Migration policy is one of the axes of the Spanish presidency of the EU throughout this semester. Jean-Christophe Dumont is the main author of the International migration outlook produced by the OECD. He came to Barcelona this week to participate in a meeting at the Cercle d'Economia.
Is immigration good for the economy?
If migrations are well managed, they are profitable for the host countries and for the immigrants themselves. But with certain conditions: that these people who arrive can highlight their skills, integrate into the labor market and contribute fiscally. In fact, it has been shown that in all OECD countries without exception, immigrants contribute more in social contributions and taxes than they receive in terms of individual benefits, education and health included. Even if public goods are included, such as infrastructure, police or justice, the final balance is positive. In the case of Spain, for example, immigrants contribute to financing 13% of military, central government and debt interest costs.
And in terms of employment?
In the short term there may be negative effects on wages or the unemployment rate, but they are marginal and affect the profiles of workers who are close to the immigrant group. But there is literature that confirms that after five or ten years these distortions disappear and the effects become systematically positive.
So why is there growing hostility towards immigrants in the West?
A public policy is needed to accompany immigrants to the host countries. There are different options. There is the case of Canada, which selects immigration: 60% have a higher diploma. Those who arrive in Canada receive a language course, they are helped with the equivalence of degrees, they are advised with housing. It is an economic investment, to take advantage of the skills that come from outside. Immigrants need to be accompanied, otherwise they stay by the wayside and will incur a cost.
The perception of public opinion is that there is some lack of control.
There is a majority of citizens who think that there is more irregular immigration than regular. And it's totally false. The bulk of immigration takes place with work, residence and family reunification permits. It must not be denied that there are some irregular flows, but they are only a fraction of the whole. The images of shepherds in the Canaries, the collapse in Lampedusa, Ukrainians fleeing the war... are powerful, but you also have to look at the numbers.
And what do the numbers say?
For example, in France citizens think that there are more than twice as many immigrants as there really are. Yes, there are saturated neighborhoods, cases of crime associated with the collective... These are situations that exist, but there is a distorted view of reality.
What emerges from the latest OECD study?
That 2022 was a historic year in terms of migration in the OECD, with increases in all categories and in almost all countries. And the good news is that immigrant employment rates are also historic.
And do these immigrants stay or then go back?
Permanent immigration has risen by 26% compared to the previous year. We are talking about six million people, it is a huge number. And not counting the Ukrainians. The rest of the categories have also registered increases: the storm surged by 74%; the student, 46% (the Chinese), and the asylum, 90% (Syrians and Afghans). At the same time, the employment rate of natives has increased, so that immigration does not come at the expense of the work of national citizens.
What challenge does immigration pose for a country like Spain?
Spain has gone very quickly from being a country from which emigrants left to being a country that welcomes them. The same thing happened with Portugal and Ireland at the beginning of 2000. In the integration of the labor market, the balance is favorable: the differences with the natives are limited. Having a common language with Latin America also helps. The number of irregulars is low. However, if you look at the employment rate of immigrants, the majority work in low-skilled sectors and, moreover, can perform tasks below their training. And when they have a high qualification, the employment rate is 13% lower than that of natives. So there is room for improvement.
Does he emigrate by choice or by obligation?
40% of immigration in OECD countries is family migration. We should not reduce everything to labor immigration and the economic utility of immigration. The right to live as a family must be recognized. Migration is also not the solution to demographic ageing, because for that it would be necessary to multiply it by ten.
Does the immigrant do jobs that the native no longer wants to do?
In this phase of technological transition, we need more workers. This is true for highly skilled professions, but also for less skilled ones such as security and domestic work. Public recovery funds need people to get them going. And in declining professions, those that lose jobs every year, immigrants represent 32%, such as the metallurgical sector, mining or artisanal work.
