Vo
lu
m
e
5,
Ju
ne
,2
02
5
,
M
ED
IC
AL
SC
IE
N
CE
S.
IM
PA
CT
FA
CT
OR
:7
,8
9
INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION PROCESSES AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE IN
THE ECONOMY OF COUNTRIES
Gulhayot Shuhratovna Abdullayeva
Senior Lecturer, Tashkent Oriental University and
Independent Researcher, Tashkent State University of Economics
agulhayot@gmail.com
Abstract:
This article examines the processes of international migration and their
significance for national economies. It presents statistical data on the top ten countries
globally in terms of remittance inflows and outflows generated by labor migrants. The
analysis focuses on the economic impact of migration on both “sending” and “receiving”
countries.
Keywords:
International migration, migrant, trend, immigrant, emigrant, gross domestic
product (GDP), export.
Introduction.
Human migration is an age-old phenomenon relevant to virtually every
society across the globe, yet it continues to evolve in diverse ways. Shifts in scale, direction,
demographics, and frequency enable us to observe how migration is dynamically developing
over time.
The term migration encompasses various legally defined categories of individuals
−
such as
labor migrants with formal status
−
as well as those who fall under specific forms of
movement regulated by law, including irregular or undocumented migrants. It also includes
groups whose legal status or means of movement are not explicitly defined under
international law, such as foreign students
.
To facilitate the collection of migration-related data, the United Nations Department of
Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA) defines an international migrant as “any person
who changes his or her country of usual residence.” This definition deliberately excludes
individuals who move for purposes such as tourism, visits to friends and relatives, business
travel, medical treatment, or religious pilgrimage
The causes of contemporary migration are diverse and complex. However, the primary
motivations can broadly be categorized as economic and social. These two categories are so
deeply intertwined that distinguishing between them is often difficult; thus, it is more
appropriate to refer to them collectively as socio-economic factors. The major determinants
of present-day migration include:
-
economic factors – wage differentials, employment availability;
1
WORLD MIGRATION REPORT 2022.
2
WORLD MIGRATION REPORT 2022.
Vo
lu
m
e
5,
Ju
ne
,2
02
5
,
M
ED
IC
AL
SC
IE
N
CE
S.
IM
PA
CT
FA
CT
OR
:7
,8
9
-
social factors – access to healthcare, quality of life, family relations, children's welfare;
- religious and ethnic factors – affiliation with a particular ethnic group or religious belief
system;
- environmental factors – climate, weather conditions, ecological stability;
- administrative factors – migration policies, regulatory frameworks.
Migration may be triggered by both “push” and “pull” factors. Push factors, which operate
in sending (donor) countries, include:
- economic reasons - unemployment and lack of job opportunities, low wage levels;
- social reasons - lack of future prospects, absence of educational opportunities, deteriorating
criminal situation, personal sense of insecurity;
- ethno-religious reasons - discrimination based on ethnic, racial, or religious affiliation,
conflicts between ethnic groups, "ethnic cleansing";
- administrative-political reasons - persecution for political views, deportation;
- natural causes - natural disasters, deterioration of ecological conditions and climate.
"Pull" factors in receiving countries include the following:
- economic factors - the possibility of finding employment, high wage levels, access to
developed infrastructure;
- social factors - opportunities for education, presence of family members and relatives;
- ethno-religious factors - religious freedom, policies of ethnic and religious diversity;
- administrative and political factors - programs for attracting migrants;
- natural factors - favorable climate, good ecological conditions.
Review of Relevant Literature.
In the study of modern population migration, significant
differences exist between domestic and international scholarly traditions. Each school of
thought reflects distinct characteristics shaped by its historical and theoretical context.
A pivotal contribution to migration theory was made by British geographer and statistician
Ernst Georg Ravenstein, whose influential article titled “The Movement of Population
Between Cities” was published in 1946 in the American Sociological Review
. In this work,
3
Zipf G. The (P1P2 / D) hypothesis: on the intercity movement of persons // American Sociological
Review. 1946. № 11. P. 677–686.
Vo
lu
m
e
5,
Ju
ne
,2
02
5
,
M
ED
IC
AL
SC
IE
N
CE
S.
IM
PA
CT
FA
CT
OR
:7
,8
9
Ravenstein explored the impact of distance on interurban migration, laying the foundation
for spatial migration theory.
He sought to explain such movements through the principle of least effort or least resistance,
which posits that individuals tend to pursue outcomes that require the least expenditure of
energy or resources. In the context of migration, this means people are more likely to
relocate to destinations that are geographically closer or socially and economically more
accessible.
