter-
national and local actors in policy change and the role of coalitions in balancing power relations
between NGOs and government. A second concerns how gender and vulnerability shaped the nat-
ure of public debate, including an emphasis on morality in discussions in which their own voices
were relatively absent. Third, the relationship between research and policy change is tenuous at
best, challenging a now global emphasis on “evidence-based policy-making.” Last is the diverse
influence of political context. For instance, one important contextual factor in understanding the
Bangladesh case study is that its civil society has had considerable experience since the 1990s in
grassroots activism and policy advocacy, including on gender and workers’ rights. These four fac-
tors provide a useful framework for consideration of other migration policy change processes.
In contrast to Palmary et al. (2019)’s qualitative comparative analysis across cases in different
countries, Chakraborty and Garg (2019) offer focused consideration of patterns, trends, and drivers
of internal migration across Indian states. Inter-state migration is an issue of considerable policy
significance in India. The number of inter-state migrants is notable and growing: between 1971 and
2001, for instance, it almost doubled, from 10.5 million to 19.8 million. As elsewhere, migration
between states in India can be politically contentious, with “local” residents reluctant to share
“their” local public goods and economic prosperity with migrants from other states.
Chakraborty and Garg (2019) focus in particular on the relationship between the Indian fiscal
transfer system and internal migration, speaking to a major policy issue: the influence of fiscal pol-
icy on internal migration. They consider whether, within a federal state like India’s, fiscal transfers
can help to address issues of fiscal inequality due to differences in fiscal capacity. They also
explore the influence of state governments’ fiscal behaviour in inducing migration, both in high-
and low-income regions. Analysis draws on data on interstate migration, fiscal transfers, and state

© 2019 The Authors. International Migration © 2019 IOM

250 Gisselquist and Tarp

government expenditure and revenues for 1971, 1981, 1991, and 2001. Overall, they show, patterns
of migration across Indian states are influenced strongly by the fiscal transfer system; there is a sig-
nificant relationship between inter-state migration and share of transfers in both origin and destina-
tion states’ net state domestic product (NSDP). Using a gravity model to estimate the determinants
of inter-state migration, their analysis suggests that the pressure of out-migration to more prosper-
ous regions could be reduced through a relatively more progressive transfer system and a develop-
mental fiscal policy stance by states.
Distributional conflict over public resources between migrant and host community populations
can also be seen as a starting point for Bilgili et al. (2019), which considers how the arrival of
refugees impacts host communities. A significant research literature suggests that the arrival of refu-
gees can have diverse impacts on land, water, housing, food, employment, and public service pro-
vision (see UNHCR, 1997). Focusing on Rwandan communities hosting Congolese refugees, the
article speaks to this literature through study of whether educational services and outcomes for
local children are influenced by the proximity of a refugee camp. Rwanda provides an interesting
context for such a study both because it hosts significant numbers of refugees (around 160,000 cur-
rently), and because of the Rwandan government’s relatively permissive policy towards refugees,
including the promotion of a “community integrated approach” in which “programs meant to bene-
fit refugees have to also benefit local communities and programs for citizens’ development benefit
refugees” (Seraphine Mukantabana, Minister for Disaster Management and Refugee Affairs, as
quoted in Government of Rwanda, 2014).
Adopting a mixed methods approach, Bilgili et al. (2019)’s analysis focuses on communities clo-
ser to and further from three refugee camps, drawing on three key sources: a household survey
conducted in communities at various distances to refugee camps; a community survey providing
information on public service provision in communities as a whole; and information gathered
through focus group discussions in the same communities. Analysis suggests that proximity to refu-
gee camps is related both to better schooling outcomes for Rwandan children, and to more positive
local attitudes about the impact of refugees on local education. In short, Bilgili et al. (2019)’s find-
ings contribute to a growing body of work demonstrating that refugees in fact need not be a “bur-
den” and that there can be benefits to hosting refugees in low-income countries.
From a very different angle, Botchwey et al. (2018) likewise speak to the impact of international
migration on receiving countries and populations, as well as to migrants themselves, including how
this is influenced by government policies and migrants’ legal status. Focusing on irregular migra-
tion from China to Ghana, their article also speaks to empirical gaps in the research literature on
the substantial Chinese migration to sub-Saharan Africa, as well as to gaps in research on irregular
migration into an informal sector. Between 2008 and 2013, roughly 50,000 Chinese – mainly from
Shanglin County in Guangxi – migrated to Ghana to work in the informal small-scale gold mining
sector. This migration has been controversial in Ghana, not least because of the legal status of these
miners given that small-scale mining has been restricted to Ghanaian citizens by law (see the Min-
erals and Mining Act, 2006).
The article finds that this mass migration has had significant impact – not only on the livelihoods
of Chinese miners – but also on Ghanaian miners and on broader economic, political, and environ-
mental outcomes. For one, this migration has revolutionized the small-scale gold mining industry,
with Ghanaian miners now using machinery and techniques introduced by Chinese miners. This
has contributed to substantial increases in gold production from small-scale mining, with implica-
tions for earnings for both Ghanaian and Chinese miners. Political impact has also been significant.
Far from being absent in the sphere of irregular migrants, many state and traditional authorities it
seems were quite present, although acting to abuse their public authority for private wealth accumu-
lation. In addition, unregulated small-scale mining has also had adverse environmental conse-
quences, the scale of which has grown with intensified gold production. In short, this migration

