China

The transformation of China and Vietnam from centrally planned economies into today’s market economies has been fuelled by the labour of millions of migrant factory workers from rural areas. These countries started reforming at the turn of the 1980s, embracing marketisation while remaining under the Communist party’s political monopoly, a system now commonly termed market socialism. In what seems to be a reversal of the wider trends of austerity, there has been rapid expansion of social protection, much like what has been happening in other Global South contexts. While the shifts indicate state and societal responses to the social conflict and tension induced by marketization, they in turn have been foregrounded by the politics around how different groups of people should be cared for, politics that are part of wider moral struggles between actors in the new economy. Given their underclass status and their salience as a social force, the question of the migrant factory workers’ welfare is critical for the understanding of the on-going shifts in these countries’ welfare systems. WelfareStruggles is aimed at uncovering the politics of care underlying the provision of welfare for migrant factory workers in China and Vietnam. It does so through a comparative investigation that has two ground-breaking features: 1) the combination of ethnography with comparative social policy analysis, and 2) a translocal approach that takes into account the workers and their families’ negotiation for welfare across the city and the countryside. The comparison is expected to generate path-breaking knowledge about the variable moral dynamics of market socialist welfare. The knowledge will be essential for understanding the momentous yet little-known transformations of Global South welfare and has wider relevance to policy makers and organisations working with analysing and formulating solutions to the welfare needs of the migrant labour force in Vietnam, China and beyond.

Suite aux réformes engagées en Chine à la fin des années 1970, des millions de personnes attirées par de meilleures conditions économiques quittent les zones rurales pour travailler temporairement dans les zones urbaines. En parallèle, les migrations internationales en Europe ont également augmenté au cours des vingt dernières années, du fait de l’intégration économique avec les pays en développement. L'objectif du projet est d'étudier comment la migration remodèle les habitudes de consommation des migrants et des personnes indirectement touchées par la migration S’il existe un grand nombre d'études analysant les conséquences de la migration sur le marché du travail, la façon dont la consommation, les comportements de consommation et les inégalités de consommation sont affectés par la migration reste un domaine très peu exploré. L'ambition du projet est de combler cette lacune en répondant aux trois questions de recherche suivantes : a) Quel est l'impact de la Grande Migration sur les modes de consommation ? b) Quelles sont les relations entre les institutions, les changements de population et les habitudes de consommation ? c) La migration conduit-elle à un transfert des normes de consommation ? La recherche montre que la consommation est une mesure idéale pour capter le revenu permanent et donc pour prédire le bien-être économique à long terme. Dans la première question de recherche, nous nous concentrerons sur l'étude de la façon dont la migration affecte la consommation des migrants avant, pendant et après la migration, ainsi que la consommation des personnes qui sont indirectement touchées par la migration (la famille restée à la campagne d’une part, les citadins d’autre part). Avec le vieillissement de la population en Chine et la diminution concomitante de la population en âge de travailler, de nombreuses personnes devront adapter leur comportement en matière de consommation présente et d’épargne pour une consommation future. Le logement est l’un des avoirs principaux qui peut être affecté par ce type d’arbitrage. Notre deuxième question de recherche examinera le lien entre la migration d’une part et la demande de logements et les prix des logements d’autre part, ainsi que la manière dont le logement affecte la consommation des autres biens. L’objectif de la troisième question de recherche est de comprendre si et comment la migration conduit à un transfert de normes de consommation de la destination à la région d’origine. Les travailleurs migrants vivant dans les zones urbaines sont de plus en plus exposés au style de vie urbain, absorbant par là-même le comportement de consommation des citadins. De même, de nombreux jeunes migrants chinois découvrent les valeurs et normes européennes au cours de leur séjour en Europe et cette exposition est susceptible de favoriser un transfert des modes de comportements de consommation en Chine, notamment par le biais des nouvelles technologies, des médias et des réseaux sociaux. L’effet de la migration sur les familles de migrants qui, en Chine, vivent en grande partie encore en zone rurale peut ne pas être toujours positif. Dans le cas de familles recevant des transferts de fonds des migrants, nous mettons en évidence un effet négatif sur l’investissement en capital humain, car ces ménages allouent une part plus faible de leur budget à l'éducation que les ménages non-bénéficiaires de transfert. Cet effet négatif provient à la fois d’une moindre propension à envoyer ses enfants à l’école (au-delà des 9 années obligatoires) et de dépenses moins élevées en éducation (tutorat, frais de scolarité, etc.) lorsque les enfants sont à l’école. Cet investissement moindre en capital humain des familles de migrants pourrait être lié à la perception de rendements faibles de l’éducation rurale sur le marché du travail urbain.

