INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN:
SOCIAL DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC TRAITS

Miguel Villa and Jorge Martínez
(ECLAC  / CELADE, Santiago, Chile)


 Introduction: The complexities of international migration

International migration is one of the most enduring social processes throughout history and its relevance underlines new concerns riddled with perceptions that differ from observable reality. It is important to point out that in the past the movement of people played a starring role in economic, social and political transformations as it complemented the expansion of trade and the world economy, contributed to the creation of nations and territories, fuelled urbanization and opened up new areas of production.
During the second half of the 19th century and the first decades of the 20th century the bulk of migration consisted of two major contrasting flows: one included the free movement of Europeans who played a key role in the economic convergence of some regions of the old and new world; the other consisted of the movement of workers of diverse origin, mostly Asian, towards tropical regions. This at times forced movement resulted in an expansion of social and economic inequalities at the international level. These flows, which were fuelled by different forces, opened up opportunities, won the approval of the countries of destination and contributed significantly to social and cultural changes (ECLAC, 2002).

In today's world migration is the object of contrasting views and many of the concerns it arises stem from perceptions on its inherently conflicting aspects. This is particularly true in receiving countries where concerns centre on the different types of illegal immigration, asylum requests, immigrants' integration possibilities and the need to regulate the inflow of workers. The acknowledgment of immigrants' economic and cultural contributions - as a reflection of their entrepreneurial capacities - or the evaluation of the consequences the current globalization phase will have on migrations - such as the deepening of development's inequalities- are issues seldom discussed. On the other hand, in the countries of origin, which are mostly developing nations, it is felt that the "escape valve" effect the emigration of workers has on the local labour market and the remittances emigrants send from abroad are positive elements. Still, these countries are also concerned with the loss of skilled human resources and, in general, the risks of human rights abuses against migrants, often fuelled by racist or xenophobic behaviour.

The contrasting views on migration are but a sample of this phenomenon's current complexities. Today's globalization is different in that States - to ensure greater fluidity in the exchange of goods and stocks - surrender part of their power to supra-national entities and acknowledge the primacy of universal human rights instruments, but retain their exclusive rights regarding regulations on the entry and permanence of foreigners in their territories. This has led some authors to argue that migration is the grip that knocks down sovereignty (Sassen, 2001). In a recent study ECLAC pointed out that rather than a 'globalization of migrations' we are witnessing today a paradox: globalization formally excludes international migration. In a world more connected than ever before and at a time when financial, information and trade flows are liberalized, the movement of people faces restrictive barriers. This reveals that the asymmetries of a limited globalization risk deepening inequalities in development levels (ECLAC, 2002)¹. The persistence of these barriers - related to border control practices that operate even between countries members of free trade agreements - causes the proliferation of situations of illegal entry. For many immigrants these situations result in lack of protection and vulnerability.

Theoretically, international migration represents a fundamental aspect of integration processes between nations that, by definition, require the removal of barriers. Nevertheless, the movement of people is not explicitly acknowledged in most integration arrangements. This is particularly evident in the agreements that establish preferential market areas, since they assume that trade flows compete with or substitute the flow of workers. Only when integration comprises political and social tenants that may allow for the development of communal areas - the best example of which is the European Union - will it be possible to establish common rules of the game regarding the movement of people (Di Filippo, 2000; Hovy and Zlotnik, 1995; Martínez, 2002a).

I.    International Migration in Latin America and the Caribbean

International migration's many relevant aspects render impossible an in depth examination of each one. As Izquierdo points out (1996) in understanding this phenomenon, images have been more effective than a thousand words, to the point of obliterating evidence. Therefore, the need arises to draw a general orientation map based on empirical records regarding the major tendencies and patterns that may be observed in the region.

