RECENT TRENDS IN MEXICAN MIGRATION TO US:
THE MEXICO PERSPECTIVE1
René Zenteno Quintero
Subsecretaría de Población, Migración y Asuntos Religiosos
Secretaría de Gobernación, México
Main argument: Most Mexican and US data sources show a significant decrease of
Mexican migration to US. On the other hand, return migration to Mexico still
demands further research and consistent estimations. However it is clear that
return migration considerably increased during the 2005-2010 period. Despite
recent reduction of Mexican emigration and the U.S. recession, it still seems to be a
labor-driven phenomenon. Such characteristics in addition to complimentary
demographic profiles might still provide opportunities for migration policy
agreements.
Special Mexican data sources
Special questionnaire section on migration in households
Since the early nineties Mexican surveys and censuses include a special section
aimed to estimate international migration from surveyed households. The first and
main question in this section is: “During
Mexican international emigrants and
the past 5 years, did a person from this
household went to live to the US or to
return migrants, five-year estimates,
another country?” Several other
2000 and 2010
questions
on
demographic Thousands
1,750
1,633
characteristics of migrants (sex, age)
1,500
and about migratory process (dates of
emigration and return, states of origin
1,250
1,111
and return) complement this section.
1,000
750
This
procedure
allows
broad
estimations of international emigrants
and returning migrants in a five-year
basis. There are some issues that must
be considered when using these
estimates: Did the household exist five
years ago? How to estimate migrants
from households that emigrated
entirely (all of its members) to US? How
to estimate return migrants when they
500
285
351
250
0
Census 2000
Emigrants
Census 2010
Return migrants
Source: CONAPO estimates based on Instituto Nacional
de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI). Population and
housing Census (10% samples), 2000 y 2010.
1
Documento preparado por la Subsecretaría de Población, Migración y Asuntos Religiosos para su
presentación en la reunión anual de la Population Association of America, en la sesión "Estimates of
Mexico-U.S. Migration from the Perspective of Both Countries: 2010 Censuses and Other Sources."
1
emigrated before the five-year period?
Disregard data accuracy, a general trend can be established (but not exact levels):
sharp decrease of Mexican emigration and an increase on the rate of return
migration. In 2000 census: 1.633 million emigrants and 285 thousand returning
migrants. For the 2010 census 1.111 million emigrants and 351 thousand return
migrants. These estimates produce a limited proxy of annual net Mexican
emigration: 269 thousand for 1995-2000 and 152 thousand for 2005-2010.
Approximately, in both sources, close to 9 out of 10 migrants headed to and
returned from US.
In the years 1995-2000, only 17 percent of all migrants who migrated abroad had
returned to Mexico in 2000. Ten years later, the percentage of return migrants
almost doubled to 32 percent.
According to the 2010 census data, less Mexicans are moving abroad and the
chances of heading back to Mexico increased.
Migration flows study with EMIF
The Encuesta sobre Migración en la Frontera Norte de México (EMIF/Norte; Survey
on Migration in the Northern Frontier) is a specialized survey on migration flows
oriented towards labor characteristics. Interviews are conducted in the Mexican
side of the border, near the border line, bus stations and meeting places of
migrants (specific flows here presented do not capture individuals traveling by car
or airplane, in this sense, estimates shown here represent flow of migrants with
low socioeconomic status; other survey sections do capture high-status migrants).
EMIF survey estimates flows in both directions. The flow heading towards US
includes information of migrants who express their intention to cross over United
States. The flow entering Mexico from the US includes information of migrants
with permanent residence in Mexico as well as migrants that claim permanent
residence in the US. In both directions, survey results are interpreted as “events”
instead of “individuals”. The flow heading to US can be interpreted as “crossing
attempts” or “events” because a migrant might be observed several times before
succeeding in crossing the border, especially when counting passing individuals for
the estimation of expansion factors. In the case of the flow entering Mexico an
individual might also be observed several times (for example, in the border line
and, again, in the bus station); however, in this case, a lower probability is
expected for a migrant to stay long enough in the border area in order to be
observed several times. Data for 2009 and 2010 is preliminary; figures for 2010
are still under revision.
