Presentation on theme: "Determinants of international migration flows: Canada 1986-1996 Ann H. Kim Department of Sociology Population Studies and Training Center Brown University."— Presentation transcript:
Determinants of international migration flows: Canada 1986-1996 Ann H. Kim Department of Sociology Population Studies and Training Center Brown University
Shift from thinking of origin and destination states as discrete units to thinking of them as part of dynamic networks. Example 1. France. Garson (1992), “Migration and interdependence: The migration system between France and Africa.” Example 2. US. Sassen (1988), “The mobility of labor and capital: A study in international investment and labor flow.” Example 3. US. Yang (1996), “Post-1965 immigration to the US: Structural determinants.” And for Canada? Simmons (1999), “Immigration policy: Imagined futures.”
The Migration System – The Systems Perspective In the context of an increasingly interconnected world, international population movements can naturally be seen as complements to other flows and exchanges taking place between countries. Indeed international migrations do not occur randomly but take place usually between countries that have close historical, cultural or economic ties (Kritz and Zlotnik 1992). The Migration System – The World Systems Perspective Nation-states occupy a class position within the world capitalist economy and unequal exchange between countries results in some countries reaping the benefits of surplus value (Portes and Walton 1981; Wallerstein 1974). Study Objective: To examine the empirical link between migration flows and economic exchanges in Canada’s international migration system.
ImmigrantsExportsImportsCDIA* 1986 USA India Vietnam Hong Kong Poland USA Japan United Kingdom West Germany USSR USA Japan United Kingdom West Germany Korea USA United Kingdom Bahamas Singapore Australia 1996 1995 Hong Kong India China Taiwan Philippines USA Japan United Kingdom Germany China USA Japan Mexico United Kingdom China USA United Kingdom Ireland Japan Australia Increase 86-96 Increase 86-95 Hong Kong China India Taiwan Philippines USA Japan Korea China United Kingdom USA Mexico China Japan Norway USA United Kingdom Ireland Japan Hong Kong Decrease 86-96 Decrease** 86-95 Vietnam Poland El Salvador Portugal Guyana Cuba Iraq Portugal Bulgaria Bangladesh Nigeria El Salvador Bermuda Nicaragua Zaire Antilles (Netherlands) Greece South Africa Norway Top 5 Countries in Canada’s Migration System
Data Sources: Citizenship & Immigration Canada Statistics Statistics Canada World Bank Development Indicators Human Development Reports – UN Sample: 117 countries, account for 93% of immigrants in 1986, 85% in 1996. Scale of immigration increased from 1986 to 1996. Numbers from the top sending country quadrupled, 7,275 (USA) to 29,966 (Hong Kong). ¼ countries experienced decreases in flows. Average decrease ~ 660 immigrants. Average increase ~ 1,300 immigrants. Export values increased, on average, over the period. Import values decreased, on average, over the period.
19861996 Variables (logged)BStandard Errors B GDP per capita Population size Population density Size of co-immigrant network Export value Import value -0.197 -0.016 0.129* 0.350** 0.173** -0.020 0.12 0.11 0.07 0.13 0.08 0.12 -0.071 0.151 0.157* 0.937** 0.253** -0.088 0.12 0.11 0.08 0.15 0.09 0.07 Adjusted R 2 0.704**0.581** **p<0.05, *p<0.10 Cross-sectional multivariate regression results 1986 & 1996
Model 1Model 2Model 3 VariablesBStd Errors BStd Errors BStd Errors ∆ GDP per capita ∆ Population size ∆ Population density ∆ Size of co- immigrant network ∆ Export value ∆ Import value -0.845** -1.672 3.963 0.37 5.81 5.79 -0.956** -2.340 -2.672 1.821** 0.35 4.51 4.50 0.45 -0.736* -2.765 -3.057 1.745** -0.084 -0.054 0.41 4.54 4.53 0.46 0.10 0.07 Adjusted R 2 0.095**0.204**0.199** First-difference regression results on change in logged flows 1986-1996 **p<0.05, *p<0.10
Conclusions No systematic pattern of association between changes in economic relations and migration flows but for a given year, there is a positive relationship between export trade and migration numbers. Exports not imports. The social network is one of the key driving forces behind contemporary migration streams. Lack of significance in the first difference model may be attributed to the pooling of developed/developing countries. Future work, with more complete and reliable data, might re- examine these models or conduct longitudinal case studies to investigate particular trajectories of bilateral relations, e.g. China.