AEGIS ECAS 2007 - View abstract

Panel	75. Migration reshaping the landscape of African development: bridging theory-practice and sending-receiving gaps
Paper ID	637
Author(s)	Smith, Lothar
Paper	View paper (PDF)
Abstract	Over the past two decades a debate has arisen between scholars largely opposed to migration from developing countries and those who favour migration for the impact it has on the economies of developing countries. Rising interest and involvement of other actors in this debate on the relationship between migration and development, notably governments of sending and receiving countries, has only seemed to further polarize the debate resulting in two main schools of thought: The anti-migration school gives primacy to issues such as ‘brain drain’ and social issues related to the migration process itself to argue for restrictive measures that would counter mass migration. In contrast the pro-migration school emphasizes how, even informal migrants, who have arrived in the west through risky and expensive informal routes are still able to support their families, friends and others in their countries of origin, contributing to the local economy, through the remittances they send (de Haas 2005, Anarfi et al. 2004, Orozco 2005, Sander 2003, Obadina 2003). From insights in our own empirical data we feel that both schools can claim validity for some of their arguments. Our own insights derive from a multi-sited research programme approach (Mazzucato 2000) in which, contemporaneously, research was conducted in three geographical sites: Amsterdam (migrants), Ashanti Region (a rural economy) and Accra (an urban economy). While this paper confines itself to the findings from the Accra research, the transnational approach we took at a programme level has helped reveal how research which confines itself to one location (usually ‘migrant communities’) or to monetary flows (i.e. remittances) only, provide incomplete insights in how transnational investments actually take place, and what these mean for the different actors involved, to understand their ‘development’ capacity. For migrants to be able to realize certain investments, they need to engage with local actors who would be willing to invest own resources in their activities. While in some situations the benefits for local actors to become involved are clear, in others they are not. Yet urban actors may still be involved, how can this be explained? For this we need to understand the institutional embedding of transnational relationships, their history of exchanges, and the multiple engagements between the two actors in a wide range of economic domains, i.e. transnational relations often entail a two-way rather than one-way flow of resources. Also, not all institutions are equally able to traverse national boundaries than others while they may also not be equally suitable in all transnational activities, notably when investments in the urban economy are only meant to benefit a few actors (including the migrant), e.g. investments in urban houses and businesses. Through our transnational-institutional lens we problematize existing perceptions on the influence of migration for developing countries, particularly in relation to possibilities to harness or guide these influences to propel economies of developing countries (O’Neill 2003, IOM 2005, Black et al. 2003, Sorensen 2004, Hugo 2006).

Through the transnational lens: The influence of migrants on the economy of Accra, Ghana