1. Major Tendencies
Latin America and the Caribbean, traditionally a region that attracted migrants, became a source of emigration during the last decades and the number of countries of destination has progressively increased. It is estimated that nearly 20 million Latin American and Caribbean nationals - that is, over 13% of the 150 million migrants throughout the world - live outside their countries of birth (IOM-United Nations, 2000).² Half of the region's emigrants emigrated during the 1990s, mostly to the U.S. During the same period, new flows of emigrants - smaller but increasing at unprecedented rates - entered European countries. Intra-regional migration, which accompanied the different stages of Latin American and Caribbean countries development, retains some of its traditional traits but has decreased due partly to the lesser attractiveness of the major countries of destination (Argentina and Venezuela) (ECLAC, 2002).

Keeping in mind the limited up to date information available on migration, three major migration patterns can be said to have prevailed in the region during the second half of the 20th century (Villa and Martínez, 2000 and 2001). The first concerns immigration from overseas, particularly the Old World. The second, deeply rooted in the region's history and previous to the establishment of boundaries, resulted from the exchange of people within the countries of the region. Finally, the third migration pattern refers to emigration to countries outside Latin America and the Caribbean. The growing intensity of these later flows begins to show signs of expulsion. Even though these three patterns coexist the quantitative importance of each has changed throughout time.

2. A Region with an Immigration Past
Between the second half of the 19th century and the first of the 20th century the flow of immigrants from overseas countries was significant in several countries, even though it fluctuated throughout time. It played a decisive role, both in quantitative and qualitative terms, in the configuration of national societies, particularly in countries on the Atlantic coast, which offered favourable conditions for the social and economic insertion of migrants, mostly form Southern Europe and, to a lesser extent, the Near East and Asia. European immigration was particularly strong in the areas more integrated to the international economy that, besides possessing "empty spaces", experienced an accelerated process of modernization. This economic expansion created jobs offering better salaries than those prevailing in Southern European countries, a fact that stimulated immigration and insured upward mobility. Of the 11 million Europeans -38% Italians, 28% Spanish and 11% Portuguese- who entered the region, half settled in Argentina and more than one third in Brazil (Pellegrino 2001),

Following World War II Europe experienced a vigorous economic transformation, which began in the countries of the North and the West and later spread through integration channels to the countries in the South. This motivated people to remain in their country of origin. At the same time, the gap between the social and economic development of European and Latin American and Caribbean countries widened. Both factors resulted in a considerable decrease in migration flows to this region and stimulated the return of migrants to the old continent. Due to the lack of new immigration flows the European immigration stock continued to age and this, together with mortality (and returning migrants) led to a progressive decrease of such stock. The total number of immigrants from overseas countries fell from almost four million in the 1970 census to less than 2.5 million in 1990.

Even though immigration from overseas countries has not ceased entirely -some smaller flows are still entering the region, mostly from Asia- it has declined during the last decades. The percentage of people from countries outside the region within the stock of immigrants censed in Latin American countries fell from representing three-fourths of the total in 1970 to a little over half in 1990 (Chart 1). This evolution clearly indicates that during the third part of the 20th century Latin America lost its traditional attractiveness for people from other regions. Still, it must be stressed that only some countries of the region held such attractiveness, as demonstrated by the fact that 80% of the stock of immigrants from outside the region that was censed in 1990 were from Argentina, Brazil and Venezuela. Other countries such as Uruguay, Cuba, Chile and Mexico also received sizable flows of European immigrants.³


Source: IMILA Project, CELADE.

3. The Sizable Exchange of Population between
Countries of the Region
The movement of people across national boundaries is deeply rooted in the social and economic history of Latin American and Caribbean territories. Geographical and cultural proximity facilitated these movements that until the early 1990s were destined mostly to countries with more favourable labour conditions and higher levels of social equality. This type of migration flows responds to structural factors and is sensitive to situations of economic expansion or contraction and social and political developments (Pellegrino, 2001 and 1995). The abandonment or re- establishment of democratic forms of government has particularly caused waves of immigrants and "returns" between neighbouring countries. The decrease in the number of immigrants from overseas and the increase in the so-called border migration and economic integration efforts have led to a growing interest in the study of intra-regional migration flows. Some of these movements, closely linked to the articulation of labour markets between neighbouring countries, represent virtual extensions of intra-national migration.

