Introduction
Migration is a situation where people move from one place to another for varied reasons. It can occur from a region to another, from one country to the next or even from one continent to the next. In International Migration, people move from one country to another or others. The movement can be an individual, a family, clan, and other groups with a common interest. The reason for this displacement can be wage driven, capital, risks, or labor demand. Many theories explain the reasons why people migrate; in this paper, we will discuss two of them; neoclassical economic theory and the new economics of migration theory. (Douglas S. Massey)
Neoclassical Economics Theory
This theory explains that individuals decide to migrate to different countries in search of better wages, this mostly occurs when a person perceives that there is better payment in a different place than where they work and improve on earnings, the individuals migrate to another country where wages are high.
The country of origin of the immigrant normally has a high availability of laborers with few opportunities for employment leading to a low demand for workers and low payment of wages. However, the receiving country has a high labor demand with a few available workers leading to high wages for the few workers. It is based on labor supply and demand
After a while, the countries which have a high demand for labor tend to reach a point where they have enough labor force leading to low wages, as the country which used to have high labor supply becomes deficient and have high wages. This may also lead to countries rich in capital moving it developing countries, in the process high-skilled human capital, move to the low skilled areas for maximum exploitation of their skills.
It is believed in this theory that if wage differences between countries are eliminated, then there will be no migrations, that the capital movements, including human capital are due to labor inequilibrium, labor market being the primary cause.
New Economics of Migration Theory
This theory seeks to explain that, migration happens as a result of an overall risk assessment of a whole family, clan, or groups of people with similar economic interests. The family after assessing their chances of survival based on the risks they are faced with in their country decides to migrate to another country in which their perceived risks can be mitigated; they move to maximize their benefits collectively and get to countries with a conducive environment for their share economic gains.
The household or family acts as a unit but can work on exploiting the abilities of individual members by deploying them to different economic zones for the greater good of the household. In this case, some members may migrate abroad while others may be sent to the same country. The theory asserts that the migration is influenced more by a family decision than an individual's choice.
Migration here can take place even if the wages are high, as it is believed that many factors may affect a household resulting in movement, including government regulations, competition for resources, security issues, and general long-term interests of a family. A combination of many factors affecting the group of related individuals may trigger the migration.
Conclusion
International migration is caused by many factors which may affect a person and cause relocation or can influence a whole family unit to move or part of it; the reasons may be diverse and can be both due to the risks and conveniences of a group or better wage market. People may migrate because of the demand and or supply of labor, the attractiveness of pay, capital movements or a combination of factors decided individually or in teams. It is, therefore, important to understand that specific migrations occur due to certain unique circumstances which may be different any other cause of the movement of a household or individual.
Work Cited
Douglas S. Massey, Joaquin Arango, Graeme Hugo, Ali Kouaouci, Adela Pellegrino,. "Theories of International Migration:." Population and Development Review, (1993): 431-448. Print
