1. OVERVIEW OF MIGRATION PROCESSES IN EAST/CENTRAL EUROPE Dušan Drbohlav Charles University Prague, Czech Republic Faculty of Science, Department of Social Geography and Regional Development drbohlav@natur.cuni.cz

2. Based on a presentation: „International Migration Patterns in the New EU Member States“. A contribution delivered at an international “annual seminar 2004“: „Europe´s Coming Generations: Demographic Trends and Social Change“, organized by: the European Observatory on the Social Situation, Demography and Family, the Austrian Institute for Family Studies and the European Commission. Brussels, Belgium, September 2004.

3. GOALS – TO DESCRIBE AND PARTLY EXPLAIN MIGRATION PATTERNS IN EIGHT NEW MEMBER STATES (NMS): The Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia. STRUCTURE: - BRIEF HISTORICAL OVERVIEW - MIGRATORY TYPES AND OVERALL MIGRATION SCALES - FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO MOVEMENTS - IMPACT OF MIGRATION ON SOCIETIES - POLICES AND PRACTICES - CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS - PROBABLE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MIGRATION MOVEMENTS

4. THIS PAPER IS BASED ON: 1) AUTHOR´S OWN EXPERIENCE 2) RESULTS OF THE EU PROJECT: „Sharing Experience: Migration Trends in Selected Applicant Countries and Lessons Learned from New Countries of Immigration in the EU and Austria“ (see Drbohlav 2004, Korys 2004, Divinský 2004, and Zavratnik-Zimic 2004) 3) SALT´S STUDY (2003) 4) OTHER SOURCES (e.g., Wallace-Stola 2001, Kielyte 2002, Nyíri 2003, Niessen-Schibel 2003, Zsoter 2003, Krieger 2004, A New 2004).

5. HISTORY 1) 19th century – the FWW – Mass migration to the „New World“ 1) 19th century – the FWW – Mass migration to the „New World“ 2) Interwar period – labour migration to WE 2) Interwar period – labour migration to WE 3) Aftermath of the SWW – 30 million people (12 million ethnic Germans) on the move 3) Aftermath of the SWW – 30 million people (12 million ethnic Germans) on the move 4) Since the end of the 1940s – socialist/communist regimes – international migration greatly restricted … 4) Since the end of the 1940s – socialist/communist regimes – international migration greatly restricted … - illegal emigration … in the wake of political upheavels: Hungary 1956, Czechoslovakia 1948, 1968, and Poland 1980/1982 - ethnically based migration - mutual exchange (among socialist countries) of labour force (Vietnam, Cuba, Angola etc.)

6. HISTORY From more liberal towards extremely restrictive migration policies during the communist era: From more liberal towards extremely restrictive migration policies during the communist era: - 1) Slovenia (within former Yugoslavia) and Hungary - 2) Poland and Czechoslovakia - 3) the Baltic states

7. HISTORY THE FOLLOWING HISTORICAL MIGRATORY LINKS OF THE NMS HAVE PARTICULARLY BEEN DEVELOPED AND ESTABLISHED: THE FOLLOWING HISTORICAL MIGRATORY LINKS OF THE NMS HAVE PARTICULARLY BEEN DEVELOPED AND ESTABLISHED: The Baltic states: Russia, … Finland, Germany The Baltic states: Russia, … Finland, Germany The Czech Republic: Slovakia, Germany, USA The Czech Republic: Slovakia, Germany, USA Hungary: Romania, former Yugoslavia, Slovakia Hungary: Romania, former Yugoslavia, Slovakia Poland: the former Soviet Union, Germany, France, USA Poland: the former Soviet Union, Germany, France, USA Slovakia: the Czech Republic, USA, Hungary Slovakia: the Czech Republic, USA, Hungary Slovenia: the former Yugoslavia, Germany, Austria, Italy Slovenia: the former Yugoslavia, Germany, Austria, Italy

8. MIGRATORY TYPES AND OVERALL MIGRATION SCALES A HIGHLY COMPLEX MIGRATION FIELD - an enormous variety of both long and short term movements to, from, and within the region: A HIGHLY COMPLEX MIGRATION FIELD - an enormous variety of both long and short term movements to, from, and within the region: - „classical“ permanent migrants - labour circular migrants - petty traders/labour tourists - cross-border commuters - transit migrants - asylum seekers - „Western immigrants“ - ethnic immigrants Many illegal/irregular migrants