Als ein Teil des Projekts Einwanderung und Transformation der chinesischen Gesellschaft werden hier die sozialen Dynamiken und die Umsetzung des neuen chinesischen Ausländergesetzes von 2012 aus der Perspektive staatlicher und nicht-staatlicher Akteure untersucht. Dabei stehen die folgenden Fragen im Mittelpunkt: Wie positionieren sich bestimmte nationale Ministerien oder die Regierungen von Megastädten wie Guangzhou zur Zuwanderung und zur Ausländerintegration in China? Wie bilden sich demografische Herausforderungen, Wirtschaftsentwicklung und Sicherheitsbedenken in öffentlichen und fachlichen Diskursen über Rechtsreformen und die Umsetzung des neuen Ausländerrechts ab? Wie verhält sich der formale Vollzug des Ausländerrechts gegenüber informalen Praktiken, etwa informalen Arrangements und Aushandlungsprozessen zwischen Einwanderern und Verwaltungsbeamten? Das Projekt wird in Peking, dem Sitz des nationalen Gesetzgebers durchgeführt sowie in Guangzhou, einem Zentrum ausländischer Zuwanderung. Um die Perspektiven des Gesetzgebers, der Verwaltung und der Einwanderer zu integrieren, verwendet dieses Projekt einen interdisziplinären Ansatz, der sich Methoden aus der Rechtswissenschaft, der Enthnologie und der Geografie bedient. Die im nationalen Gesetzgebungsverfahren involvierten Interessen werden mittels der Analyse von Texten und Experteninterviews in Ministerien, Parteiorganen, Universitäten und Thinktanks erforscht. Die Untersuchung des Vollzugs des Ausländerrechts in Guangzhou beinhaltet eine Aktualisierung bereits vorhandener qualitativer und quantitativer Daten sowie Interviews mit örtlichen Behörden, Konsulaten und Ausländerorganisationen. Die Perspektive der Einwanderer wird mittels Methoden der ethnografischen Forschung untersucht, wobei insbesondere Einwanderergruppen aus Westafrika und aus Europa betrachtet werden.

Migration policies are guided more by fears than by facts. Many fears are rooted in economic arguments. In receiving regions, e.g., natives fear that immigrants will take their jobs. In sending regions, there is the fear of losing the migration option and of decreasing remittances due to the economic crisis. The research group seeks to investigate into perceptions and realities in selected migrant-sending and receiving countries. It will compare perceptions and realities as reflected in data, media and public discourses, which are obstructing the creation and sharing of knowledge. With the planning grant, the project team aims at elaborating a comparative theoretical and methodological approach suitable for the study of the perceptions and realities of irregular migration in times of global economic crisis. Reports about the state of art will focus on China, Ecuador, Finland, Germany, Nigeria, Spain and the United Kingdom.

The recent economic transformation in Pearl River Delta/China has resulted in massive megaurbanization, which is at least partly driven by informal processes. To the most severe problems belong the high informal migration and the almost collapsed health-care system. Against this background the research project aims at a deepened understanding of the connection between highly complex and informal megaurban processes - here: the connection and dynamics between flows of informal migration and megaurban health strategies - and the mutual forms and effects of global change as well as the reorganisation of spatial, social, and institutional relationships in the megacities. How are different groups of informal migrants affected by the devastated health care systems, how do different stakeholders react, how are different levels of administration (central and local levels) reacting to this complex interplay of local, national and supranational agents, and how does this condition the regime s stability and legitimacy?