During the 1970s intra-Latin American migration grew considerably. Due to the persistence of structural factors and social and political alterations the number of migrants tripled, reaching close to two million in 1980 (Chart 1). On the other hand, during the eighties this stock of immigrants registered a more modest increase as a result of the economic crisis and the structural reforms programs that followed it -which were felt particularly in the major countries of destination- and of the re-establishment of civil cohabitation norms in several countries. During that period the cumulative total of such immigrants increased to just 2.2 million. Even though this suggests the relative stabilization of the absolute number of intra-Latin America migrants, movements continued to occur, this time mostly as returns to the country of origin. Moreover, it is possible that part of traditional migration was replaced by new types of movements, such as temporary moves that do not imply a change of residence, as a result of the longer life-span of a growing number of the population, a phenomenon that coincided with the region economies' new territorial structures and more flexible labour mechanisms.

In spite of the changes in the social, economic and political context, the origin and destination of migration flows within Latin America did not alter greatly between 1970 and 1990, thus revealing a consolidation of the region's migratory map. Thus, in 1990 almost two-thirds of the Latin Americans who resided in countries of the region other than their own lived in Argentina and Venezuela.

Argentina has been the traditional destination for many Paraguayans, Chileans, Bolivians and Uruguayans who were lured by the availability of jobs in agriculture, manufacturing, construction and services. As European immigration decreased their presence became more noticeable. During the 1970s Venezuela's economy, stimulated by the oil boom, attracted mostly Colombians and people from the Southern Cone countries who were forced to leave their homes.

Throughout the so-called lost decade of the 1980's immigration flows to Argentina and Venezuela decreased considerably: data from the 1990s censuses reveal a reduction in the total stock of immigrants in both countries. However, through indirect estimates we can conclude that during those years both received considerable numbers of immigrants from neighbouring countries.⁴

During the same period, some nations that traditionally had been sources of emigration registered a significant return migration. During the 1970s Paraguay's economic expansion spurred by vast hydroelectric projects and by an intense colonization process stimulated the return of Paraguayans who had settled in Argentina and immigration from neighbouring countries, particularly Brazil. Since the mid-1990s Chile has been receiving return migrants as well as large numbers of immigrants from other Latin American countries, particularly Peru (CEDLA and others, 2000; Martínez, 1997), Argentina and Ecuador. The effects of recent economic crises, which imply a possible alteration of the intra-regional migrations' map, will only be ascertained once the results of the censuses of the 2000-decade are made available.

In Central America, the serious social and political alterations of the 1970s and 1980s, together with development's traditional structural shortcomings, caused a massive emigration. Thus, between 1973 and 1984 the stock of Nicaraguan and Salvadorian immigrants in Costa Rica increased considerably. This tendency continued during the following years: the Costa Rican census for the year 2000 reveals a total of 300,000 immigrants -which represent 8% of the country's total population- of which 75% are from Nicaragua. The number of Nicaraguan immigrants to Costa Rica quintupled in just sixteen years (INEC, 2001). Mexico has also been a major destination for emigrants from Central America, mostly Guatemala and El Salvador. A similar situation occurred with Belize, whose number of immigrants was less large but had vast demographic, social and cultural consequences. Still, the peace agreements signed by the major social actors in Central American countries appear to have contributed to the re-insertion of groups that had sought asylum and refuge in Mexico. Data from the 2000 census in Mexico indicate that the number of immigrants from Guatemala has decreased substantially. The repatriation of these immigrants was not without difficulties as often it occurred precipitously and some people were not able to settle again in their countries of origin (Castillo, 1999).

