Global, US, and Ag Migration
Ph i l i p M artin: plmartin@ucdavis.edu
http://migration.ucdavis.edu
Three Topics
• Global: 3% migrants, 9%
industrial countries
• US: 100,000 foreigners/day
• Ag: over half unauthorized
!" #
$
$%
& '
$(
!
"
!"
&'
Why International Migration?
• Differences: demography, economics,
security
• Networks: communications,
transportation, rights
• More countries and more borders to
cross--from about 45 to 200 countries in
20th century
Demographic Differences
• Demography: Global pop up by 1.3% or
80 million a year; 97% in developing
• Europe and Africa, 1800-2050
– Europe: from 21% to 7% of global pop
– Africa: from 11% to 21% of global pop
Economic Differences 1
• Wide gap in average per capita incomes
between high-, middle- and low-income
countries
– 1975: High-to-low ratio was 41-1, high-tomiddle 8-1
– 2000: High-to-low 66-1, high-to-mid 14 to 1
– 2005: High-to-low 61-1, high-to-mid 13 to 1
Economic Differences 2
• World labor force in 2005 was 3.1 billion,
including 40% in ag
• Rural-urban migration and international
migration:
– Accept 3-D jobs (dirty, dangerous, difficult) at
home or abroad
– Make physical and cultural transition with ruralurban move
– Cities as nodes in global migration system
– Rural migrants to not return; urban Diaspora may
Security Differences
• Re fuge e s : 1 0 mi l l i on i n 2 0 0 5 , mo s t
i n n e i g hbo r i ng c oun t r i e s
• 1951 Geneva Conven t i o n c r e a t e s a
g l oba l r e g ime - - do no t r e t u rn a
mig r an t f a c i ng p e r s e c u t i on “ f o r
r e a s on s o f r a c e , r e l i g i on ,
na t i onal i t y , membe r shi p o f a
pa r t i cu l a r s o c i a l g r o up , o r
po l i t i c a l op i n i on . ”
• Mode l ?
Migration and Development
• Motivations
– Remittances: over $200 billion to
developing countries in 2006
– Failure of top-down efforts such as WTO
GATS, ILO Multilateral Framework
– US: advocates bottom-up process building
on the results of regional forums, such as
Puebla process
Foreigners to US: 100,000/day
• 3,500 legal immigrants x 365 = 1.3
million in FY06
• 92,000 temporary visitors = 34 million
• 3,300 apprehensions = 1.2 million
– Note that temporary visitors and
apprehensions double-count individuals
who visit several times or are apprehended
several times
Immigrants
• 37 million foreign-born US residents
(2005)
• Three almost equal groups:
– legal immigrants, temporary visitors (39%)
– naturalized US citizens (31%)
– Unauthorized (30%)
11 Million Unauthorized (2005)
• 7-8 million unauthorized workers: ag,
construction, meatpacking, services
• Ag: less than 20% of unauthorized, but
often first US job
• Ag: special role in Mexico-US migration-Braceros, SAW
Unintended Consequences
• Best guide to effects of US policy changes:
assume the opposite outcome
• Senator Edward Kennedy (1965 changes)
“the ethnic mix of this country will not be
upset”
• President Reagan (1986 IRCA): “Future
generations of Americans will be thankful for
our efforts to humanely regain control of our
borders”
Realities One
• 1950s--2/3 of US immigrants from
Europe and Canada
• Today: 3/4 of US immigrants from Latin
America and Asia
Realities Two
• Estimated 3.5 million unauthorized in
1985-86
• Estimated 12 million unauthorized in
2006
Why Goal-Outcome Gap?
• Setting the stage for IRCA?
• Early 1980s: Mexican debt crisis, 25%
unauthorized in CA ag, unauthorized were
concentrated in less perishable crops
• IRCA (1986): Grand Bargain
– Employer sanctions to reduce future unauthorized
– Amnesty to wipe the slate clean
IRCA’s Effects
• Legalize 2.7 million foreigners, 85%
Mexicans,and 1/7 of adult men in rural
Mexico. Stay and commute to seasonal US
jobs or more to US?
• Sanctions did not close the door to the US
labor market because of little enforcement
and false documents
• Result: IRCA increased unauthorized
migration, and spread Mexicans throughout
US
Immigration Reforms: 1996
• Context: rising illegal migration during
California recession, Prop 187
• Question: reduce legal/unauthorized
immigration OR access to welfare?
