However, the US does not maintain or report data on those who have emigrated, except in those notable cases where individuals have renounced citizenship. Meanwhile, countries like Mexico and the Philippines track their overseas citizens regularly, acknowledging the realities of dual citizenship or residency. Return migration (a permanent return to the country of origin) also represents a significant flow of people but is often underreported. For example, up to one-quarter of Europeans that migrated to the US in the late nineteenth century eventually returned to Europe. In recent years, more people have migrated back to Mexico from the US than from Mexico to the US. The process of migration, then, is a complicated nexus of movement rather than a simple one-way, permanent, single-directional move from place A to place B.

American cultural geographer Wilbur Zelinsky identified a migration transition based on the phases of the Demographic Transition Model reviewed in Chapter 2. The migration transition is a change in the migration pattern in a society that results from the social and economic changes that also produce the demographic transition. According to the migration transition, international migration is primarily a phenomenon of countries in stage 2 of the demographic transition, whereas internal migration is more important in stages 3 and 4. As countries move from stage 1 to stage 2, they experience exponential growth in population due to declining death rates. Historically this increase in population has been relieved by emigration, beginning in 1800 with the onset of the Industrial Revolution in England first, followed by Northern Europe countries. The migrants found several young welcoming countries around the globe open to this new wave of immigrants to help expand and secure new territories in the United States, Australia, Brazil, and South Africa, among others.

As the Industrial Revolution moved to the East and Southern countries in Europe and beyond to Latin America, Asia, and more recently Africa, the new waves of immigrants have not always been equally welcome as before, as they migrate to more industrialized countries, forcing these immigrants to settle in cities.

Large farms called plantations grew up near the cities and towns in the region. These plantations were responsible for the forced migration of hundreds of thousands of slaves from Africa to work the fields. Just before the Civil War in 1860, there were 331,726 enslaved people and 18,647 free people of color in Louisiana. Once slavery was abolished hundreds more were brought to work under contracts from India and other countries in Asia.

Despite the complex patterns and processes of migration, some general characteristics of migration and migrants were articulated by British demographer Ernst Ravenstein (1885), characteristics known as the laws of migration. Many of them still hold true 135 years later. Can you decide which are still true today?

1. Most move only a short distance.
2. Each migration flow produces a counter-flow of migrants.
3. Long-distance migrants tend to move to major cities.
4. Rural residents are more migratory than those in towns.
5. Females migrate more inside countries.
6. Males migrate more internationally.
7. Economic factors are the main reason for migration.

In short, each of the “laws” generally holds true, with the notable exception of number five. Ravenstein theorized that males were more likely than females to migrate long distances to other countries because searching for work was the main reason for international migration, and males were much more likely than females to be employed. This held for U.S. immigrants during the nineteenth and much of the twentieth centuries when about 55 percent were male. However female immigrants to the United States began to outnumber male immigrants around 1970, and they now comprise 55 percent of the total. Female immigrants also outnumber males in other developed countries.

A variety of non-government organizations, research groups, and humanitarian entities also track the movement of people across borders and within countries in order to provide a deeper understanding of the causes and effects of migration locally, regionally, nationally, and globally. For example, the Migration Information Source offers a wealth of reports, analysis, and data visualization that dramatically enhance our geographic understanding of migration. The Pew Research Center conducts regular polls often focused on Latino populations in the US. Other non-profit organizations track the effects of immigration in the US and publish regular reports, but often they lack objectivity or editorial oversight, as the intent of such efforts is to achieve policy change to reduce immigration levels. For example, the Federation for American Immigration Reform—FAIR—is an organization motivated by the explicit desire to reduce the number of immigrants and to secure the traditional cultural heritage of European Americans. Likewise, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) presents data to support its stated vision “of an America that admits fewer immigrants” and to reduce immigration of all kinds in the twentieth century (Center for Immigration Studies).

Geographers have identified general trends in global migration, also known as North-South migration, in which most emigrants originate in poorer, developing countries and most destinations have traditionally been wealthier, developed countries. For most Americans and Canadians, this pattern is very familiar, as recent decades have seen unprecedented numbers of Latinos immigrate to the US to find higher-paying jobs and better opportunities and escape structural poverty in the developing world. Similarly, the recent patterns in Europe have seen record numbers of Eastern Europeans move west and north to earn higher wages than those available in their home country. However, such wage differentials do not tell the whole story. For example, wages in Chicago tend to be much higher than those in other parts of Illinois, but not everybody leaves rural Illinois just because they can earn a higher wage. Wages, though significant, only tell part of the story. Unless you are reading this text in Manhattan, Paris, or Hong Kong, you could most likely move tomorrow and find a job elsewhere that pays more than what you earn now (if you are working). Geographers recognize that attachment to place, cultural factors, desire to stay close to family/friends, and other factors play a powerful role in the decision to move or stay.

