Mass Migration in Europe - a Threat or Benefit to Host Countries - Coursework Example

Mass Migration to Europe: A threat or benefit to host countries? Introduction Europe now compares to North America in its magnitude of immigrants. All European states are now net immigration countries, which means that more immigrants are entering these countries than leaving them. Established host countries like France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Benelux countries, Austria, Switzerland, Sweden and Denmark have been net immigration countries since the 1960s (Boswell 2005, p. 2). Though there was a decline in migration in 1973-4 due to discontinuance of recruitment, there have been high degrees of immigration since the 1990s to most of these countries. Family reunions, refugee flows and labour migration accounted for most of these inflows. Germany, which experienced an exceptionally high inflow of immigrants in the early 1990s, for the same reason, saw a decrease in inflow since the early 1990s (Boswell 2005, p. 2). According to a study by the German Ministry for Business and Technology, there is a worsening situation of skills shortage in Germany “as more highly skilled Germans leave the country and fewer immigrants arrive” (UK split on costs and benefits 2007). Germany follows a closed-door policy on labour immigrants from Eastern Europe. In the 1980s, there also arose another category of net immigration countries mainly due to the growing economic prosperity of these countries and also because of a redirection of flows consequent to more stringent policies with regard to migration in the north European receiving countries. These countries include Ireland, Spain Portugal, Greece and Finland, with markedly high inrush of labour migrants into the former three countries. Migration to these net receiving countries also increased since the 1990s (Boswell 2005, p. 2). Several of the countries that joined the European Union experienced economic growth and improved political stability following the unification and attracted a great influx of migrants. Some of these countries are Cyprus, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Slovania (Boswell 2005, p. 2). The drawbacks of mass migration One of the factors leading to increased immigrant inflow into these countries is the increased labour opportunities available in these countries. This has also led to irregular entry of immigrants. Another factor leading to the increased immigration is the enhanced relationship of the European Union with its neighbours, which has led to easing of travel restrictions into these countries. This has also led to irregular entry of immigrants to these countries and illegal activities like smuggling and trafficking (Boswell 2005, p. 4). An article by Drury (2008) states that according to the Lords Economic Affairs Committee, “record levels of migration have brought virtually no economic benefit to Britain.” Public facilities such as schools, hospitals and transport are reported to have struggled to deal with the immigrant influx. It has also been reported that immigrants force wage levels down. The report presented that almost £8.8 billion was used “to bolster the asylum system, teach English to the new arrivals and treat illnesses” (Drury 2008). The report urged the fixing of a limit on the number of family members that can settle in Britain with a relative. The impact of the diversity of ethnic cultures on the free thinking and other democratic values of the European population has been another question of concern that has been posed time and again. For example, the cultural and social impact of Polish immigration to the United Kingdom is going to be very different from that of Somalian immigration, as the culture of Poland is very similar to that of the UK’s while that of Somalia is not (Haiste 2008). Immigration from Islamic countries is going to affect the European societies the most in the coming decades as immigration into Europe during this time will be mostly from Somalia, Turkey and the Middle East. The increase in the Muslim electorate is going to have its effects on the politicians, the laws that they pass, and the policies that they make. This will have a great impact on the European societies, as Muslims are likely to vote for Muslims or those who represent their interests (Haiste 2008). This raises the question whether in such a situation Europe will be able to survive as a socially liberal and politically secular entity. There is no clear division between religion and state in the Islamic way of life as evidenced by opinion polls where the majority of British Muslims voted for Islamic courts. Even the second and the third generation immigrants do not seem to be assimilating. In the face of an expanding Muslim population, according to Haiste (2008), if the Europeans wish to preserve their liberal, free thinking culture, they should not allow excessive tolerance and apathy to sow the seeds of their own cultural destruction. Today the biggest fear faced by the host countries of immigrants is the fear of social disorder and the conflicting values of non-Western