Transit movements through Mexico, Belize and Guatemala, on the way to the U.S., are another aspect of Central American migration. The seasonal displacement of labour has a long and relevant tradition in these countries, as is demonstrated by the flow of Guatemalan workers who move periodically to the Soconusco region in Mexico's Chiapas State (Castillo, 1990).

Within the whole intra-regional Latin American emigrant population in 1990, Colombians were the most numerous: over 600,000 were censed in the censuses of other Latin American countries (90% in Venezuela). Chileans and Paraguayans held the second place, with a total of close to 280,000 emigrants (three-fourths censed in Argentina). In spite of their magnitude in terms of absolute numbers, these migration flows represented -except in the case of Paragua - less than 3% of the population in the respective countries of origin. Uruguayan emigration -mostly to Argentina- deserves separate consideration. During the 1970s it reached an intensity equal to the mortality rate in the country of origin (Fortuna and Niedworok, 1985). In Central America intra-regional emigration is particularly significant in the cases of Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala.

Migration between the countries of the English-speaking Caribbean Community is of a different nature. The intensive circulation of people - eased by geographical conditions - involves a relatively small percentage of changes of residence and a higher percentage of recurrent movements (Simmons and Guengant, 1992), some for a short period of time (with frequent returns home) and others by stages, with stops along the way to the destination outside the sub-region.⁵ Recent studies indicate that migration within the Community is acquiring renewed dynamism, linked to higher standards of living and the increase in the labour demand in some countries. It is estimated that almost half of the immigrants registered in 1991 were from the same sub-region, representing almost 4% of the total population in the Community (Mills, 1997). In 1991 this situation varied greatly between Caribbean countries. Most of the immigrants in Trinidad and Tobago, the US Virgin Islands and Barbados - three of the five countries with the largest immigrations stock - were from the sub-region, particularly in the case of the U.S. Virgin Islands, where they represented one-third of the population. On the other hand, immigrants in Jamaica and the Bahamas, the other two countries with the highest stock of immigrants, were mostly from countries from outside the sub-region (Chart 2). At the same time, the majority of emigrants from Granada, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Guyana entered the rest of the sub-region, preferably Trinidad and Tobago. In the case of the first two countries, they represented almost a fifth of the native population. These data highlight the enormous repercussions of intra-regional migration on the demographic dynamics of Caribbean Community countries (Thomas-Hope, 2000).

In the non-English speaking Caribbean, one of the most constant migration flows is that of Haitians to the Dominican Republic. In spite of occasional tensions, the demarcation line between both countries has not been an obstacle to such movements. Until the mid-20th century, substantial numbers of people migrated from Haiti's highly populated and resources scarce North Eastern region to areas beyond the international demarcation, with higher productive capacities mostly in agriculture. Gradually, these flows became seasonal movements dictated by crops' dynamics in the Northern and Western regions of the Dominican Republic (Pellegrino, 2000).


Source: Mills (1997)


4. Latin American and Caribbean Nationals Residing Outside their Region.
During the last decades, as immigration from overseas diminished and intra-regional migrations stabilized, emigration to countries outside the region have played a starring role. Even though the countries of destination are many -there are increasing numbers of Latin American and Caribbean nationals in Europe (mostly the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Spain and Italy), Asia (basically Japan) and Australia- the great majority of emigrants from the region make their way to the USA and, to a lesser extent, Canada.

Even though the emigration of people from the region, mostly Mexico and Caribbean countries, to the U.S. is a phenomenon of old - with fluctuations resulting from economic and social and political developments as well as changes in the US immigration law - recently it has increased considerably. Thus, the U.S. views migration from Latin America and the Caribbean as a very relevant social phenomenon, to the extent that the debate on its repercussions has become a priority issue in its relations with the countries of the region (ECLAC, 2002). Such migration contributes to increase the so-called "Latino" or "Hispanic" population in the U.S., which according to the 2000 census has reached 35.5 million. This group of immigrants and native Latinos represents the largest ethnic minority in the U.S. (Grieco and Cassidy, 2001)