Another pattern that has remained consistent over time is that of highly skilled migrants, who tend to enjoy much greater freedom of movement than those with lower levels of education and fewer skills. For example, computer software engineers, database managers, and a host of other highly demanded skills lead to efforts by countries and corporations to attract the best and the brightest minds to immigrate to bring those skill sets into a country where they are in short supply. Countries often offer travel visas (temporary permission to enter a country) to those with highly demanded skill sets. Countries like Australia, Canada, and New Zealand utilize a points system to determine which of the highly skilled applicants will be granted permission to enter. The brain drain refers to the conceptual idea that when a wealthy country recruits the “best brains” from a poorer country, it can be damaging to the sending country, as many of the most qualified and talented groups of people are poached away by higher-paying opportunities. As such, the term brain gain refers to the benefits received by a country that receives all those “brains” without having to produce them from scratch! Recently, countries have also acknowledged the concept of brain waste, in which receiving countries fall short in utilizing the full range of human capital inherent in many immigrant populations. For example, nearly half of all immigrants to the US from 2011 to 2015 held at least a bachelor’s degree, but more than 2 million immigrants with college degrees continue to work low-skilled jobs because employers or governments do not recognize foreign-held degrees. Similarly, a brain-drain/brain-gain phenomenon occurs within some countries, such as the US. California and New York, for example, continue to draw the most highly trained and qualified people away from other states. Governments that wish to keep highly skilled people at home take such transfers of educated and highly skilled people very seriously.

Framing migration as a loss or gain, however, also does not tell the whole story. Most countries that send migrants also receive them. The US receives large numbers of immigrants, but it also is a country of emigration, whereby retirees choose to live outside of the US, or long-term migrants (who usually are US citizens) choose to return to their home country in retirement. Migration is neither inherently good nor bad; rather, it is complicated. This chapter seeks to tease out some (but not all) of the important characteristics of migration in the twenty-first century to help you gain a better understanding of a topic that too often is used by politicians to gain votes or credibility. Let us put those simplistic debates aside for a few minutes to consider the basic elements of migration around the world.

3.3 GLOBAL, NATIONAL, REGIONAL, AND LOCAL PATTERNS

3.3.1 Global Patterns

Though geopolitical and global economic forces change over time, it is useful to understand contemporary global, national, and regional patterns of migration as processes that vary by geography. The vast majority of people do not migrate internationally, yet migration makes a powerful impact globally. Just imagine what our world would look like if nobody ever moved! Latin America would have no coconut trees, the American Midwest would still be dominated by buffalos, and most humans would look very much alike—how boring! Instead, migrants across the globe diffuse new ideas, new genetic footprints, new diseases, new cooking styles, and new sports. While a small number of countries receive large numbers of newcomers each year, only 3.4 percent of the world’s population live outside of their birth country, so most places in the world are not significantly impacted directly by international migration. However, the dynamics of migration are undergoing a significant transformation, and the future is very difficult to predict. Humans have been on the move for over 60,000 years, so it is unlikely to come to a halt anytime soon. The number of international migrants grew to 281 million in 2020, meaning that 3.6 percent of the world’s people lived outside their country of birth that year, according to the United Nations’ International Organization for Migration (IOM), standing at 3.6 percent in 2020, up from 3.2 percent a decade earlier (Figure 3.1).

Figure 3.1 Immigrant populations around the world by region; Authors | Dilip Ratha, Christian Eigen-Zucchi, and Sonia Plaza; Source | World Bank eLibrary; License | CC BY 3.0 IGO.

Cross-border migration seems to be accelerating in many parts of the world as more people have access to information, infrastructure, and communication—all elements that facilitate the large-scale movement of people. In 2015, nearly 70 percent of all migrants originated in either Europe or Asia, with the largest numbers coming from India, Mexico, Russia, and China. With nearly 51 million migrants in 2020, the U.S. leads the world on this measure by a wide margin (Figure 3.2).

Figure 3.2 Top countries of immigration by number and percent; Authors | Dilip Ratha et al.; Source | World Bank eLibrary; License | CC BY 3.0 IGO.

