Descripción del medio. Inventario ambiental

The other type of migration around which this study indirectly revolves is return migration.

In fact this study does not target return migrants rather it targets international long-term migrants who had intentions for return migration during the global economic crisis period.

First, we also need to have a standardised or largely accepted definition of a return migrant to rule out any ambiguity or inconsistency. The UNSD (1998: 94) also provided a definition of return migrants as “persons returning to their country of citizenship after having been international migrants (whether short-term or long-term) in another country and who are intending to stay in their own country for at least a year”. Apparently this definition seems simple, understandable and applicable for all situations, but the dimension of country of citizenship raises ambiguities and thus challenges its applicability to all situations. Also, having dual citizenship is another common practice among many immigrants, which also makes the application of this definition difficult. The OECD (2008: 164) noted that

17

Figure 2.2: Conceptualization of the transnationality perspective

Source: Own construct³

shortcoming of this presented definition as well and amended it by replacing the dimension of country of citizenship by country of birth. With this amendment, the OECD (op. cit.: 165) presented different cases of return migration (Figure 2.3).

Figure 2.3: Different cases of return migration

Source: OECD, 2008: 165

http: //dx.doi.org/10.1787/428281631410

The originally presented definition of return migrants was also not applicable for the current study. Many of the Pakistani immigrants in Germany (persons with Pakistani migration background) are no more Pakistani citizens, but are German citizens after going through either naturalization process or simply by acquiring the German citizenship by meeting the prescribed requirements of the German law. In any case, these Pakistani immigrants have to go through the process of renouncing their Pakistani citizenship in the first place. According

3 Presented in an international conference on ‘Translocal Spatial Practices, Urban Transformations: Migration and Mobile Urbanism in South and South-East Asia, held at FRIAS, University of Freiburg, Germany dated 14-16 January, 2015

Chapter 2 Development and Migration: Theoretical and Conceptual Debate

18 to broad German definition of migrants, such migration background status is also passed on to the next generations. I argue that if we apply UNSD introduced definition to such Pakistani immigrants, including those who are born in Germany, their country of citizenship will be Germany and in that case, any such migratory movement as per the presented definition, cannot be regarded as return migration. So in this study, the amended definition of return migrants suggested by the OECD is used.

Conventionally, migration has been viewed as a cycle or a process comprising of many stages to which return migration has been perceived as an integral and crucial component (GMG, 2010a). But the emerging empirical findings of the literature regarding migratory patterns suggest that knowledge of return migration is still incomplete (OECD, 2008: 162) and developing. Dustmann and Weiss (2007) described return migration as one of the possible outcomes of temporary migration under economic motives. de Haas (2007) identified return as an optional outcome of the third migration stage, which comes after the migrant settlement with more or less stable work and earnings in the destination place. But the empirical evidence suggests that migrants with permanent settlement plans, even having their families reunited in the destination places may return back to their origin countries at some uncertain future time for various reasons. While on the other hand, the immigrants with initially temporary migration mind-set could end up as permanent settlers in the destination places. Schmidt-Kallert (2009) also discussed the same migratory trend within the context of rural-urban migration and mentioned the difficulty of differentiating between permanent and non-permanent migration. Likewise, van Baalen and Müller (2008) found that immigrants in Germany with plans to return to their home countries within five years of time could be expected to remain in Germany for at least another 26 years. The important point here is that the terms of temporary and permanent have not been used by these scholars in replacement of short-term and long-term respectively as defined by the UNSD and the OECD. To bring this conceptual discussion into the flow of this study, temporary migrants under their investigation included both short-term and long-term migrants as per the definitions presented in Section 2.2.1. They mainly inquired the uncertain time duration involved in making return decision by the migrants.

The uncertain time duration involved in making actual return migration is explained by the theories of livelihood strategies, multilocality and transnationalism. The theory of livelihood strategies of multi-locational households describes migration as a risk sharing strategy which is exercised with set targets in mind. This strategy does not allow migrants to return back until the achievement of set targets. However migrants are observed to prolong their stay abroad even after achieving their targets. For these migrants, returning to their origins remains an option only if the political and socioeconomic situation in the home country is stable and attractive (OECD, 2008: 163). While the theories of multilocality and transnationality explain that migrants prolong their stay in the host countries in order to maximise their benefits from the available resources of multiple locations. This discussion reflects that returning back home could be an option available for both short and long term migrants with consideration of uncertain time factor involved.

Figure 2.4 summarizes the above discussion by combining the categorization of migration forms under economic motives presented by Dustmann and Weiss (2007), and the hierarchical order of migration stages suggested by de Haas (2007) with possible further extension. It also depicts the actual behaviour of migrants in finding their way either towards return migration or in the direction of a permanent settlement in the receiving places by giving rise to the next generation of immigrants. It further shows the openness of

19 the return migration option available to immigrants at various migration stages. According to assimilation theory, the tendency to return migration becomes weaker at advanced stages of migration and the connection between the connected places breaks down due to the immigrant’s integration into the host societies.

Figure 2.4: Different migration stages for economic migrants and their link with return migration

Source: Own construct, based mainly on the writings of Dustmann and Weiss (2007); de Haas (2007) and OECD (2008)

Determinants of return migration

Djajić and Milbourne (1988), Stark et al. (1997), Dustmann (2001) and van Baalen and Müller (2008) described three main economic motives as determinants of return migration which were, higher marginal utility of consumption in the home country, the higher purchasing power of the currency of host country in the home country and the higher returns of the accumulated financial and human capital in the home country. Further, the OECD (2008:

178) added another determinant of return migration as a failure to integrate in the host country. According to the literature, first three determinant models relate the motives of return migration with the unexpected changes in the labour market conditions or in the economic situation of the host or the home country (van Baalen and Müller, 2008). Such

Economic migrant

Settling process

Settled with more or less stable work and earnings

Temporary stay Permanent stay

Target achieved Ongoing stay

Family reunion Return migration

Give rise to next generation of immigrants

Failed to settle

Transient migration

Strong connection/linkage Weak connection/linkage

Chapter 2 Development and Migration: Theoretical and Conceptual Debate

20 unexpected changes in the labour market conditions and overall economic situation of the destination places may hamper the aspirations of immigrants which could lead to integration failures. Undoubtedly, the direct impact of the economic crisis times in the destination places is on the labour market, which could also indirectly affect the integration efforts of immigrants. This literature finding provided me a departure point to carry out this research set in the time period of the global economic crisis.