In the period between the 1980 and 1990 censuses the number of Latin American and Caribbean nationals censed in the U.S. doubled, reaching a total of almost 8.4 million, which represented 43% of the total foreign population in the U.S. in the year 1990.⁶ This increase was accompanied by a diversification of the countries of origin, as revealed by the immigration flows from Central and South America (Chart 3 and Table 1). Thus, slightly more than half of the above total of immigrants was from Mexico, one-fourth from Caribbean countries (mostly Cuba, Jamaica and Dominican Republic) and the other fourth from Central and South American nations, in equal percentages. Even though Mexicans represented the largest number of immigrants -the 4 millions censed in 1990 doubled the 1980 total- during the 1980s people from El Salvador comprised the fastest growing immigrants' stock (470,000 people in 1990). Their total number in the U.S. quintupled over a period of ten years. During the same decade the number of immigrants from Nicaragua and Guatemala more than tripled; from Honduras, Peru and Guyana multiplied by 2.8; the number of immigrants from Haiti, Bolivia and Paraguay doubled. The number of Cubans increased just slightly, however the 740,000 Cuban immigrants represented the second largest group from Latin America and the Caribbean and registered the highest percentage of people who became U.S. citizens.


Source :IMILA Project, CELADE. Data corresponding to the year 2000 was taken from the Current
Population Survey.

The information supplied by the U.S. Current Population Survey -a source that is subject to sample-related errors and that is consulted to complement data from the not yet available 2000 censuses- indicates that in the year 2000 the total number of Latin American and Caribbean immigrants reached 14.5, from 13.1 million in 1997. These numbers represent a little over half the total stock of immigrants in the U.S., thus between 1990 and 1997 the number of immigrants from the region increased by 54% (Schmidley and Gibson, 1999) and by 73% between 1990 and 2000 (Lollock, 2000). According to this source, in the year 2000 the almost 8 million Mexicans represented 54% of all Latin American and Caribbean immigrants in the U.S., followed by Cubans, Dominicans and Salvadorians, with a little less than 1 million each (www.census.gov). In some countries of the region, this increase in Latin American and Caribbean emigration to the U.S. is counterbalanced by a growing number of people returning home. For example, according to data from the 2000 Mexican census, the stock of people born abroad reached 520,000 -50% more than in 1990- most of them below the age of 20 and born in the U.S.

What is the number of immigrants from the region who entered the USA illegally? The lack of appropriate data makes any quantification of this phenomenon a matter of speculation. However, based on past records gathered by the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service we can estimate that in 1996 almost one fifth of the foreign population (approximately 5 million people) comprised illegal immigrants, with Mexicans representing 54% of the total, followed by people from El Salvador and Guatemala (each with percentages below 10%) (INS, 2000).

Even though the limited information available does not allow for accurate estimates, it is possible that in the year 2000 Latin American and Caribbean emigration to countries outside the region other than the U.S. reached a total of just over 2 million (Table A.2). Canada is the major destination. In 1996 the number of immigrants from the region increased to 525,000 from approximately 320,000 in 1986. Even though the number of people from the Caribbean (mostly Jamaica, Guyana, Trinidad and Haiti) represented half the total number of immigrants, people from Central America (mostly El Salvador) comprised the fastest growing group. In 1996, the total number of immigrants from this group grew to almost 70,000 from less than 19,000 in 1986.