• Answer: allow high immigration, but limit
access to welfare (some access later
restored)
2000: Mexican President Fox
• President of 125 million Mexicans, 100
million in Mexico, 25 million in US
• #1 foreign policy goal: protect Mexicans
in US
• Whole enchilada: legalization, new
guest workers, more immigrant visas for
Mexicans, reduce border violence
Mexican Over-reach
• Fox just before 9/11-- “we
mus t…r e a ch an ag r e emen t o n
mig r a t i o n . . . [ s o t h a t ] t h e r e
a r e no Mex i c an s who h ave n o t
en t e r e d t h i s c oun t r y l e g a l l y
… and t h a t t ho s e Mex i c a ns
who c o me i n t o t h e c oun t r y do
s o w i t h p rope r do c umen t s . ”
Enforcement-Only
• House Republicans 2005: control
border and interior BEFORE dealing
with unauthorized in US
• How? Fences, lights and agents plus
credit-card type verification at hiring
• Outcome: Hope for attrition among
unauthorized
Comprehensive
• Bush and Senate: more border and
interior enforcement PLUS
– Earned legalization: path to immigrant visa
depends on how long in US
– New guest worker programs--easy for
employers and migrants
– Other provisions: Dream and AgJOBS
Immigration Reform 2006
• Senate approves CIRA 62-36 in May 2006
•More enforcement, including new fences
on the border, mandatory electronic
checks of new hires
•3 legalization programs: >5 years, 2-5
years and <2 years
•New guest worker program for
(unauthorized) inside and outside US with
path to citizenship
Immigration Reform 2007
• Stalled in Senate in June 2007; cannot get 60 votes
•More enforcement, including new fences
on the border, mandatory electronic checks of
new hires and current employees
•Legalization with Z-1 visas that allow living and
working in US indefinitely. But to get immigrant visa,
pay fees and touch back
•New guest worker programs (Y-1)
•Select future immigrants with a point system:
must earn at least 55 of 100 points
DHS: August 2007 No Match
• SSA sends no-match letters to
employers with 10 or more no matches
for previous year
• SSA include DHS letter: clear up
discrepancies within 90 days or we
assume you knowingly hired
• Injunction prevented implementation.
Why? Errors in SSA database
Incremental Reforms
• Deal with backlog of foreigners waiting
for immigrant visas
• DREAM for unauthorized foreigners
brought to US before age 16
• AgJOBS: test earned legalization
concept in employer-worker deal
Immigration and Agriculture
• Rising share of US farm work done by
hired, and hired are over 75% foreignborn
• Over 2/3 of foreign-born unauthorized;
half of all farm workers
• Labor-intensive FVH ag is expanding
Definitions Imply Solutions
• Employers: get work done at minimum
cost given competitive markets etc by
opening border gates
• Worker advocates: deal with low wages
and low incomes with (1) labor laws etc
and (2) federal assistance programs for
MSFWs
• Government: responds to both
Ag Employer Goals
• Legalize the status quo, that is, legalize
currently unauthorized workers
• 1986: SAW-RAW compromise, legalize
currently unauthorized, RAW workers
float if labor shortages
• 1986: revise H-2A program for
employers willing to plan and invest
(certification, housing, AEWR)
Guest Worker Programs
• Who controls border gate? Attestation vs
certification, caps vs no caps
• Are migrant workers tied to employer? What
housing, working condition etc guarantees?
• What is the minimum wage and productivity
standard? Iron triangle between minimum
wage, minimum productivity standard, and
piece rate wage
AgJOBS Compromise
• Worker advocates: legalize and empower
farm workers (to get out of farm work)
• Farm employers
– legalize and require more farm work to become
immigrants
– Change H-2A program: attestation, housing
allowance, reduce AEWR minimum wage
Thinking about Migration
• Migration: a process to be managed, not a
problem to be solved
• Migration: choices between competing goods,
not bads and goods (food prices and farm
wages)
• Avoid extremes of no borders and no
migrants
Three Predictions
• More migration and more debate about its
impacts
• Best policy is economic development in
sending countries
• Until then: anyone with a solution does not
understand the problem; anyone who
understands the problem does not have a
solution
Thank You
• More information:
• http://migration.ucdavis.edu