Back to top
Definition
Different definitions of governance exist. One definition of governance pertaining specifically to migration is:
“A system of institutions, legal frameworks, mechanisms and practices aimed at regulating migration and protecting migrants. Used almost synonymously with the term ‘migration management’, although migration management is also sometimes used to refer to the narrow act of regulating cross-border movement at the state level” (IOM, 2011).
Related to migration governance is migration policy, which is widely used without being clearly defined. Related terms include migration regulation, restriction and control. A recent definition describes migration policies as:
“… a government’s statements of what it intends to do or not do (including laws, regulations, decisions or orders) in regards to the selection, admission, settlement and deportation of foreign citizens residing in the country” (Bjerre et al ., 2015).
Migration policies may cover various areas including the labour market, integration, and humanitarian/asylum, family, co-ethnic, and irregular migration. IOM’s Migration Governance Framework (MiGOF) defines migration policy as the “law and policy affecting the movement of people” and includes policy on “travel and temporary mobility, immigration, emigration, nationality, labour markets, economic and social development, industry, commerce, social cohesion, social services, health, education, law enforcement, foreign policy, trade and humanitarian” issues (IOM, 2017).
Key trends
Global trends in migration policies cannot be easily defined or tracked because available indices cover different aspects of migration for different periods and regions. For countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), data from the International Migration Policy and Law Analysis (IMPALA) database reveal a trend “toward more complex and, often, more restrictive regulation since the 1990’s.” IMPALA data also show “differential treatment of groups, such as lower requirements for highly skilled than low-skilled labor migrants” (
Beine et al., 2015). Others find that while policies toward irregular migrants and, more recently, family members have often become more restrictive, other policies targeting high and low-skilled workers, students, and migrants from specific origins, have become less restrictive since the Second World War (
de Haas et al., 2014).
Back to top
Data sources & measurement
Several migration policy indices exist and more are under development (Bjerre et al al., 2015). Available data vary considerably according to the specific aspect of migration that is measured, the number of countries that are included, and the number of years covered. The data sources that are most comprehensive because they cover more countries and dimensions of migration policies include:
The World Population Policies Database (UN DESA) provides information on the views and policy priorities of 196 countries. It covers 16 indicators across various population policy areas, including immigration and emigration, age structure, fertility, health and mortality, spatial distribution and internal migration. The database is updated biennially. In 2013, UN DESA released an International Migration Policies Report that was based on data in the World Population Policies Database as well as the Global Migration Database. The report provides information on levels and trends in international migration, and on policies to influence the level of immigration, promote the immigration of highly skilled workers, and foster the integration and naturalization of immigrants into the host communities. Data also include information on policies designed by Governments in countries of origin, such as policies on emigration, acceptance of dual citizenship, policies to encourage the return of citizens, and measures to promote involvement of diaspora in countries of origin. The response rate by countries can ranges depending on the year and survey question.
Determinants of International Migration (DEMIG) POLICY tracks more than 6,500 migration policy changes enacted by 45 countries from 1945 to 2013. DEMIG accesses policies using 51 indicators and codes them according to the policy area and migrant group targeted, as well as the change in restrictiveness they introduce in the existing legal system.
The Migration Governance Indicators (MGI) form a framework to assess the comprehensiveness of countries’ migration policies and to help identify gaps and priorities to build institutional capacity and programmes on migration. The MGI covers 39 countries and 90 indicators, and is based on the six dimensions of good migration governance in IOM’s Migration Governance Framework (MiGOF), the first and so far only internationally agreed definition for “well-managed migration policies”. These six policy dimensions are: migrants’ rights, institutional capacity, regional and international cooperation, socioeconomic well-being of migrants, mobility dimensions of crises, and safe and orderly migration. In May 2016, a report with the MGI findings for fifteen pilot countries was published, and subsequently, the framework is being applied in a growing number of volunteering countries. One of the aims of the MGI is to help countries develop baseline assessments and conduct future reviews of their work in the context of the SDGs and the Global Compact on Migration.
The Immigration Policies in Comparison (IMPIC) project developed a set of 69 sophisticated quantitative indicators to measure immigration policies in all (33) OECD countries for the period 1980 to 2010. Policy areas include labour migration, asylum claims and refugees, family reunification, and the migration of those with a shared colonial history, language, religion and/or ancestry, (also known as “co-ethnic migration”). Various sub-dimensions in each policy category are taken into account, including eligibility, conditions, security of status and associated rights.
The IMPALA project compiles comparable data on immigration law and policy in over 25 countries of immigration between 1960 and 2010. Data cover all major categories of immigration law and policy, such as the acquisition of citizenship, economic migration, family reunification, permanent immigration, temporary migration, asylum and refugee protection, and policies relating to undocumented migration and border control.
OECD’s Policy and Institutional Coherence for Migration and Development (PICMD) dashboard measures the extent to which public policies and institutional arrangements are coherent with international best practices to minimize the risks and maximize the development gains of migration. The dashboard of indicators are grouped into five policy dimensions: institutional coherence, reducing the cost of migration, protecting the rights of migrants and families, promoting integration and reintegration, and enhancing the development impact of migration. The pilot project includes 10 countries with plans to expand to 20-25 countries.
A related index, the Migration Integration Policy Index (MIPEX), also measures migration governance but focuses on integration policies instead of migration policies.
Back to top
Data strengths & limitations
More data on migration policies have become available in the last decade, mostly through research institutions and international organizations. Migration policy indices cover a wide range of relevant fields, different time periods and countries. However, certain limitations exist:
- Migration policy indices are not available for many countries, especially low income countries;
- Different indices also use varying definitions of migration policies and apply different methods, such as different scales, aggregations and coding;
- Most indices are based on experts’ evaluation of legal provisions in a specific country;
- Many indices cannot be replicated easily and are not publicly available; and
- Migration policy indices generally do not measure the implementation of policies or their respective outcomes. For example, an immigration policy index may describe the laws governing irregular migration to a specific country; however, it does not tell you whether the policy is enforced or how many irregular migrants are entering or residing in the country.
Further reading
| Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) |
|---|
| 2017 |
Indicators and a Monitoring Framework: Launching a data revolution for the Sustainable Development Goals. |
| Beine, M. et al. |
|---|
| 2016 |
Comparing immigration policies: An overview from the IMPALA database. International Migration Review, 50 (4). 827-863. ISSN 01979183 |
| International Organization of Migration (IOM) |
|---|
| 2016 |
Measuring well-governed migration: The 2016 Migration Governance Index. The Economist Intelligence Unit, London. Helbling, M, L. Bjerre, F. Römer and M. Zobel |
| Helbling, M, L. Bjerre, F. Römer and M. Zobel |
|---|
| 2017 |
Measuring immigration policies: The IMPIC database. European Political Science, 16(1): 79-98. |
| de Haas, H., K. Natter, and S. Vezzoli, S. |
|---|
| 2014 |
Compiling and coding migration policies: Insights from the DEMIG POLICY database. IMI Working Paper Series 87. Oxford: International Migration Institute, University of Oxford. |
Back to top