© 2019 The Authors. International Migration © 2019 IOM

 Migration governance in the global south 251

had diverse and sometimes dramatic impacts on livelihoods and developmental landscapes in which
politics, policy, and governance can be seen to play an important role.
In the final article in this special section, Abdel-Samad and Flanigan (2019) provide yet another
angle to a Southern focused perspective on migration governance through consideration of Syrian
diaspora organizations’ provision of assistance to conflict-affected Syrians in Lebanon, Syria, and
Turkey. Such organizations can play a significant role in providing assistance to migrants; in this
sense, they help to meet needs unmet by governments and other actors, which may be especially
pronounced in fragile situations with poor governance. Abdel-Samad and Flanigan (2019) focuses,
however, on another aspect of migration governance here – that of governance within these organi-
zations themselves, in particular issues of accountability and the social mechanisms employed to
support it in challenging environments.
Analysis draws on data compiled through semi-structured interviews with leaders of four Syrian
diaspora non-profits. All four organizations provide aid or social services to Syrians in multiple
countries. The article illustrates how these organizations draw on informal social accountability
mechanisms derived from individuals’ social network ties, which help them to address uncertainty
and other challenges in the environments in which they operate. In this sense, diaspora organiza-
tions may have an advantage over other actors in conflict zones because they can better identify
dependable partners and enforce agreements through reliance on personal and social ties. One
implication of this is that such organizations could be useful partners for larger international organi-
zations with more resources in global efforts to assist migrants, particularly in challenging environ-
ments.

TOWARDS “WELL-MANAGED MIGRATION POLICIES”

A key indicator of SDG target 10.7 is the number of countries that have implemented “well-man-
aged migration policies” (10.7.2). While what exactly constitutes “well-managed” remains a point
of some discussion, the international community has made some progress toward definition. A key
example is the Migration Governance Framework (MiGOF), which was adopted by the IOM Coun-
cil in 2015. IOM and the Population Division of UNDESA further offer a methodology for its mea-
surement across six key policy domains. Another assessment tool that speaks to the MiGOF is the
Migration Governance Indicators, developed by IOM in collaboration with the Economist Intelli-
gence Unit. These indicators are intended to help identify best practices and policy levers for coun-
tries to strengthen their migration governance, as well as to report on their progress towards target
10.7.
The sort of studies included in this special section can contribute to this broader global conversa-
tion. In terms of SDG measurement, for instance, they offer deeply grounded new empirical
insights with which to think critically about such cross-national indicators and snapshots. In terms
of the development and implementation of well-managed migration policies, furthermore, they also
offer new frameworks and perspectives in understanding such processes and thinking about levers
of change.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This special section is supported by UNU-WIDER. We thank in particular Ernest Aryeetey and
ARUA for their collaboration, participants of the “Migration and Mobility” conference for thought-
provoking discussions, and Ayu Pratiwi for research assistance.