Panel data estimation with ENOE
The Encuesta Nacional de Ocupación y Empleo (ENOE; National Survey of
Occupation and Employment) reports quarterly estimations of Mexican emigration
and immigration. The survey identifies total household members in an initial
2
quarter and, in the following quarters, reports missing members due to
international migration and arriving members from abroad. Such procedure
generates estimates of out, in and net migration. Some issues to be considered
when using these estimates: How to recount multiple out and in events throughout
a calendar year? How to estimate returning migrants when they do not return to
old households but to brand new ones?
The ENOE series report a sharp decrease of Mexican emigration rate during 20062008 but a somewhat stable immigration rate (with small fluctuations). Both
trends produce a very small net international migration rate, even close to zero in
some quarters. Of course, these estimates are controversial and subject to
discussions and clarifications.
Mexican in and out-migration rates, ENOE 2006-2010
Rates
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
2010/4
2010/3
2010/2
2010/1
2009/4
2009/3
2009/2
2009/1
2008/4
2008/3
2008/2
2008/1
2007/4
2007/3
2007/2
2007/1
2006/4
2006/3
2006/2
0
Year-Quarter
Emigration
Immigration
Source: Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía, Encuesta Nacional de Ocupación y Empleo (ENOE).
As controversial as they might be, estimates of a remarkably reduced net Mexican
migration do agree with some US figures. Namely, this small net emigration would
imply little growth of the Mexican-born population in the US. The American
Community Survey (ACS) and Current Population Survey (CPS) report estimates of
the Mexican-born population. During 2003-2007 these estimates show a 1.6
million increase but recently, from 2007 and onwards, Mexican-born population
seems to have halted its growth (it even shows a small decrease in the ACS series).
3
Mexican-born population in United States, 2003-2010
Millions
12.5
12.0
11.5
11.0
10.5
10.0
9.5
9.0
2003
2004
2005
2006
CPS
2007
2008
2009
2010
ACS
Source: CONAPO estimates based on US Census Bureau, Current Population Survey (CPS), March
Supplement 2003-2010; American Commmunity Survey (ACS), 2003-2009.
However, migration movements continue
Mexican emigration
Despite the notable reduction of Mexican net migration, data sources in both
countries still report numerous migration movements. For example, according to
CPS series, between 1.5 million and 922
thousand Mexicans emigrated to US
Mexican emigrants to US, five-year
during 2005-2009. It is worth to
estimates, by source and question
remember that different questions,
implemented, 2005-2009
included in the very same survey,
Thousands
systematically
produce
divergent
1,514
1,600
estimates for the same time periods. In
1,400
1,200
US sources, migration levels estimated
994
922
1,000
with the question of year of arrival are
800
always higher than the ones obtained
600
accumulating annual results from the
400
question about residence 1 year ago. In
200
Mexican sources, levels derived from the
0
section on migration in households are
Five-year estimates 2005-2009 (complete years)
somewhat similar to US lower estimates
CPS 2010 (year of arrival during 2005-2009)
(but never exactly the same).
Different migrant profiles. Not only levels
differ, also socioeconomic characteristics
of same migration flows are not exactly
the same according to US and Mexican
sources. Usually, for the same time
periods, US sources observe slightly
older migrants than Mexican estimations
4
CPS 2006-2010 (accumulated residence 1 year
ago, entrances 2005-2009)
Mexican Census 2010 (Section for households,
emigration to US during june 2005 to june 2010)
Source: CONAPO estimates based on US Census Bureau;
Current Population Survey 2006-2010 (CPS) and Instituto
Nacional de Estadística Geografía (INEGI); Mexican census
bureau 2010.
and a higher proportion of women. Also migrants in US estimations have slightly
higher educational levels and their geographic origins are situated, in a higher
proportion, in urban areas. Such differences might indicate that US sources
observe more long-term migrants than Mexican sources. Further research in this
topic might prove fruitful.
