Diaspora engagement policies

Since the onset of the economic crisis in 2008, hundreds of thousands of Greeks have left their homeland to seek employment abroad. Unlike past waves of emigration from Greece, the current wave is composed primarily of well-educated youth, whose precious knowledge and skills will be used to the advantage of other countries. Their exodus poses two major policy challenges: first, how to stem the outflow and utilize their knowledge and skills at home and, second, how to harness the enormous potential of Greeks currently abroad to benefit the Greek economy, by mobilizing the diaspora to use their knowledge, skills, talents, resources, and networks in ways which will positively impact the Greek economy. It is on this second set of policy challenges that this book focuses. OECD data on emigrants living in OECD and other countries reveal the increased educational level of those leaving Greece over the last decade compared to their predecessors. The populations of people born in Greece residing in various destination countries differ markedly, however, in terms of their educational profile. The Greek-born population living in the UK is by far the most educated, with nearly 70% holding a university degree, while only a small proportion of the Greek-born population in Germany has a university degree. Nonetheless, the composition of the Greek-born population living in Germany is changing rapidly, given that in the last decade Germany overtook the US as the number-one destination of Greek emigrants and that the educational level of recent Greek emigrants to Germany greatly exceeds that of Greeks who moved to Germany in previous decades. The Greek diaspora contains hugely successful business people, professionals, and academics, while its pool of talent is constantly expanding. So far, Greece has done little to utilise its valuable diaspora to the benefit of its economy. The international experience abounds with examples of successful diaspora policies implemented by both developing and developed countries, such as the creation of professional, scientific, and entrepreneurial networks which facilitate transfers of skills and knowledge and promote business development. For instance, the Talent Network for Innovation of ChileGlobal is composed of highly skilled members of Chile’s diaspora who contribute their time, experience, contacts, knowledge, and skills in order to create innovative Chilean companies and help existing companies to innovate and globalise. The Global Irish Network is composed of very influential Irish and Irish-connected business people based in forty countries who contribute to Irish economic development by promoting foreign direct investment and providing practical assistance to Irish exporters. Indus Entrepreneurs is a network of highly-skilled overseas Indians founded in Silicon Valley in 1992 which organizes hundreds of networking and entrepreneurship events every year and has played a major role in creating high-tech firms in India and stimulating spectacular economic growth. Greece needs to utilize the potential of its diaspora to enhance economic growth. Drawing on the rich international policy experience, the specific diaspora population segments and individuals that can make a valuable contribution to the Greek economy need to be identified and effectively mobilized, in order to capture the development benefits offered by its exceptionally talented diaspora.

The recognition of diaspora contributions towards their home country through remittances, investments and networks has facilitated a shift in attitude and thinking regarding migration, from brain drain to “brain bank”, “brain gain”, “brain trust” and “brain circulation”. This shift in thinking is also evident in India in recognition of the manifold contributions being made by the Indian diaspora to the home country. This paper examines the historical and socio-economic characteristics of one important Indian diaspora community, the Punjabis in the UK and discusses the latter’s contributions to India and to its home state of Punjab. The evidence reveals that the NRI Punjabi diaspora in the UK is quite old, dating back to the colonial period. It is a heterogeneous community, divided by castes and sub-castes which influence the institutions through which its subgroups engage with the homeland. The secondary and primary evidence collected for this study indicate a wide variety of contributions economic, social, philanthropic, cultural and political. Some of the main sectors of contribution are health, education and rural infrastructure. However, the evidence also reveals that there is much greater potential for diaspora engagement and that large scale investments by the diaspora are deterred by corruption, an inefficient bureaucracy, lack of streamlined procedures and lack of supportive diaspora policies at the state and central levels. The study thus concludes that greater thrust is needed, especially at the state level to facilitate the Punjabi diaspora’s engagement with India and with its home regions and state.