The American sociologist Everett S. Lee made a significant contribution to the study of
population migration theory. In 1966, in his article “Theory of Migration”, he revised
Ravenstein's theory, focusing on push and pull factors
.
American economists John Harris and Michael Todaro also placed high importance on
migration issues. Their work was published in 1970 in the American Economic Review
journal in an article titled “Migration, Unemployment and Development: A Two-Sector
Analysis”
.
Another scholar who has studied migration is the American sociologist Samuel Stoffer, who
believes that distance and population are not the main factors determining the migration
flow between them
.
It is also worth noting Nobel laureate William Arthur Lewis, the author of the two-sector
economic model, which provides for the separation of rural and urban sectors. In this model,
the author paid special attention to rural-urban migration against the backdrop of increased
production and employment in third-world countries
American sociologist Saskia Sassen is a prominent researcher of globalization, urbanization,
and international migration, and is the author of the term “global city” and several books.
In his book “The Mobility of Labor and Capital”, Sassen argues that foreign investment in
developing countries only contributes to an increase in emigration
.
4
Lee E. A Theory of Migration // Demography. 1966. № 3. P. 47–57
5
Harris J., Todaro M. Migration, Unemployment, and Development: A Two-Sector Analysis
// The American Economic Review. 1970. № 60. P. 126–142.
6
Stouffer S. Intervening Opportunities: A Theory Relating Mobility and Distance //
American Sociological Review. 1940. № 5. P. 845–867
7
. Lewis W.A. The Theory of Economic Growth. — N.Y., 1959. — P. 402.
8
Sassen S. The Mobility of Labor and Capital: A Study in International Investment and Labor
Flow. New York : Cambridge University Press. 1988. P. 240.
Vo
lu
m
e
5,
Ju
ne
,2
02
5
,
M
ED
IC
AL
SC
IE
N
CE
S.
IM
PA
CT
FA
CT
OR
:7
,8
9
The influence of the globalization process on migration is described in detail in the book
"The Age of Migration" by theorists Stefan Kasls and Mark Miller
Research methodology
. Familiarization with scientific research on migration processes and
solving their problems, the study of statistical data and economic comparison and analysis,
logical thinking, scientific abstraction, data grouping, and methods of analysis and synthesis
were widely used.
Analysis and Findings.
According to recent estimates, in 2019, there were approximately
169 million labor migrants worldwide, accounting for nearly 62% of the 272 million
international migrants recorded at the time
. It is important to note that these figures
precede the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which had a profound impact on international
labor migration. Therefore, these pre-pandemic statistics serve as a useful baseline for future
assessments of COVID-19's long-term effects on global migration flows.
Among the global population considered to be of working age (defined as individuals aged
15 and older), international labor migrants represented approximately 68.8%, or 245.6
million people.
In terms of distribution by income groupings of destination countries, the data reveal that:
-
67% of labor migrants (approximately 113.9 million individuals) resided in high-
income countries;
-
an additional 49 million migrants (29%) lived in upper-middle-income countries;
-
only 6.1 million migrants (3.6%) resided in low-income countries.
These patterns underscore the strong correlation between labor migration and economic
disparities at the global level, where high-income nations continue to serve as primary
destinations for economically motivated migrants.
Migrants make a substantial contribution to the financial systems of their host countries, not
only by paying taxes but also by spending approximately 85% of their income within the
economies of the receiving nations. The remaining 15% is typically sent back to their
countries of origin in the form of remittances
In recent years, the volume of remittances sent by migrants to their home countries has seen
a dramatic increase. In 2000, total global remittances amounted to USD 128 billion, whereas
by 2019, this figure had risen to USD 719 billion. This significant growth underscores the
9
Castles S., Miller M. The age of migration: international population movements in the
modern world. London : Macmillan. 1993. 306 p.
10
World Bank, 2020.
11
"Foreign Economic Activity and Competition Management" Rakhmatullayeva F.M., Abdulloyev A.J.,
Giyazova N.B., Narzullayeva G.S. Study Guide, Part I "Durdona" Publishing House, Bukhara-2021.
Vo
lu
m
e
5,
Ju
ne
,2
02
5
,
M
ED
IC
AL
SC
IE
N
CE
S.
IM
PA
CT
FA
CT
OR
:7
,8
9
expanding role of remittances as a critical source of external finance for many developing
economies.
In 2020, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, global remittance flows experienced a slight
decline of 2.4%, amounting to USD 702 billion. This represented a drop from the USD 719
billion recorded in 2019, marking the first downturn following three consecutive years of
growth.