Mexican emigrants to US, five year-estimates,
by age groups, sex ratio and source
Age groups
65 and more
Sex ratio
4
100%
1
80%
16
13
40 - 64
65
60%
21
20
30 - 39
40%
46
15 - 29
76
61
20%
13
0 - 14
35
5
24
0%
0%
15%
30%
45%
60%
ACS average 2005-2009 (Residence 1 year ago)
ENADID 2009 (Section for households)
ACS average
2005-2009 (Res.
1 year ago)
Female
ENADID 2009
(Section for
households)
Male
Source: CONAPO estimates based on US Census Bureau, American Commmunity Survey (ACS), 2005-2009;
Instituto Nacional de Estadística Geografía, Encuesta Nacional de la Dinámica Demográfica (ENADID), 2009.
Mexican geographic origins
Mexican emigration has its origins in almost every state of the country.
Nevertheless, Mexican 2010 Census data, with special section on migration in
households, shows that almost half of total emigrants left from only six states:
Guanajuato, Jalisco, Michoacán, Estado de México, Puebla and Veracruz. In recent
years other states increased their share in the migration process. For example, the
state of Oaxaca today contributes to the total number of migrants with 5 out of
every 100. For almost all state estimations, approximately 9 out of 10 migrants
headed to US.
5
Mexican emigrants by main states of origin,
volume and distribution, 2000 and 2010
Thousands
300
Distribution
10.8
10%
250
7.7
8%
6.8
200
174
160
6.6
163
150
5.6
5.3
135
120
100
6%
4.5
3.9
86
85
76
70 73
3.7
3.1
87
79
63
73
56 59
50
50
61
60
43
41
4%
2.8
66
50
34
31
Census 2010 (Abs)
Census 2000 (%)
Zacatecas
San Luis
Postosí
Hidalgo
Guerrero
Distrito Federal
Oaxaca
Veracruz
Puebla
Edo. México
Michoacán
Jalisco
Guanajuato
0
Census 2000 (Abs)
2.7
30
Chihuahua
7.7
2%
0%
Census 2010 (%)
Source: CONAPO estimates based on Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía (INEGI), Population and Housing
Census (10% samples), 2000 y 2010.
Flow of Mexican migrants heading towards US
In recent years EMIF series report an important reduction in the number of
attempts of border crossing. This flow almost halved it size between 2007 and
2010. Another significant change occurred in the same period regarding
undocumented migration. While in 2006 and 2007, the flow consisted almost
entirely of undocumented migrants (8 out of 10 crossing attempts were tried
without any documents), in 2010 only half of the crossing attempts were
performed by migrants without proper documents. The significant decrease of
undocumented migration
Furthermore, the reduction in the outmigration flow relates to a significant
decrease of undocumented migration. In turn, the decrease could be related to new
state laws and stronger border control but also, to the capacity of undocumented
migrants to adjust their routes according to labor market conditions. In any case, it
is still necessary to produce detailed research to derive unbiased explanations.
6
Flow of migrants heading towards U.S. by possession
of migration documents, 2005-2010
Thousands
1,000
900
855
814
800
706
746
20%
18%
700
630
24%
600
33%
492
38%
500
400
52%
80%
81%
300
76%
67%
200
61%
48%
100
0
2005
2006
2007
2008
Undocumented
2009
2010
With migration documents
Source: CONAPO estimates based on CONAPO, STPS, INM, SRE and COLEF, Encuesta sobre
Migración en la Frontera Norte (EMIF NORTE), 2005-2010.
Labor-driven migration. Reasons to cross to the US are slowly changing. However,
most Mexican migrants still cross, as it has been historically, searching for better
paid jobs. In recent years the proportion of crossing attempts performed because
of labor related motives decreased; yet, most of the crossing attempts are still
performed by migrants who wish to work in the US.
Flow of migrants heading towards U.S. by motive
for migration, 2005-2010
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
5
4
5
15
12
16
80
2005
Work
83
79
2006
2007
11
7
6
19
22
30
70
71
2008
2009
Reunion with family or friends
63
2010
Other
Source: CONAPO estimates based on CONAPO, STPS INM, SRE and COLEF, Encuesta sobre
Migración en la Frontera Norte (EMIF NORTE), 2005-2010.