immigrants. They fear that through their sheer numbers they would destabilize Western societies and “in the near future will become so numerous that the demographic outlook of countries such as France, Great Britain, Germany, and the Netherlands will change dramatically” (Lucassen 2005, p.1). The benefits of migration Though European countries, as compared to the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, found more difficulties in accepting immigrants, especially those from cultural and ethnic backgrounds that are significantly different from their own, leading to anti-immigrant discrimination, the benefits they have gained are significant from immigration. Low-skilled immigration of the 1950s and the 1960s has played an important role in the post-war economic reconstruction in Western Europe. In contrast to migration to North America or Australia, labour immigration to Europe was intended to be temporary by the sending and receiving countries as well as the migrants (Dustmann 1996, p. 216). Temporary labour migration seemed to be beneficial for everybody in that it solved a temporary labour shortage problem for the host country and while increasing the wealth of the migrants, the migrants’ home countries benefited from the experience they gained abroad. In the more recent times, “labour migration fills critical gaps in the IT sector, engineering, construction, agriculture and food processing, health care, teaching, catering and tourism, and domestic services” (Boswell 2005, p. 5). According to Boswell, the economic case for labour immigration is going to be more impelling in the coming decades. An important factor leading to this is the increased importance of skilled human capital in an increasingly knowledge-based economy. Another factor is the higher qualifications of the European workers and their discriminative nature in the choice of occupations and locations, which would leave labour shortages in the low- and semi-skilled as well as low-status and low-remuneration job sectors. Besides, the increasing ageing and dependent population in the European countries would lead to increased demand for labour in healthcare and leisure sectors (Boswell 2005, p. 5). The threats associated with migration The impact of immigration has been far-reaching on European societies. Cultural changes have occurred in the spheres of cuisine, sports, fashion, the arts and the media in addition to labour, politics and economy. Immigration has led to the formation of culturally pluralistic societies which in turn have led to “the emergence of new, often hybrid forms of cultural expression” (European Migration Network 2006, p. 9). While on the one hand, there has been increasing liberalisation, on the other hand there has been increased pressure for restriction of immigration due to several genuine fears and some misconceptions. In spite of the positive economic impacts of migration, there is the fear of possible displacement effects in a setting where unemployment is already rather high. The socio-cultural impact of immigration is another significant cause for concern. Europeans are worried about the unsatisfactory performances of the ethnic immigrants in the fields of education and labour. They are concerned about the terrorist activism that they fear the ethnic minorities might be involved in. Another serious cause for anxiety for the Europeans in the matter of immigration is the ghettoisation of “deprived minorities in the inner cities, and the corresponding problems of inter-ethnic tensions and violence” (Boswell 2005, p. 6). They fear that increased cultural diversity can be a threat to social solidarity. Family reunion and asylum system are used as routes for irregular immigration. Demand for illegal labour in sectors such as construction, textiles and sewing, catering and domestic work has also helped irregular entry of migrants. Reduced welfare support of the state in the wake of mass unemployment and deregulation of labour markets render the Europeans unsure about the state’s ability to provide social and economic security to its population. The individuals are under pressure to support themselves with the decline in collective identities like the church, class, profession and family. Migration is “the most tangible form of globalization that people experience in their daily lives” (Archer 2009, p. 3). Globalization is a disruptive process that, while leading to economic growth, also causes changes in cultural, social and political lives. While the gains of migration have been enjoyed by the societies generally, the costs have been borne by minorities. Communal tensions, fear of unemployment, etc., which already exist, increase multifold during economic crises and periods of recession. This may lead to Euro-scepticism among the countries of the European Union. While the single market and free labour movement may have been perceived in a positive light during good economic times, they may be regarded with apprehension during recession for fear of losing sovereign control, “stopping governments from protecting jobs or from restricting foreigners from taking work away from local