In dem Projekt wird eine systematische und komparative Analyse über asiatische Studierendenmobilität durchgeführt werden. Dabei handelt es sich um eine der weltweit stärksten bildungsbezogenen Migrationsbewegungen. Wir möchten neue Einblicke über den Zusammenhang zwischen bildungsbezogener Mobilität, Lebensplanung und Lebensverlauf gewinnen. Unser Forschungsdesign ist innovativ: Wir schlagen auf der Basis eines repräsentativen Samples von japanischen und chinesischen Studierenden einen dreifachen Vergleich vor: zwischen (1) japanischen und chinesischen Studierenden an britischen und deutschen Universitäten, (2) im Inland verbliebenen chinesischen und japanischen Studierenden und (3) nach Japan migrierten chinesischen Studierenden. Durch solche Vergleiche, und unter Verwendung von verschiedenen multivariaten Methoden und Netzwerkanalysen, erwarten wir einige theoretische Aspekte aufdecken zu können, etwa im Hinblick auf die Selektivität bildungsbezogener Mobilität, die Formierung individueller Präferenzen für regionale oder überregionale Migration, und die unterschiedlichen Auswirkungen solcher Präferenzen auf den wahrgenommenen Wert und die Möglichkeiten tertiärer Bildung für die zukünftige Lebensplanung. Zusätzlich zu der Generierung von wertvollen Umfragedaten über die Migration von chinesischen und japanischen Studierenden, wird die Forschung einer Reihe von nicht-akademischen Interessenvertretern, einschließlich Regierungen, tertiären Bildungseinrichtungen, think-tanks und Organisationen, die in die Bereitstellungen von Informationen und Unterstützung für internationale Studierende involviert sind, zugute kommen. Das vorgeschlagene Projekt beruht auf dem aktuell geförderten Befragungsprojekt 'Bright Futures: Internal and International Mobility of Chinese Students' der europäischen Partner und deren Kooperation mit Forschern an der Universität Kyoto.

Migration policies are guided more by fears than by facts. Many fears are rooted in economic arguments. They are thus intensified in times of economic crisis. In receiving regions, natives fear that immigrants will take their jobs or put additional strain on social infrastructure and the welfare system. In sending regions, there is the fear of losing the migration option and of decreasing remittances. The moral panic generated by changes in migration situation can often lead to a fear of and hatred for "the other" and social crisis. This pilot project seeks to explore perceptions and realities of irregular migration in 4 European countries (Germany, United Kingdom, Spain and Finland) and 3 non-European countries (China, Nigeria and Ecuador) and develop a larger international research project on these issues under the “Europe and Global Challenges” Programme, jointly organised by the a consortium of foundations composed of the Compagnia di San Paolo (Italy), the Riksbankens Jubileumsfond (Sweden) and the Volkswagenstiftung (Germany). Objectives • To elaborate a comparative theoretical and methodological approach suitable for the study of the perceptions and realities of irregular migration • To prepare reports about the state-of-art concerning perceptions and reality of irregular migration in times of global economic crisis in the selected European and non-European countries • To integrate theoretical, methodological and organisational approaches into a coherent project and team structure

MiTSoPro focuses on the link between migration and welfare across different European and non-European countries. The first part of the project closely examines migrants’ access to welfare in home and host countries. In doing so, the project adopts a top-down analytical approach of the concept of Transnational Social Protection from above, thus aiming to provide answers to the following research questions: Do migrants have access to social protection in Europe and beyond? What kind of social benefits can they access in their countries of residence and what type of social protection entitlements can they export from their countries of origin? Do some migrant groups benefit from an easier formal access to welfare benefits than others? Do some countries offer more inclusive social protection regimes for immigrants and emigrants alike? The first part of the project provides an in-depth analysis of eligibility conditions for accessing welfare entitlements across 40 countries. The project thus includes all EU Member States and 12 non-EU sending countries distributed across different continents, whose nationals represent an important share of the migration inflows towards European countries (the 12 non-EU countries included in the project are: Argentina, China, Ecuador, India, Lebanon, Morocco, Russia, Senegal, Serbia, Switzerland, Tunisia and Turkey). For each country, we systematically analyse migrants’ access to social benefits across five core policy areas that are closely examined via a broad range of indicators (i.e. specific types of social benefits in kind and cash): 1) Health care (benefits in kind and cash in case of sickness and invalidity benefits); 2) Unemployment (covering both unemployment insurance and unemployment assistance); 3) Old-age pensions (including contributory and non-contributory pensions); 4) Family benefits (maternity, paternity, parental, and child benefits); 5) Guaranteed minimum resources (social assistance programmes aiming to provide a “safety net” aiming to protect individuals from severe poverty). The data collection process was conducted between April 2019-January 2019, based on a survey with national experts across all country analysed. The survey included standardized questions, thus ensuring comparability across the different countries analysed, despite their different political settings and migration histories. The project covers national legislations in place in 2019. This first dataset on migrants’ access to welfare entitlement is complemented by a second one that examines the programmes and initiatives led by home countries authorities to respond to the social protection needs of their non-resident nationals. Covering the same 40 countries, this second dataset highlights the role of three key actors (consulates, diaspora institutions and home country ministries/agencies responsible for specific social policy areas) through which sending states interact with their nationals abroad across the five policy areas previously mentioned. The data collection of this second dataset is based on another survey conducted between April 2018-January 2019 with national experts across the 40 countries analysed in the project.