Complementary populations
Demographic complementarity of population stocks in US
In terms of age-structure of population stocks, we can see that Mexican immigrant
population in US accumulates in age groups where US labor force is relatively
small. The bulk of the Mexican immigrant stock concentrates in ages between 25 to
44 years old, just in the same age groups where US-born population shows gaps.
7
Such coincidence can be found for both sexes. In terms of magnitude, there cannot
be any possible competition given huge absolute differences; US-born population
is more than 20 times bigger than Mexican-born (266 million versus 11.6 million,
respectively).
Demographic complementarity. Mexican immigrants
accumulate in age groups where U.S. labor force is diminished
Age
80 +
75 - 79
70 - 74
65 - 69
60 - 64
55 - 59
50 - 54
45 - 49
40 - 44
35 - 39
30 - 34
25 - 29
20 - 24
15 - 19
10-14
5-9
0-4
Males
Females
US-born
US-born
Mex-born
11 10 9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
Mex-born
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11
Millions
Males US-born
Males Mex-born
Females US-born
Female Mex-born
Source: CONAPO estimates based on U.S. Census Bureau , American Community Survey, 2009.
US geographic destinations
Today Mexican-born immigrants live in nearly all of the United States territory,
including Alaska and the associate state of Puerto Rico. Despite this fact, Mexicanborn population still concentrates in the southwest states (California, Arizona, and
Texas). Also, Florida, Georgia and North Carolina gained participation as settling
destinations.
50%
40%
Mexican foreign born immigrants in US by state of
residence, 2000 and 2009
42.1
37.5
30%
20.9
20.8
1.6 2.4
1.7 2.4
2.2 2.1
2.0 2.1
2.2 2.0
1.6 1.9
Colorado
New York
Nevada
5.6 5.1
North
Carolina
6.2 6.0
Georgia
10%
Florida
20%
Arizona
Illinois
Texas
California
0%
ACS 2000
ACS 2009
Source: CONAPO estimates based on U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey
2000 and 2009.
8
Immigration and return migration to Mexico
Mexican return migration from US
Immigration and return migration to Mexico does occur. Nonetheless, US sources
do not estimate Mexican return migration.
In addition to the special section on migration in households, Mexican censuses
and surveys also include internationally comparable questions aimed to observe
immigration, as Place of residence 5 years ago. Older data sources included the
question about Length of stay in actual residence (however, this question was not
included in recent sources). The last edition of the Encuesta de la Dinamica
Demografica (ENADID, National Survey of Demographic Dynamics) included a
question about Place of residence 1 year ago. However, return migration to Mexico
seems to be a very complex phenomenon. Estimates from different instruments
(questions) are completely different in terms of levels and trends.
Strikingly dissimilar estimations of return migration arise from two different
instruments. Results derived from the question about residence 5 years ago show
an unmistakable trend of sharp increase in return migration. In 2010 census
return migrants reached an historical high level close to 1 million. On the other
hand, estimates derived from the special section on migration in household
present no clear trend and no relation at all with other return estimates (however
this results might be related to emigration levels reported by the same section).
Return migrants to Mexico, five-year estimates from two
different questions implemented in the same data sources
994
951
717
643
461
388
351
Census
2010
Census
2000
ENADID
2009
267 261
ENE
2002
289
344
ENADID
1997
291
Conteo
1995
ENADID
1992
Thousands
1,000
875
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
180
200
100
Derived from question of residence 5 years ago
Derived from section on migration in households
Source: CONAPO estimates based on Instituto Nacional de Estadistica y Geografia, Encuesta General de
Dinámica Demográfica (ENADID) 1992, 1997 y 2009, Conteo de Población y Vivienda 1995, Encuesta Nacional
de Empleo (ENE) 2002, Censo General de Población y Vivienda, 2000.
Mexican returning destinations
As in the case of Mexican emigration origin states almost every state of the country
has returning migrants. Mexican 2010 Census data, with special section on
9
migration in households, shows that most than half of total returns goes to seven
sates: Jalisco, Guanajuato Estado de México, Michoacán, Veracruz, Distrito Federal
and Puebla. Almost 9 out of 10 migrants, in these figures, returned from US.