Several European countries have also received immigrants from Latin America and the Caribbean. The highest numbers of immigrants from the region are in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Spain and Italy. People born in the Caribbean Community are an important minority in the UK, even though their number fell from 625,000 in 1980 to less than 500,000 in 1991 (data from OPCS Labour Force Surveys and Census, quoted by Thomas-Hope, 2000)⁷. It is estimated that in the year 2000 the number of immigrants from the region in the Netherlands reached 150,000, mostly from the Netherlands Antilles (www.satline.cbc.nl). On the other hand, immigrants to Spain are mostly from Latin America. In the year 2000 their number grew to over 150,000 from 50,000 in 1981 (Palazón, 1996) (estimates based on data from the migration regularization carried out recently in Spain, www.mir.es).⁸ Similarly, a vast majority of the 116,000 immigrants from the region living in Italy during the year 2000 were from Latin American countries (www.istat.it).⁹ During the same year a little over 70,000 Latin American and Caribbean nationals were censed in Australia (mostly Chileans, www.immi.gov.au) and a similar number in Israel (mostly from Argentina, www.cbs.gov.il). Finally, data from the Immigration Office of Japan's Ministry of Justice (http://jim.jcic.or.jap/stat/stats/21MIG22.html) indicates that in the year 2000 over 300,000 of the non-native residents were from Latin America, more than 80% from Brazil and 14% from Peru.

The analysis of regional emigration to such a vast number of destinations requires that we take into account not only the impetus originated by the migrant networks that began operating in several European countries during the seventies, but also the fact that the increase in migration flows was due also to the return of those who had emigrated overseas and those who acquired the citizenship of the countries of origin of their parents or ancestors (differed return). Similarly, it is possible that a large number of the people born in Brazil and Peru who are residing in Japan are descendants of Japanese immigrants (Nisei) who had settled in those countries decades ago.

From a strictly demographic point of view it is possible to argue that the evolution of extra-regional migration reveals that the region has become a net exporter of people. Yet, even though most of the countries of the region register a negative migration balance and in several countries, particularly El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua this increased considerably during the 1970s, estimates for the region as a whole reveal much smaller numbers (Villa and Martínez, 2001). Thus, during the 1980s the average net (negative) migration rate for Latin America was only two over thousand. National population estimates assume that such rate decreased gradually, reaching a (negative) rate of one over thousand during the second five years of the 1990s (CELADE, 1998).¹⁰

¹ The free mobility of people is limited to one region of the world (the European Union). It is also the object of case by case negotiations within international agreements linked to the temporary movement of people with skills required for specific economic activities (or business or services) (ECLAC, 2002).

² These estimates do not include an unspecified number of people who migrate and work illegally or those who move for short periods of time or participate in circular or return movements (ECLAC, 2002).

³ In the non-Spanish speaking Caribbean countries immigrants originate from the colonial powers of old (UK, France and the Netherlands) and from India.

⁴ The use of inter-census survivor relations by gender and age for the period 1980-1990 produced a net immigration balance of 147,000 in Argentina and 60,000 in Venezuela.

⁵ An example of this is the Bahamas, which, besides receiving a large number of immigrants seeking permanent residence is a transition stopover for many people from other Caribbean countries, particularly Haiti.

⁶ The sharp increase in the stock of Latin American and Caribbean nationals in the U.S. during the 1980s was due partly to the amnesty granted through the Migration Control and Reform Law adopted by that country in 1986.

⁷ The flow of Caribbean nationals to the UK was very strong until 1962, when that country decided to end the free admission policy for Caribbean Community nationals.

⁸ People from Ecuador (29,000), Peru (28,000), the Dominican Republic (27,000), Colombia (25,000), Argentina (19,000) and Cuba (17,000) represented the bulk of this last group (
www.elpais.es).

⁹ The largest groups comprised Peruvians (33,000), Brazilians (19,000), and Ecuadorians (10,000).

¹⁰ These rates are one-tenth below the natural growth rate of the population of the region and represent a net annual loss of 560,000 people for the period 1980-1995 (CELADE, 1998).

  Previous- Next
Top

http://www.sela.org
sela@sela.org
   SELA,  Permanent Secretariat
Torre Europa, Fourth floor, Urb. Campo Alegre, Av Francisco de Miranda,
Caracas 1060- Venezuela
Tlf: (58) (212) 955.71.11 Fax: (58) (212) 951.52.92