The IMISEM project adopts a comprehensive view of migration policy that includes both its emigrant/emigration and immigrant/immigration sides, bridging the two sides of migration policy. The main research question is: how does policy offer or hinder a path for migrants to become or remain an integral part of the polity? The theoretical framework bridges the stages of entry/exit, residency in/abroad, and access to citizenship and looks for patterns of how states manage the process of migrant inclusion in or exclusion from the polity. IMISEM gathers cross-regional evidence on the variety and depth of policy configurations governing migration trajectories for different profiles of migrants. With these data it charts the connections between policies of mobility, settlement and belonging, looking forward to extracting the underlying principles structuring them, and possibly to find whether or not there are threads of coherence across the “two sides” (emi-/immigrant policies). Using a comparative area study angle, IMISEM develops a broadened perspective on the migration policy landscape across regions. Thus, it looks at 30 cases from Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Asia, to cover a wide breadth of migratory profiles and institutional contexts to which policies can be traced back un further analyses.

The MACIMIDE Global Expatriate Dual Citizenship Dataset charts the rules that existed in near all states of the world since 1960 with regard to the loss or renunciation of citizenship after a citizen of a respective state voluntarily acquires the citizenship of another state. The central variable of the Dataset is the dualcit_cat variable. This is a categorical variable whose values may be used to interpret, in broad lines, the position of a country with regards to the expatriate dual citizenship. The dualcit_cat variable reflects what consequences the legislation and legal practice of a country attaches to the voluntary acquisition of a foreign citizenship. The value of this variable depends on a number of criteria, including whether a citizen of the reference country who voluntarily obtains a foreign citizenship automatically loses – in principle – the citizenship of the origin country, and whether a citizen of the reference country can renounce that citizenship. The value assigned to dualcit_cat reflects the position of the country on the 1st of January of the reference year. Any subsequent changes in legislation will be reflected in the dualcit_cat value of the following year and included in updated versions of the Dataset. The dualcit_binary variable is a recoding of the dualcit_cat variable. This variable can be used for broad comparisons of the dual citizenship positions around the world. The possible values reflect whether the legislation of a country, in a given reference year, provides for the automatic loss of the origin citizenship (1) or not (2). All data have been centrally collected and refer to specific provisions in national law.

Since the mid-1970s, the World Population Policies Database, last updated in 2015, provides comprehensive and up-to-date information on the population policy situation and trends for all Member States and non-member States of the United Nations. Among several areas, the database shows the evolution of government views and policies with respect to internal and international migration. The migration strand covers internal migration, immigration, emigration, and return. The Database is updated biennially by conducting a detailed country-by-country review of national plans and strategies, programme reports, legislative documents, official statements and various international, Inter-governmental and non-governmental sources, as well as by using official responses to the United Nations Inquiry among Governments on Population and Development.

DEMIG POLICY tracks more than 6,500 migration policy changes enacted by 45 countries around the world mostly in the 1945-2013 period. The policy measures are coded according to the policy area and migrant group targeted, as well as the change in restrictiveness they introduce in the existing legal system. The database allows for both quantitative and qualitative research on the long-term evolution and effectiveness of migration policies. DEMIG POLICY was compiled between 2010 and 2014 as part of the DEMIG project (Determinants of International Migration: A Theoretical and Empirical Assessment of Policy, Origin and Destination Effects). It tracks 6,500 migration policy changes (both immigration and emigration) in 45 countries, most of them enacted in the 1945-2013 period. DEMIG POLICY assesses for each policy measure whether it represents a change towards more restrictiveness (coded +1) or less restrictiveness (coded -1) within the existing legal system. Besides this main assessment of change in restrictiveness, every policy change is also coded according to the policy area (border control, legal entry, integration, exit), policy tool (recruitment agreements, work permit, expulsion, quota, regularization, resettlement, carrier sanctions, etc.), migrant group (low- and high-skilled workers, family members, refugees, irregular migrants, students etc.) and migrant origin (all foreign nationalities, EU citizens, specific nationalities etc.) targeted. The database has been compiled by the DEMIG team, in particular by Katharina Natter, Simona Vezzoli and Hein de Haas, and reviewed by national migration policy experts.