Mexican return migrants by main states of residence, volume
and distribution, five year estimates, 2000 and 2010
Thousands
Distribution
70
12%
60
9.9
9.8
10%
8.8
50
7.4
34
31
26
5.8
32
5.3
5.3
6%
26
24
20
20
19 19
18
10
3.0
10
8
10
3.6
13
Censo de 2000 (Abs)
Censo de 2010 (Abs)
Hidalgo
Puebla
Distrito Federal
Veracruz
Michoacán
Edo. México
Jalisco
Guanajuato
0
11 11
Censo de 2000 (%)
3.0
13
10
2.8
8
4%
2.7
10
10
2%
5
0%
Oaxaca
30
8%
San Luis Potosí
35
Zacatecas
37
Chihuahua
40
Censo de 2010 (%)
Source: CONAPO estimates based on Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía (INEGI), Population and Housing
Census (10% samples), 2000 y 2010.
State return proportions of Mexican migrants, for main states of
return (section for households), 2000 and 2010
50%
41
41
37
35
33
32
31
30
29
30%
20%
22
25
22
18
20
17
22
19
16
13
13
16
11
Census 2000
Puebla
Guanajuato
San Luis
Potosí
Michoacán
Hidalgo
Veracruz
Zacatecas
Distrito
Federal
Jalisco
Edo.
México
0%
Chihuahua
10%
9
10
Oaxaca
21
29
Guerrero
40%
Census 2010
Source: CONAPO estimates based on Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía (INEGI). Population and
Housing Census (10% samples), 2000 and 2010.
Results from the question residence five years ago display a different scene than
returning migration from section on migration in households. Immigrants aged five
years or over trace notable differences in volume and relative share of some states.
10
Mexican immigrants aged five years or over by state of
residence, 2000 and 2010 (question on residence five years ago)
Distribution
Thousands
14%
180
160
12%
140
10%
9.4
8.3
120
7.6
5.5
63
6%
58
4.1
46
4.0
44
40
29
28
19
20
Censo de 2010 (Abs)
42
41
41
11
7
4%
2%
5
0%
Chihuahua
Baja California
Veracruz
Edo. México
Guanajuato
Michoacán
43
3.8
3.8
3.8
26
12
0
Jalisco
4.0
20
18
5
Censo de 2000 (Abs)
43
Puebla
60
5.3
59
Censo de 2000 (%)
Hidalgo
80
8%
5.8
Guerrero
82
Distrito Federal
89
Oaxaca
102
100
Censo de 2010 (%)
Source: CONAPO estimates based on Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía (INEGI), Population and Housing
Census, 2000 and 2010.
Flow of Mexican migrants returning to Mexico
The flow of migrants returning to Mexico also shows an important decrease in
recent years. The decline in crossing events towards Mexico, along with the
decrease of the crossing attempts towards US, is consistent with the overall
perception, derived from other data sources: that migration has reduced its
magnitude. Of course, trends of “attempts” or “events” do not follow patterns
similar to estimates of numbers of migrants. Further research could analyze the
number of attempts made by migrants before succeeding or giving up crossing the
border. Also further analysis is needed for understanding circular migration and
recurring migration trips.
Flow of migrants with permanent residence in Mexico
returning to Mexico, by reason of return, 2005-2010
Thousands
500
438
404
300
404
362
400
50%
47%
255
51%
245
15%
64%
59%
200
100
47%
10%
9%
15%
44%
35%
6%
43%
35%
2005
2006
34%
0
2007
2008
2009
7%
28%
2010
Personal and other motives
Didn't find job or job ended
Forced (some kind of immigration law enforcement)
Source: CONAPO estimates based on CONAPO, STPS, INM, SRE and COLEF, Encuesta
sobre Migración en la Frontera Norte (EMIF NORTE), 2005-2010.