people” (Archer 2009, p. 4). Acts of terrorism are other factors that have increased the foreboding of the European public about immigrants or, to be more precise, about the culture and religion of the immigrants. Following events like that of 9/11, apprehension about mass migration almost exclusively focuses on the culture and religion of the immigrants, especially the Muslim immigrants. As a result, “today there is much public handwringing about a possible re-Islamicisation of Europe” (Furedi 2007). A study by the French research institute TNT Sofres found that while one in two Italians believed that foreigners bring economic benefits, two-thirds believed in their ability to fill gaps in unskilled labour (Immigrants 2007). A third of the Italians surveyed believed that immigrants posed a threat to Italy’s cultural identity. While more than three quarters called for tough action on illegal immigration, more than half expressed their support for immigration. A quarter of those surveyed categorically opposed immigration. According to the study, these opinions were not due to racism but due to a fear that there would not be “enough resources to go around” (Immigrants 2007). Feldstein (2006) has put forth several arguments that questioned the rationality of relying on immigration to fund an ageing population. Increasing life expectancy and declining birth rates are resulting in significant fiscal problems throughout Europe. Increasing ageing population, along with slower growth of labour force, calls for considerable government expenditure towards pensions and healthcare. However, even a large increase in immigrants will not be able to ensure a corresponding positive impact on the revenue, as a considerable portion of the tax paid by them would be needed to look after their own needs such as education and healthcare. According to statistical research, immigration of skilled workers is ten times more beneficial to an economy than immigration of unskilled workers (Research proves benefits 2005). According to the study, unskilled immigrants, while being beneficial for the affluent section of the population, bring down the wage levels of unskilled native population and do not add much by way of taxes as most of this is consumed by themselves. The case for migration The issue of migration, in spite of its economic significance, causes a lot of anxiety among the European public as regards its impact on cultural and social values. A remarkable fact to be noted in this context is that while these challenges are being faced by all liberal democratic welfare states, the Europeans “have shown a particular propensity to channel these anxieties into migration issues” (Boswell 2005, p. 7). These anxieties can be more a reaction to the socio-economic changes than a response to the effects of immigration. According to Legrain (2007), just as Prohibition did more harm to America than drinking ever has, efforts to tighten immigration controls by EU governments would incur heavy financial and social costs (p. 88). Increased control could lead to a humanitarian crisis on the borders of Europe with thousands of Africans drowning each year trying to reach Europe. Border walls, patrols and bureaucracy would turn out to be burdensome financially. Stringent controls on migration may lead to an ever-expanding shadow economy where illegal migrants could be exploited, labour laws could be broken and taxes would go unpaid (Legrain 2007, p. 88). Along with an upsurge of criminality, there would be increased discrimination against immigrants and they would be perceived as criminals and anti-socials. The increasingly ageing and well-educated population of Europe are not ready to take up low-paid and low-status work. This makes allowing immigrants into the European countries not only necessary but inevitable. Besides, instead of taking jobs away from Europeans, immigrants create more jobs as they also need to consume and their jobs also create demand for complementary labour. Immigrants help in enhancing the living standards of the Europeans by taking up low-skilled jobs, through their innovations and improvisations, and their creation of new jobs. Contrary to general concerns, immigrants do not increase but help reduce unemployment rates as evidence has shown. For example, France’s unemployment rate has remained high for more than 25 years in spite of its stringent immigration regulations while “Spain admitted more immigrants than any other European country (and) its unemployment rate continues to fall” (Legrain 2007, p. 90). For three decades since the mid-1970s, Western Europe had followed restrictive and unilateralist migration policies to check mass arrivals from the South. This has resulted in irregular immigration to Western Europe which is now estimated at 300,000 to 500,000 entrants a year, which means there are at least two irregular entrants for every three regular immigrants. Increased public expenditure on border and immigration control has in the meantime been a burden on available government resources (Ghosh n.d.). The irregular immigration has created a lucrative market for human trafficking