© 2019 The Authors. International Migration © 2019 IOM

252 Gisselquist and Tarp

REFERENCES

Abdel-Samad, M. and S.T. Flanigan

2019 “Social accountability in diaspora organizations aiding Syrian migrants”, International Migration.
https://doi.org/10.1111/imig.12494.
Adepoju, A., F. Van Noorloos and A. Zoomers
2010 “Europe’s migration agreements with migrant-sending countries in the global south: A critical
review”, International Migration, 48(3): 42–75.
Asis, M.M.B., N. Piper and P. Raghuram
2010 “International migration and development in Asia: Exploring knowledge frameworks”, International
Migration, 48(3): 76–106.
Betts, A.
2012 Global Migration Governance, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
€ C. Loschmann, S. Fransen et al.
Bilgili, O.,
2019 "Is the education of local children influenced by living near a refugee camp? Evidence from host
communities in Rwanda", International Migration. https://doi.org/10.1111/imig.12541.
Botchwey, G., G. Crawford, N. Loubere et al.
2018 “South-south irregular migration: The impacts of China's informal gold rush in Ghana”, Interna-
tional Migration. https://doi.org/10.1111/imig.12518.
Carothers, T. and D. De Gramont
2013 Development Aid Confronts Politics: The Almost Revolution. Brookings Institution Press, Washing-
ton, DC.
Castles, S.
2008 “Development and migration - migration and development: What comes first? Global perspective
and African experiences”, Politics of MIgration, 56(121): 131.
Cerna, L.
2014 “Attracting high-skilled immigrants: Policies in comparative perspective”, International Migration,
52(3): 69–84.
Chakraborty, P. and S. Garg
2019 “Fiscal pressure of migration and horizontal fiscal inequality: Evidence from Indian experience”,
International Migration. https://doi.org/10.1111/imig.12536.
Collinson, S.
1993 Beyond Borders: West European Migration Policy Towards the 21st Century. Royal Institute of
International Affairs, London.
Dasandi, N., E. Laws, H. Marquette, et al.
2019 “What does the evidence tell us about ‘Thinking and working politically’ in development assis-
tance?”, Politics and Governance, 7(2): 14.
De Haas, H.
2010 “Migration and development: A theoretical perspective”, International Migration Review, 44(1):
227–264.
Diedhiou, A.
2015 “Remittances, transnational dahiras and governance in Senegal”, International Migration, 53(1):
171–186.
Filindra, A. and M. Kov
acs
2012 “Analysing US state legislative resolutions on immigrants and immigration: The role of immigra-
tion federalism***”, International Migration, 50(4): 33–50.
Finotelli, C. and G. Echeverr
ıa
2017 “So close but yet so far? Labour Migration Governance in Italy and Spain”, International Migra-
tion, 55(S1): 39–51.
Gisselquist, R.M.
2017 "A WIDER perspective on migration" Blog. Available at wider.unu.edu (Accessed 26 June 2019).
Government of Rwanda
2014 “MIDIMAR launches 1000 Days nutrition campaign in refugee camps”, Report from Government
of Rwanda. Available at reliefweb.int (accessed 26 June 2019).

© 2019 The Authors. International Migration © 2019 IOM

 Migration governance in the global south 253

Guiraudon, V.
2000 "European integration and migration policy: Vertical policy-making as venue shopping", Journal of
Common Market Studies, 38(2): 251–271.
Hansen, P.
2012 “Revisiting the remittance mantra: A study of migration-development policy formation in Tanza-
nia”, International Migration, 50(3): 77–91.
Harris, J.R. and M.P. Todaro
1970 “Migration, unemployment and development: A two-sector analysis”, The American Economic
Review, 60(1): 126–142.
Hofmann, E.T., J.L. Carboni, B. Mitchneck, et al
2016 “Policy streams and immigration to Russia: Competing and complementary interests at the federal
and local levels”, International Migration, 54(2): 34–49.
Hugo, G.
2009 “Best practice in temporary labour migration for development: A perspective from Asia and the
pacific”, International Migration, 47(5): 23–74.
Ingleby, D., A. Singleton and K. Wickramage
2019 "Is it time to phase out UNDESA's regional criterion of development?", International Migration, (2
May 2019).
IOM
2018 "Data bulletin: Informing a global compact for migration", in Data Bulletin: Informing a Global
Compact for Migration, IOM, United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, and
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. Grand-Saconnex, Switzerland.
Koslowski, R.
2014 “Selective Migration Policy Models and Changing Realities of Implementation”, International
Migration, 52(3): 26–39.
Palmary, I., T. DeGruchy, A.A. Ashraf et al.
2019 "How unpopular policies are made: Examples from South Africa, Singapore and Bangladesh",
International Migration. https://doi.org/10.1111/imig.12505.
Parviainen, S. and F. Tarp
2016 "An economist’s view on migration and refugees", United Nations University, available at unu.edu
(accessed 27 June 2018).
Piper, N.
2006 “Gendering the Politics of Migration”, The International Migration Review, 40(1): 133–164.
Raimundo, I.M.
2009 “International Migration Management and Development in Mozambique: What Strategies?”, Inter-
national Migration, 47(3): 93–122.
Sachs, J.D.
2016 “Toward an international migration regime”, American Economic Review, 106(5): 451–455.
UNESCO
2017 Migration as a Development Challenge: Analysis of Root Causes and Policy Implications.
UNESCO, London, UK.
UNHCR
1997 "Social and economic impact of large refugee populations on host developing countries", Social
and economic impact of large refugee populations on host developing countries. UNHCR Standing
Committee, Geneva, Switzerland. available at unhcr.org (accessed 27 June 2019).
Van Hear, N. and N.N. Sørensen
2003 The migration-development nexus. International Organization for Migration, Grand-Saconnex,
Switzerland.

© 2019 The Authors. International Migration © 2019 IOM

Copyright of International Migration is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may
not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.