Turkey has many expatriate communities abroad, as well as communities of various origins, whose members reside within its borders and feel connected to other states or regions. Many of these communities have been ignored or eyed with suspi-cion by the modern Turkish nation-state since its inception in the 1920s. It is only recently that Turkey has “discovered” its people abroad and the diaspora communities within, a discovery that appears to be causally connected with Turkey’s rising ambitions and ‘soft power’ capabilities. Under the Justice and Development Party, efforts for a concerted dias-pora policy have reached a peak with the creation of the Presidency for Turks Abroad and Related Communities in 2010. This report deals with the Presidency, its goals and capacities, its role within the larger context of Turkey’s foreign policy and its desired and actual impacts on Turkey’s diaspora communities.Is this a “new diaspora policy” geared towards increasing Turkish influence abroad or an attempt to improve the quality of life of Turkish citizens often experiencing discrimination in Western European countries? Or is it an example of constructive foreign policy and diaspora building among a disparate group of people, most of whom have only very little in common? Based on qualita-tive field research in the Presidency, this paper argues that Turkey’s new diaspora policy combines all of these different approaches. This openness and flexibility is a great strength, even though significant political challenges await Turkey’s diaspora policies, precisely because it is still very much in the process of assembly. That said, this first stage in the making of Turkey’s diaspora policy is a perfect time to discuss its direction and suggest ways to make it more inclusive and internationally respected. This is all the more important as Turks abroad are likely to experience more discrimination in a European Union increasingly influenced by racist and Islamo-phobic political parties, while the contestations over the hundredth anniversary of the Armenian geno-cide in 2015 will add new stress to inter-community relations between Turks, Kurds and Armenians abroad. An inclusive and post-nationalist diaspora policy would be an important remedy to both of these challenges.

In the first half of the 1990s, Belarus saw large migration flows, which since then have become considerably more moderate. The main destination countries for Belarusian emigrants are Russia, Poland, Germany, the US, and Canada. Over the last decade, temporary labour migration of Belarusians to the European Union has remained rather limited. At the same time labour migration flows of Belarusians towards Russia have increased. Belarus is a highly centralized state with regional authorities playing a marginal role in elaborating state policies, including in emigration matters. In order to curb emigration, Belarus authorities have resorted to the adoption of laws that discourage mobility. Taking into account growing labour shortages, the state policy to attract immigrants has been largely ineffective. At the same time, by September 2014 Belarus had reportedly hosted more than 25,000 Ukrainian migrants as a result of the military conflict in the Donbass region. Diaspora policy in Belarus is largely incoherent and selective. The long-awaited diaspora law is set to be adopted soon, but it fails to take into account the aspirations of diaspora members.

The Portuguese colonial era in India began in 1502 and ended in 1961 with the annexation of Goa by India. This long standing colonial relationship led to a deep-rooted historical, cultural and social relationship between Goa and Portugal. Migration from Goa to Portugal, over different periods, played an important part in forging this relationship. This paper examines the history of migration from Goa to Portugal, the characteristics of the Goan community in Portugal, and its engagement with Goa and with India, based on secondary and primary sources of information. Section 2 discusses the different waves of migration from Goa to Portugal. It finds that Goans migrated to Portugal during the colonial period in search of education, then following the annexation of Goa by India in 1961, and subsequently during the 1970s when Goans “twice migrated” to Portugal from Mozambique and Angola following their independence. In recent decades, Goans have been migrating to Portugal to seek access to the larger European market. Today, there is a sizeable Goan community residing in Portugal. Sections 3 and 4 explore the question of identity as perceived by this community in Portugal. The findings indicate that history, the causal factors underlying migration, and the heterogeneity within the community in terms of background, economic and social status have a major influence on the notion of identity. One section of the community does not consider itself as a diaspora group or as expatriates or migrants as it sees itself as fully integrated with Portuguese society. Their connection is with Goa, not with India. Another section of the community views itself as belonging to India and also Goa, realizing that they have a distinct identity within Portugal. For the twice migrated, the issue of identity is even more complex as they identify with a third country and many have never lived in Goa or India. Section 5 discusses how this issue of identity has in manifested itself in different ways, such as through the community’ position on issues of minority representation within Portuguese society, through diaspora associations and networks, and the extent to which the community has engaged with and contributed back to Goa and India. It finds that due to the dilemma over identity, the community has had very weak economic and philanthropic ties with the homeland. Section 6 highlights the growing engagement between the Goan community in Portugal and India in recent years and some initiatives at the government level to deepen this engagement. However, it finds that a long term strategic vision has been lacking on the part of both the Indian and the Portuguese governments. Section 7 concludes by calling for a forward looking approach to engaging with the Goan diaspora community in Portugal. It recommends that this community be strategically leveraged not only to strengthen economic and cultural relations with Portugal but also to serve India’s larger foreign policy and geopolitical objectives in the Lusophone countries of Latin America and Africa.