Between 2016 and 2019, global inward remittance flows steadily increased:
-
from USD 597 billion in 2016 to USD 640 billion in 2017, reflecting a 7.2% rise;
-
from USD 640 billion in 2017 to USD 694 billion in 2018, a further 8.4% increase;
-
and from USD 694 billion in 2018 to USD 719 billion in 2019, which represented a
3.6% increase.
In alignment with this upward trend, remittances to low- and middle-income countries had
also been increasing before the pandemic. However, in 2020, these flows declined
significantly, reversing the positive trajectory observed from 2016 to 2018.
In 2020, the top five recipient countries in terms of remittance volume were India, China,
Mexico, the Philippines, and Egypt, with both India and China receiving over USD 59
billion each in total remittance inflows (see Table 1). Among the G7 economies, France and
Germany have consistently remained in the global top ten list of remittance-receiving
countries since 2005, maintaining their positions in 2020 as well (see Table 2).
However, when ranked by the share of remittances in national GDP, a different set of
countries emerge as the top recipients. The leading five countries in this regard are: Tonga –
35.2% of GDP, Kyrgyzstan – 33.6%, Tajikistan – 31.0%, Haiti – 30.7%, Nepal – 28.0%.
This disparity illustrates that while large emerging economies may dominate in absolute
remittance volumes, low-income and small developing countries often rely on remittances as
a critical component of national income, representing a significant share of their gross
domestic product (GDP).
Table
1
Leading countries receiving remittances, billion USD, 2005-2020 (billion USD)
Top Countries Receiving Remittances, billion USD
2005
2010
2015
2020
China
23.63
India
53.48
India
68.91 India
83.15
Mexico
22.74
China
52.46
China
63.94 China
59.51
India
22.13
Mexico
22.08
Philippines
29.80 Mexico
42.88
14.64
Philippines 21.56
Mexico
26.23 Philippines
34.91
Vo
lu
m
e
5,
Ju
ne
,2
02
5
,
M
ED
IC
AL
SC
IE
N
CE
S.
IM
PA
CT
FA
CT
OR
:7
,8
9
Nigeria
France
14.21
France
19.90
France
24.07 Egypt
29.60
Philippines
13.73
Nigeria
19.74
Nigeria
20.63 Pakistan
26.11
Belgium
6.88
Germany
12.79
Pakistan
19.31 France
24.48
Germany
6.86
Egypt
12.45
Egypt
18.33 Bangladesh
21.75
Spain
6.66
Belgium
10.99
Germany
15.58 Germany
17.90
Poland
6.47
Bangladesh 10.85
Bangladesh
15.30 Nigeria
17.21
Source: World Migration Report (WMR), 2022
Table 2
Leading countries in remittance outflows, billion USD, 2005-2020
Leading countries sending money transfers
2005
2010
2015
2020
USA
47,75 USA
50.53 USA
68.91 USA
68.00
Saudi Arabia 14,30 Saudi Arabia 27.07 United Arab
Emirates
63.94 United Arab
Emirates
43.24
Germany
12.71 Russia
21.45 Saudi Arabia 29.80 Saudi Arabia 34.60
Switzerland
10.86 Switzerland
18.51 Switzerland
26.23 Switzerland
27.96
Buyuk
Britanya
9.64
Germany
14.68 Rossiya
24.07 Germany
22.02
France
9.47
Italy
12.88 Germany
20.63 China
18.12
South Korea
6.90
France
12.03 Kuwait
19.31 Russia
16.89
Russia
6.83
Kuwait
11.86 France
18.33 France
15.04
Luxembourg 6,74
Luxembourg 10.66 Qatar
15.58 Luxembourg 14.20
Malaysia
5.68
United Arab
Emirates
10.57 Luxembourg 15.30 Netherlands
13.92
Source: World Migration Report (WMR), 2022
Currently, the remittance-to-GDP ratio of 29 countries (out of 177 countries reported) is
more than 10%. Although many countries maintained the same level in 2020 as in 2019,
Lebanon's share of GDP tripled in 2020 due to a sharp decline in GDP. Conversely, Haiti's
remittance economy saw its share of GDP halved due to limited use of local currencies.
Serious dependence on remittances can foster a culture of dependency in the receiving
country, which can reduce labor force participation and slow down economic growth
12
"Foreign Economic Activity and Competition Management" Rakhmatullayeva F.M., Abdulloyev A.J.,
Giyazova N.B., Narzullayeva G.S. Study Guide, Part I "Durdona" Publishing House, Bukhara-2021.
Vo
lu
m
e
5,
Ju
ne
,2
02
5
,
M
ED
IC
AL
SC
IE
N
CE
S.
IM
PA
CT
FA
CT
OR
:7
,8
9
Excessive reliance on remittances makes the economy more vulnerable to sharp fluctuations
in remittance inflows.