along with smuggling of drugs and arms, forced prostitution of women and child abuse. Around 10 to 12 billion US dollars are estimated to be channelled into the human trafficking industry, worldwide, “entailing enormous human hardships and suffering as well as loss of thousands of human lives” (Ghosh n.d.). Western Europe’s restrictive immigration policies ignored its own labour market needs and the losses from skill shortages have been enormous (Ghosh n.d.). According to an estimate by Microsoft in 2000, the cost of shortfall of skills in the EU’s IT sector alone amounted to $481 billion by 2003. Even in the face of high unemployment, there was shortage of high skilled labour in Germany. The situation was worse in Britain and the National Skills Task Force observed in 2000 that an additional £50 billion output can be generated in a decade if the skill gap could be closed in on Germany (Ghosh n.d.). The European Union was challenged by a shortage of 1.7 million qualified workers in the technology sector alone. While unmet labour demand has impeded Western Europe’s economic growth, denial of legal entry has led to irregular immigration. Several industries in the underground economy tried to survive by using cheap, irregular immigrant workers. About 10 to 20 million workers were employed, the majority of whom were irregular immigrants, equivalent to 17 per cent of Western Europe’s GDP, “which also implies losses of billions of dollars in tax revenues” (Ghosh n.d.). Conclusion Immigration, with all its associated social, cultural and political problems, can be positively beneficial for the receiving European country, especially in the skilled labour and economic sector. As a country advances technically, it creates not only a lot of skilled jobs but also numerous unskilled and semiskilled jobs such as those in the healthcare sector for the ageing population. These demands can be taken care of by job-seeking immigrants. For countries that significantly lack in high-skilled labour, immigration may be able to provide the necessary highly qualified workers who can innovate, improvise and use their expertise for the benefit of the host country. Not fulfilling all these necessities can result in severe economic losses for the host country. The answer lies in creating policies that would take care of the economic and labour needs of the host country as well as forestalling all causes for concern in other spheres. References Archer, T. 2009, Immigration in Europe at a time of economic hardship, viewed 18 March 2009, www.upi-fiia.fi/assets/publications/UPI_Briefing_Paper_27_2009.pdf Boswell, C. 2005, A paper prepared for the Policy Analysis and Research Programme of the Global Commission on International Migration, viewed 17 March 2009, http://www.gcim.org/attachements/RS4.pdf Drury, I. 2008, ‘Economic benefits of mass immigration are close to zero’, Lords told, viewed 18 March 2009, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1085759/Economic-benefits-mass-immigration-close-zero--Lords-told.html Dustmann, C. 1996, Return migration: the European experience, viewed 18 March 2009, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~uctpb21/Cpapers/Returnmigration_europeanexperience.pdf European Migration Network: Impact of immigration on Europe’s societies, 2006, viewed 18 March 2009, http://72.14.235.132/search?q=cache:fMWsFRJeQnAJ:emn.sarenet.es/Downloads/download.do%3Bjsessionid%3D8FDFAA5220800D34D541CB622859FEE3%3FfileID%3D351+immigration+europe+impact&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=in Feldstein, M. 2006, Immigration is no way to fund an ageing population, viewed 19 March 2009, http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fc1fbb56-8ad8-11db-8940-0000779e2340.html?nclick_check=1 Furedi, F. 2007, The end of Europe?, viewed 19 March 2009, http://www.frankfuredi.com/index.php/site/article/152/ Ghosh, B. n.d., Europe and the South: Migration and development, viewed 19 March 2009, http://www.euforic.org/docs/200411101518152579.doc?&username=guest@euforic.org&password=9999&groups=ALL Haiste, O. 2008, The effects of mass immigration on Europe, viewed 18 March 2009, http://my.telegraph.co.uk/oliver_haiste/blog/2008/09/27/the_effects_of_mass_immigration_on_europe Immigrants: Immigration a threat and a benefit- report, 2007, viewed 19 March 2009, http://www.wantedinrome.com/news/news.php?id_n=3741 Legrain, P. 2007, The case for opening Europe’s borders wide to migrant workers, viewed 18 March 2009, http://www.philippelegrain.com/legrain/files/EW06_Legrain.pdf Lucassen, L. 2005, The immigrant threat: The integration of old and new migrants in Western Europe since 1850, University of Illinois Press, viewed 19 March 2009, http://books.google.co.in/books?id=xao3YPj0IoEC&dq=immigrants+threat+to+europe&lr=&source=gbs_summary_s&cad=0 Research proves benefits of skilled worker immigration, 2005, viewed 19 March 2009, http://www.workpermit.com/news/2005_08_24/uk/benefits_skilled.htm UK split on costs and benefits of immigration, 2007, viewed 18 March 2009, http://www.euractiv.com/en/enlargement/uk-split-costs-benefits-immigration/article-160660 Read More