11
Crossing events towards Mexico include movements made by migrants who were
forced to leave US due to different sorts of immigration law enforcement. However,
most of these movements were voluntary returns to Mexico. Voluntary returns
include different sorts of answers, as: “could not find any job”, “job ended”,
“personal motives” and “family reunion”. Furthermore, the proportion of voluntary
returns is fairly stable in the EMIF series, close to 60% of the flow (except for 2010
but data for this year is preliminary). That most migration returns are performed
willingly is a very important observation for the Mexican perspective: not every
migrant intends to stay permanently in the US; and temporary jobs do not
necessarily lead to permanent residence of migrants. These claims are not new;
they can be inferred from several data sources and historical recounts. EMIF data
merely reinforces these assertions. More importantly for the Mexican perspective,
in the Mexican data mentioned here (ENOE, EMIF, Census) there is no evidence
that policy changes in US, like stronger immigration law enforcement and more
harsh state immigration laws, increase in any way return migration to Mexico.
Short and medium-term of stay in US. Very short periods of permanence in US, less
than 3 months, are strongly related to immigration law enforcement. But then
again, not all of these movements are performed by migrants forced to leave US.
For longer periods of permanence, 3 or more months of stay, return migration is
clearly voluntary. More interestingly, EMIF data allows identifying return
movements motivated by migrants who were unable to find any job. No matter the
length of stay, only a minimal proportion of migrants return because of being
unable to find any job. However, close to 15% of migrants with 3 or more months
of stay in US did return to Mexico because their jobs ended. It is unclear if they
were unable to find other job (but then again, they would have answered that they
didn’t find a new job) or if they did not want to find any other job (if so, those
migrants could have fulfilled economic goals in temporary jobs or they could
conform some kind of specialized workforce that returns to Mexico when no
proper jobs are available).
Flow of migrants with permanent residence in Mexico, returning to Mexico,
by short (<3) and medium (=>3) term of stay in US and by reason of return,
2007 and 2009
Medium term of stay (=>3 months)
Short term of stay (<3 months)
100%
80%
3
2
2
1
100%
2
2
14
17
68
58
17
23
2007
2009
80%
35
54
60%
60%
40%
40%
60
43
20%
20%
0%
0%
2007
Forced (imm law enf)
Job ended
2009
Personal and other
Forced (imm law enf)
Personal and other
Didn´t find job
Job ended
Didn´t find job
Source: CONAPO estimates based on CONAPO, STPS, INM, SRE and COLEF, Encuesta sobre Migración en la Frontera
Norte (EMIF NORTE), 2005-2010.
12
Labor demand in US. Most of the migrants that stayed in US for 3 or more months
did work during their stay. EMIF data shows that almost 9 of every 10 returning
events to Mexico were performed by migrants that were able to work in the US.
These data reinforce the idea that labor market in US does demand Mexican labor
and also, if we consider that most of these migrants return willingly to Mexico, it
also reinforces the idea that finding a job in US does not necessarily lead to
permanent residence of immigrants.
Medium-term stay. Flow of migrants returning to Mexico, with
permanent residence in Mexico and medium (=>3) stay in the U.S.
by working condition in the U.S., 2005-2010
Thousands
250
213
8%
200
150
100
12%
16%
121
16%
82
13%
92%
9%
50
180
149
148
88%
84%
2006
2007
84%
87%
91%
0
2005
2008
Worked
2009
2010
Didn't work
Source: CONAPO estimates based on CONAPO, STPS, INM, SRE and COLEF, Encuesta sobre Migración en la
Frontera Norte (EMIF NORTE), 2005-2010.
Traditional and documented migration. Greater migration mobility in Mexican
states where phenomenon has historical roots is not only related to strong social
networks. Also a higher proportion of possession of migratory documents keeps
traditional migrants coming and going among borders.