Provoked by more frequent discussions about the "emigration-diaspora" nexus among the researchers on international development, this policy brief, written based on the explanatory notes submitted by country-experts of CARIM-East project, explores the emigration-diaspora issues in migration policies of post-Soviet states in the EU neighborhood. As the examination of CARIM-East country experts reveals, the primary focus of emigration policies of post-Soviet states remains linked to labour migration and focuses on the prevention of emigration (and return of emigrated co-nationals), although migration policies of post-Soviet states also emphasize the need for integrating their labour-force into the international labour market. Post-Soviet governments offer various stimuli to attract their former residents to return to homeland, ranging from advocacy campaigns on business development to matching financial investments from remittances to providing grants to those trained abroad. Despite the conceptual ambiguity stemming from including labour migrants into diasporas, or as the development community has referred to -- "migrant diasporas", the policy documents of post-Soviet states use the term diasporas to refer to both permanently emigrated former citizens, and to current citizens living abroad (regardless of length of residency abroad). However, a more systematic examination is needed to understand whether and in which aspects the focus of migration policies of post-Soviet is different or overlaps for labour migrants abroad vs. diasporas.

The Diaspora Policies dataset focuses on thirty-five states characterized in terms of their symbolic policies, social and economic policies, religious and cultural policies, citizenship policies and government and bureaucratic control, coded in nineteen categorical variables. The dataset includes features of diaspora policies. The dataset is composed of 19 indicators, regrouped in five headings: symbolic policies, social and economic policies, religious and cultural policies, citizenship policies and government and bureaucratic control. Data for these variables has been collected from a variety of secondary sources, as well as primary sources from states, international organizations and diaspora organizations

Based on review of documentary sources on state-emigrant relations, the dataset reviews how 64 states relate to their diasporas. It shows how states constitute various extra-territorial groups as members of a loyal diaspora, through a diverse range of institutions and practices. Three higher-level types of diaspora engagement policy are identified: 1 - capacity building policies, aimed at discursively producing a state-centric ‘transnational national society’, and developing a set of corresponding state institution; 2 - extending rights to the diaspora, thus playing a role that befits a legitimate sovereign, and 3 - extracting obligations from the diaspora, based on the premise that emigrants owe loyalty to this legitimate sovereign.

Human resource mobility is an essential feature of today’s globalised world where integrated world markets, networks and technologies are all contributing to the increasing movement of labour, students, professionals and families. The migrants of today are the Diaspora of tomorrow - and those of yesteryears, that of today. The Indo-European Diaspora represents a significant population in its size, spread and depth. Yet it is argued that their engagement – economic, social and cultural– with India is currently short of its potential relative to their counterparts in North America. This paper examines that relationship and suggests how both India and the EU must draw upon the Indian strategy to widen and strengthen the bridge that the Indian Diaspora represents. The paper focuses on a five select countries in the EU for this analysis, i.e. Belgium, France, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands, being countries that not only have the largest presence of Overseas Indians in mainland Europe but are also strategically important for India. The paper examines the link between Diaspora and development and concludes that it’s a relationship that needs to be nurtured for mutual benefit. It argues that the Indo-European Diaspora has contributed to the economies of the host countries and now is in a position to play a part in India’s developmental efforts. For this a conducive framework needs to be in place. The Indian Government’s policies and programmes are steps in this direction and the time is opportune for the Diaspora to evolve mutually beneficial strategies with both host and home countries to carry forward the relationship.

The aim of the paper is to prioritise the missing side of European migration governance, that is its approach to emigration and diaspora. In order to fill the research gap and to start building a coherent knowledge base on emigration and diaspora policies in the EU, it proposes the mapping of the national responses to emigration over the last four years (mostly overlapping with the economic crisis and post-accession mobility). In this context it tackles two main questions. First, what do we know about emigration from the EU – who migrates and to where? Second, what are the main categories of response of the EU Member States to emigration? In other words, how can we categorize the existing European emigration and diaspora policies? The paper is based on commissioned reports written by 28 EU country correspondents provided in the framework of the project Carim East.