The impact of migration on development varies widely across the globe. Many of the countries do experience positives and negatives in short term but over a longer period of time, stand to gain a significant amount. When a country receives people many areas that are lacking are temporary filled but the increase of people in turn puts a huge burden on the economic structure and welfare burden. The easiest way to look at the positives and the negatives is that for every person that migrates into a new area, a new pair of hands becomes available for farming, working and other skills. However, on the other side, those two pair of hands comes with an appetite, that tend to eat more than they make. The trade off is beneficial when the migrating people bring more to the table than what they take off the table.
For countries like Somaliland, the economic benefit is short term. Emigration remittances accounted for $414 billion dollars in 2009, a significant drop in numbers from 2008. Many countries face far worse numbers when considering the affect migration has on development in their countries.
In Tajikistan, many people who have migrated to neighboring areas have contributed significantly towards the development of those regions. In return, they people now sending monies back home have been able to help that country rebound economically. In just the past few years, monies sent back to Tajikistan from migrants who are working abroad, has contributed to 50% of the GDP and helped save a failing country.
The positives for the countries being developed from cheap, unskilled labor helps that country’s economic climate to increase as well. These low paying workers fill very needed positions that some countries simply do not have enough workers to fill. Farm labor is an area that many skilled workers will not want to be a part of, and the unskilled low paying migrant has no trouble filling that position instantly. In many of the larger countries, they make a substantial amount of money of the import of very cheap goods. So is the benefits on a countries development when much needed positions can be filled with cheap labor. These jobs in no way affect domestic workers, as many economists had previously claimed. The need for unskilled workers in low level jobs is a much needed part of the economy, and if migration of these people to that area can benefit both the country of origin and the developing country, many positives can be shared in the long run.
This is not always the case in countries like the United States where the CIS claims that Mexican immigrants have caused an overall decrease in the countries wages. This is part to these immigrants needed healthcare and housing that the United States needs to eventually tax the rest of the country for. The trickle down effect in this particular country is negative when it comes to allowing cheap, unskilled labor infiltrate the workforce and have a negative effect on development.