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

The Inquiry gathers critically important data for monitoring the implementation of the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development and other international agreements, including the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The Inquiry, mandated by the General Assembly in its resolution 1838 (XVII) of 18 December 1962, has been conducted by the Secretary-General at regular intervals since 1963. The Twelfth Inquiry consists of multiple-choice questions, organized in three thematic modules: Module I on population ageing and urbanization; Module II on fertility, family planning and reproductive health; and Module III on international migration. In 1994, Member States attending the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo agreed that “population-related goals and policies are integral parts of cultural, economic and social development” and recommended that actions be taken “to measure, assess, monitor and evaluate progress towards meeting the goals of its Programme of Action”. The year 2019 will mark the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Cairo conference and adoption of the ICPD Programme of Action, which continues to provide crucial guidance for addressing the fundamental development challenges facing the world today. Population issues are also at the core of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development adopted in 2015. The United Nations Inquiry among Governments on Population and Development (the “Inquiry”) gathers critically important data for monitoring the implementation of the ICPD Programme of Action and other international agreements, including the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The Inquiry, mandated by the General Assembly in its resolution 1838 (XVII) of 18 December 1962, has been conducted by the Secretary-General at regular intervals since 1963. The most recent Inquiry, the Eleventh, was implemented in 2014.

The index addresses the legal rights (civil and political, economic, social, residency, and family reunion rights) granted to migrant workers admitted under labour immigration programs in high- and middle-income countries to admitting migrant workers. Labor immigration programs are defined as policies for regulating the number, skills, and rights of migrants who are admitted for the primary purpose of work. It includes 104 programmes in force for the year 2009. Migrant rights refer to the legal rights (defined here as the rights granted by national laws and policies) granted to migrant workers on admission under a particular labour immigration program. So the indicators measure rights “in laws and regulations” rather than “in practice”. The dataset includes all high-income countries with a population exceeding two million, and, to ensure broad geographic coverage, a selection of upper- and lower- middle-income countries. In total, the sample comprises 46 countries including 34 high-income countries.

This set of indicators compares several dimensions of migration policies as of early 2009. For a selected set of 28 countries, both developed and developing, the indicators address admission criteria, policies on integration and treatment of migrants, and efforts to enforce those policies. Irregular migration is a particular area of focus. The analysis distinguishes between different entry regimes, namely: labour migrants (high or low skilled, with a permanent or a temporary permit), those who move with a family-related visa, humanitarian migrants (asylum seekers and refugees), international visitors and international students. The indicators cover three main areas of policy interest: admission, treatment, and enforcement. Most of the 84 questions were multiple-choice, but there were also open-ended questions to allow comments and explanations. The data is drawn from an assessment by country experts as well as by desk-research of Human Development Report Office staff. Information was collected in two parallel and complementary efforts during early 2009: through a questionnaire answered by International Organization for Migration (IOM) country-level staff and other world-wide migration experts, and through internal desk-web research

The index is based on three types of entry visa restrictions: visa required, visa not required for short stays and visa not required. The author identifies country pairs which changed their visa regime during 1998–2010. This immigration policy index is constructed for all countries and territories in the world for both March 1998 and November 2009. This index is heterogeneous across destination and origin countries as well as over time.

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.

Western Union commissioned the Economist Intelligence Unit to compile a migration index that ranks 61 countries by how attractive and accessible they are for migrants (the Global Migration Barometer), with a separate assessment of their need for migrants. The Economist Intelligence Unit developed the methodology behind the index, collected the data and scored the countries, with input from Western Union and an independent panel of migration experts. The index has been produced for 61 developed and emerging markets using a standard analytical framework. The model used to generate the index employs indicators that reflect the standard of living and economic development of a country, legislative policy and attitudes towards migration, and demographics and social welfare commitments. Many of the 32 indicators used to generate the index are based on quantitative data and have been drawn from national and international statistical sources. The others are qualitative in nature and have been produced by the Economist Intelligence Unit. Each of the indicators has been adjusted and weighted to produce a score of 0 to 100, where 100 represents the highest attractiveness, accessibility or need for migrants.