Nearly two-thirds of all international migrants live in high-income countries, in contrast with just 31 percent in middle-income countries and around 4 percent in low-income countries. On the other hand, low- and middle-income countries hosted 80 percent of the world’s refugees in 2020. Refugees comprise around 3 percent of all international migrants in high-income countries, compared to 25 percent in middle-income countries and 50 percent in low-income countries. Generally speaking, migrants tend to move away from low/middle-income countries into high-income countries because the most common driving force is economic opportunity. Most migrants move for better jobs, higher incomes, and better opportunities overall. It is worth noting, however, that about one-third of international migration takes place between lower-income countries (e.g. from Bangladesh to India or from Afghanistan to Iran).

It is also important to note that patterns can change very quickly, depending on economic or political conditions. Spain, for example, was a major recipient of immigrants from 2000 to 2008, but when its economy dipped and job opportunities decreased, people began to leave en masse. In every year since 2011, more people have left Spain than have arrived. Ireland, on the other hand, experienced mostly net emigration from the mid-1800s until the late 1990s when large numbers of Irish and descendants returned “home” and new immigrants began to choose Ireland as a popular destination due to its improved economic opportunities under the European Union.

3.3.1.2 Immigrant and Emigrant Populations by Country of Origin and Destination

As of mid-2020, the number of international migrants worldwide stood at 280.6 million (or 3.6 percent of the world’s population), according to the most recent UN Population Division estimates. This incredibly handy map shows the immigrant and emigrant populations by country of origin and destination. Select a country from the dropdown menu to learn where immigrants originate and the countries in which emigrants settle. If “emigrants” is selected, bubbles will appear over the top countries of destination, sized according to the estimated emigrant population in each country. (Hover over individual bubbles to learn the population sizes by country.) Selecting “immigrants” as the population indicator will display bubbles over key countries of origin for the immigrant population of a selected country based on the estimated population size.

Notes:

1. Because governments collect statistics on international migrants in varying ways, there is no consistent cross-country definition of this population. The UN Population Division provides the mid-year estimate of international migrants based on official statistics on the foreign-born, i.e., people born outside of the country of current residence. However, for countries that do not collect data on place of birth but have data on citizenship, the estimated number of noncitizens is used instead. In both cases, migrant stock includes refugees, some of whom may not be foreign-born. Most of the data were obtained from population censuses; population registers and nationally representative surveys were also used for information on the number and composition of international migrants. For more information on the UN Population Division’s methodology to estimate the size of immigrant and emigrant populations, visit: www.un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.development.desa.pd/files/undesa_pd_2020_international_migrant_stock_documentation.pdf.
2. The UN Population Division may base its population estimates on projections from national-level data collected in earlier years.

Source:

Migration Policy Institute tabulation of data from the United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, International Migrant Stock 2020: Destination and Origin, Table 1: International Migrant Stock at Mid-Year by Sex and by Region, Country or Area of Destination and Origin.

Available here: www.un.org/development/desa/pd/content/international-migrant-stock.

3.3.2 Regional Migration Flows: Europe

Consistent with Ravenstein’s “laws of migration,” most international moves continue to take place across relatively short distances. In no place is this more evident than in Europe, where it is also quite common to find Spaniards in France, Germans in Switzerland, Romanians in Germany, etc. As portrayed in the map below, movement within Europe tends to be from East (blue dots) to West (red/orange dots) (Figure 3.3). Given the ease of travel within, the small size of, and the short distances between many European countries, it is not surprising that many people move across borders for a variety of reasons. Of the 508 million residents of the European Union (EU), about 10 percent (54 million) are foreign-born, of which 35 million originate outside of the EU and 19 million moved from one EU country to another. Movement within and to the EU has accelerated in recent decades for two reasons. First, Europe has intentionally worked towards greater economic integration and cooperation since WWII by removing barriers to movement (see more about the EU in Chapter 8). Citizens and legal residents of participating EU member states may travel, live, study, and work seamlessly across national borders under the Schengen Agreement (Figure 3.4).

Figure 3.3 Total European Immigrant and Emigrant Populations by Country, mid-2015 estimates; Map on left. Authors | Open Street Maps and Migration Policy Institute (MPI); Source | Migration Policy Institute; License | ODbL. Map on right Author | user “ssolbergj”; Source | Wikimedia Commons; License | CC by SA 3.0.