Flows of migrants by region of origin and possession of migration
documents, 2007 and 2009
Returning to Mexico
Heading towards to US
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
18.4
23.2
35.4
42.9
81.6
76.8
64.6
57.1
2007
2009
Traditional Region
Undocumented
2007
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
27.0
3.19
73.0
68.1
2009
Traditional Region
With migration documents
53.6
48.0
2007
Rest of the country
46.4
52.0
Undocumented
2007
2009
Rest of the country
With migration documents
Source: CONAPO estimates based on CONAPO, STPS, INM, SRE and COLEF, Encuesta sobre Migración en la Frontera
Norte (EMIF NORTE), 2007-2009
13
Law enforcement removals and returns
Different estimations
In past years the flow of unauthorized migrants grew rapidly, becoming a relevant
concern for governments in both countries. Nowadays, this flow is reducing
rapidly. However, many concerns remain. Both countries would like to regulate
this flow, achieving more control over their borders but also assuring safe journey
conditions for migrants. In order to accomplish these goals, knowledge about the
magnitude and characteristics of this flow becomes relevant. Estimations about the
flow of unauthorized migrants entering the US do exist. They are sometimes
controversial and always subject to further revision. On the other direction of the
flow, undocumented return, fewer estimations can be found but official records of
law enforcement exist in both countries. Unfortunately, such records do not agree.
Official figures related to immigration law enforcement in both countries do not
concur. Despite important coordination efforts, doubts remain about how many
immigrants are returned and how many deported. More sound coordination
efforts are needed in order to achieve a commonly shared statistical depiction,
which will become a basic input for joint strategies aiming border control and
human rights protection.
Mexican registered repatriation events versus returned/removed
events of Mexican immigrants in United States, 2005-2010
Thousands
1,200
1,097
1,043
1,000
891
811
800
600
557
530
601 580
578
528
469
400
200
145
183
247
209
283
0
2005
2006
Repatriation Events, INM-Mexico
2007
2008
Aliens Returned *, DHS-US
2009
2010
Mexicans Removed, DHS-US
Note * : Returns are the confirmed movement of an inadmissible or deportable alien out of the United
States not based on an order of removal. Most of the voluntary returns are of Mexican nationals who
have been apprehended by the U.S. Border Patrol and are returned to Mexico.
Source: CONAPO estimates based on Instituto Nacional de Migración, Estadísticas migratorias. www.inm.gob.mx; US
Department of Homeland Security based on Customs and Border Protection, Office of Border Patrol, Immigration and
Customs Enforcement, Office of Investigations and the Office of Detention and Removal Operations.
14
Final remarks
In recent years different data sources in Mexico and US show a major decrease of
Mexican emigration. Specially, net population loss in Mexico and its counterpart,
net Mexican immigrant population gain in US, have both shown a sharp reduction.
However, migration mobility continues.
Sources in both countries report a diminished but still significant number of
Mexican emigrants going to the US. Differences in volumes and demographic
profiles reported for migrants in both countries suggest that Mexican and US
sources observe different types of migrants. In order to achieve a better
understanding of the phenomenon data analysis from both countries is essential.
Almost every state in Mexico reduced its number of international emigrants in the
last five years. Important reductions occurred in traditional migratory states as
Jalisco and Michoacan. Notably, few states as Puebla and Oaxaca maintained
emigration levels observed ten years ago. Proportions of undocumented migration
also show a decreasing trend. Recent behavior of Mexican emigration might be
related to stronger border control but also to the economic recession in US.
Migration phenomenon still seems to be labor-driven. And the age composition of
Mexican immigrant stock in US complements perfectly US age-profile. Both
characteristics still provide an opportunity for migratory policy agreements.
Mexican migration does not always include a definitive change of usual residence.
There are many Mexican migrants that return to Mexico and, depending on the
source and instrument used for estimation, returning volume kept its peace or
even increased in recent years. Furthermore, half of the returning flow does come
back willingly to Mexico.
Propensity of migrants to return to Mexico increased in recent years. Mexican
states with higher return proportions are not necessarily the ones with higher
volumes of returning migrants. The five states with more proportional returns are
Estado de Mexico, Jalisco, Distrito Federal, Chihuahua and Zacatecas. Furthermore,
emigrants from relatively recent migratory states as Veracruz and Puebla also
increased their returning proportions.
Recent changes offer a renewed opportunity, in public policy terms, of addressing
migratory process in a shared US-Mexico agenda. Specific topics might be:
Mexican return migration policy
Labor-market complementarities
15