High-income countries are almost always the primary sources of international remittances.
For decades, the United States has held the leading position among remittance-sending
countries, including in 2020, when the total amount reached 68 billion USD, followed by the
United Arab Emirates (43.24 billion USD), Saudi Arabia (34.60 billion USD), and
Switzerland (27.96 billion USD). In 2019 and 2020, Germany ranked fifth in remittance
volumes, with total remittances amounting to 23.94 and 22.02 billion USD, respectively (see
Table 2). In addition to its role as a major remittance-receiving country, China also ranks
among the leading countries sending remittances. In 2016, China sent remittances totaling
20.29 billion USD, and in 2017, 16.18 billion USD
.
Throughout 2020, numerous analysts worldwide closely monitored the latest data and
analyses to understand the impact of COVID-19 on international remittances, migration, and
mobility. Data on remittances from several countries during 2020 contradicted the World
Bank’s global forecasts of a significant decline in remittance volumes. Some countries
reported monthly record-high remittance inflows after mid-2020. According to the World
Bank’s May 2021 report, remittance flows remained resilient during the COVID-19 crisis.
Officially recorded remittance flows in 2020 amounted to USD 702 billion, representing
only a 2.4% decrease compared to USD 719 billion in 2019.
According to the UN methodology, the category of highly skilled migrants includes
researchers, engineers, medical doctors, and others. In the United States during the 1980s,
foreigners accounted for 10% of engineers and 24% of medical doctors; additionally, 23% of
the members of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and 33% of Nobel Prize laureates
were immigrants to the United States.
Conclusion and Recommendations.
A positive aspect for exporting countries is that when
emigrants return to their homelands, they often possess significantly higher qualifications
and can establish their own businesses, transferring the professional skills acquired abroad to
others. Thus, the country effectively receives “enriched” labor resources. However, it is
essential to create favorable socio-economic conditions that enable returnees to realize their
entrepreneurial potential and generate new employment opportunities. At the same time, the
emigration of highly skilled specialists and scientists from less developed countries further
weakens their economies and slows their development, while strengthening the positions of
the recipient countries. This dynamic leads to increased polarization and widens the gap
between developed and developing countries.
Xulosa o’rnida shuni aytish mumkinki, migratsiya jamiyat uchun ham, migrantlar uchun
ham ijobiy ijtimoiy-iqtisodiy natijalar berishi mumkin. Mamlakatlar ushbu imtiyozlardan
foydalanishlari uchun ularning siyosati va amaliyoti muhojirlar va jamiyatning ijtimoiy-
iqtisodiy farovonligini oshirishi, shu bilan birga davlat hududidagi shaxslarning inson
13
WORLD MIGRATION REPORT 2022.
Vo
lu
m
e
5,
Ju
ne
,2
02
5
,
M
ED
IC
AL
SC
IE
N
CE
S.
IM
PA
CT
FA
CT
OR
:7
,8
9
huquqlarini hech qanday kamsitishlarsiz hurmat qiladigan, himoya qiladigan va bajaradigan
xalqaro standartlarga rioya qilishi kerak.
References:
1. WORLD MIGRATION REPORT 2022.
2. Zipf G. The (P1P2 / D) hypothesis: on the intercity movement of persons // American
Sociological Review. 1946. № 11. P. 677–686.
3. Lee E. A Theory of Migration // Demography. 1966. № 3. P. 47–57
4. Harris J., Todaro M. Migration, Unemployment, and Development: A Two-Sector
Analysis // The American Economic Review. 1970. № 60. P. 126–142.
5. Stouffer S. Intervening Opportunities: A Theory Relating Mobility and Distance //
American Sociological Review. 1940. № 5. P. 845–867
6. Lewis W.A. The Theory of Economic Growth. — N.Y., 1959. — P. 402.
7. Sassen S. The Mobility of Labor and Capital: A Study in International Investment and
Labor Flow. New York : Cambridge University Press. 1988. P. 240.
8. Castles S., Miller M. The age of migration: international population movements in the
modern world. London : Macmillan. 1993. 306 p.
9. World Bank, 2020.
10. "Foreign Economic Activity and Competition Management" Rakhmatullayeva F.M.,
Abdulloyev A.J., Giyazova N.B., Narzullayeva G.S. Study Guide, Part I "Durdona"
Publishing House, Bukhara-2021.
11. "Foreign Economic Activity and Competition Management" Rakhmatullayeva F.M.,
Abdulloyev A.J., Giyazova N.B., Narzullayeva G.S. Study Guide, Part I "Durdona"
Publishing House, Bukhara-2021.