9. International Migration Patterns in NMS: Estimate – Beginning of the 2000s CountryINTOOUTTHR. Czechia+++++++++ Estonia+++ Hungary+++++++++ Latvia++++ Lithuania++++ Poland++++ ++ Slovakia++++++ Slovenia+++

10. CURRENT MIGRATION PATTERNS – ESTIMATES: FLOWS INTO, OUT, THROUGH (in absolute terms)

11. Population, Area, and Components of Population Change in NMS, 2000-2002

12. Selected Migratory Parametres – Stocks in NMS, 2002

13. Selected Migratory Parametres – Flows in NMS, 2001-2002

14. Number of Asylum Applications Submitted in NMS, 1998-2003 (in thousands)

15. Factors Contributing to Migration Movements „PUSH/PULL“ FACTORS: „PUSH/PULL“ FACTORS: - Economic conditions - Democratic regime, political stability - Geographic locations - Migratory legislation and practices - Cultural distance (natives vis-a-vis immigrant groups) - Diasporas - Perception of immigrants by native population (xenophobia) It seems that there are no strong push factors that would propel a mass migration from NMS – except Poland.

16. Impact of Migration Movements on Societies In particular, ECONOMICALLY-DRIVEN immigration helps propel motors of transformation processes – mainly in capitals and other urban areas In particular, ECONOMICALLY-DRIVEN immigration helps propel motors of transformation processes – mainly in capitals and other urban areasX Often „brain-waste“ and exploitation for/of illegal/irregular immigrants - Circular labour migrants via trans-border commuting improve - Circular labour migrants via trans-border commuting improve living standards and local/regional milieu - „Western immigrants“ transfer know-how and new technologies and new cultural patterns (e.g. capitalist ethos of work) Immigration vis-a-vis CULTURAL contributions, DEMOGRAPHIC changes, changes in the SOCIAL and GEOGRAPHICAL structures =>=>=> so far no nation-wide influence on these issues Immigration vis-a-vis CULTURAL contributions, DEMOGRAPHIC changes, changes in the SOCIAL and GEOGRAPHICAL structures =>=>=> so far no nation-wide influence on these issues

17. Migration/Integration Policies and Practices - There was a mandatory alignment with the EU norms (with some exceptions – e.g. the Schengen Agreement) - More restrictive rather than more liberal policies (reinforce border controls, tighten visa regimes, strict asylum schemes, etc.) - Coherent and mutually complementary policies are still missing =>=>=> Czechia (followed by Poland and Slovenia) did more than other NMS while forming their policies/practices - States´ integration programs – ethnically based migrants preferred (contoversial issues – Hungary, Slovakia) - New pro-active policy – Czechia and its program targeted at attracting skilled/qualified foreign labour force

18. Conclusions The conditionality of migration, qualitative aspects of the migratory process and the nature of the migration policies and practices - similar to those in Western Europe The conditionality of migration, qualitative aspects of the migratory process and the nature of the migration policies and practices - similar to those in Western Europe In NMS, there is more intensive mobility, more immigration, and more transit movements, while generally emigration from NMS has been stabilizing or decreasing In NMS, there is more intensive mobility, more immigration, and more transit movements, while generally emigration from NMS has been stabilizing or decreasing However, in terms of migratory patterns, NMS create no homogeneous group However, in terms of migratory patterns, NMS create no homogeneous group As compared to other NMS, the Baltic states are, for many reasons, at a less developed stage As compared to other NMS, the Baltic states are, for many reasons, at a less developed stage

19. Probable Future Development „Past experience and several studies of the prospective enlargement have failed to indicate that further large scale movements from the new to the existing member states will occur, although there is bound to be some redistribution of population as the economies of the EU become more integrated“ (Salt 2003)

20. Immigration to Selected Western European Countries from CEEC – Delphi survey, N=15 and 9 – Czech experts, 2003

21. Emigration from Selected CEEC to Western Europe – Delphi survey, N=15 and 9 – Czech experts, 2003