While the EU facilitates the free movement of capital, products, and services in the region, the agreement permits the free flow of people across international borders without significant delay, hassle, or regular security checks. Millions of working-age residents of Poland, Romania, and Bosnia, for example, have moved to countries like Germany, France, and Spain for higher wages. In some ways, the European region has become similar to the US in that Spaniards may travel to France just as easily as Californians may travel to Oregon.

Figure 3.4 Schengen Countries; Author | User “Ssolbergj” Source | Wikimedia Commons License | Public Domain

The second reason for increased movement and mobility in Europe, however, is that more people from nearby Africa and the Middle East have attempted to enter Europe to seek work, escape conflict, or find better educational opportunities. Although economic and political life has been relatively more attractive in Europe than in neighboring regions for some time, the forces of globalization have accelerated such flows. Human smuggling organizations transport hopeful migrants in exchange for large amounts of money. As such, the EU has increased maritime military patrols in the region, which has forced human smugglers and would-be immigrants into riskier, more perilous routes. Thousands die each year trying to gain entry to another country (Figure 3.5). In 2016, approximately 7,400 died during a migration route, and nowhere is the trek riskier than in the Mediterranean, where 4,800 migrants perished in 2016, most of whom were from African countries. Additionally, conflicts in the Middle East, most notably Syria, have driven hundreds of thousands to seek refuge in Europe.

Figure 3.5 Migrant Fatalities in 2017; Author | International Organization for Migration Data Analysis Center; Source | International Organization for Migration Data Analysis Center; License | CC BY SA 4.0

The free flow of people across the European region has come into question in recent years as northern member states mistrust the vetting process put into place by southern and eastern European states. An individual who manages to enter any of the Schengen states can travel quite easily to any of the other European states. Denmark and Sweden, for example, have increased border security and border checks despite being signatories to the agreement (Figure 3.6). The bold experiment in Europe to integrate so many cultural, linguistic, and political systems faces constant challenges and has no guarantee for long-term success. Twice in the last century, the region was war-torn. As the twentieth century unfolds, Europe remains a focal point for migration policy and practice into the twenty-second century.

Figure 3.6 Google News Headlines on Danish Border Control; Author | Google News; Source | Google News; License | © Google. Used with permission. Search Results Screen Capture for terms “Danish border control.” 6 September 2017.

3.3.3 Regional Migration Flows: North America

North America represents a special case in that the US routinely receives significantly more immigrants than any other country in the world. Roughly 14.5 percent (46 million) of all residents in the US were foreign-born in 2015, representing seventeen percent of the labor force. In 2021, immigrants comprised 13.6 percent of the total U.S. population, a figure that remains short of the record high of 14.8 percent in 1890 and slightly below the 13.7 percent share they comprised in 2019. In Canada, the numbers were roughly 21 percent for both categories. Roughly 75 percent of Canada’s population growth comes from immigration, mostly in the economic category. By 2036, immigrants will represent up to 30 percent of Canada’s population, compared with 20.7 percent in 2011. The International Organization for Migration (IOM), sponsored by the United Nations, offers a great tool for visualizing migration around the world (https://www.iom.int/ world-migrationhttps://worldmigrationreport.iom.int/wmr-2022-interactive/).

Click on the tool to find out how many in the US came from China or how many from the US lived in Mexico last year (hint: toggle the In/Out button).

Do you notice any patterns?

Click on a few other Caribbean countries to view the flows of migration into North America. You will notice that the largest source areas to the US were Latin America and Asia, but sending countries and volumes vary significantly over history.

The figure below shows changes over time in the US immigrant population, and you can see that immigration from Latin America and Asia has only occurred in the most recent period.

• Do you know or think you know when your ancestors arrived?
• Can you visualize the time period during which they first came to North America?
• Which population groups are not included in the chart?
• Why do you think this might be?

There are four distinct phases of immigration, but let’s examine each one briefly. First, during the era of frontier expansion (1820–1880), a rapid westward movement occurred. Settlers were given the rare opportunity to acquire large amounts of good farmland in the “New World,” which pushed people out of the large cities like New York and Boston and towards the American Midwest into the future states of Ohio, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, etc. Many immigrants came to the US specifically in search of land because population pressure in Europe made land acquisition very difficult. The Homestead Act of 1862 offered up to 160 acres of farmland to citizens or those planning to become citizens as long as they continuously lived on and farmed the land for five years. More than 1.5 million claims for land were made in subsequent years, resulting in a massive movement of people.

It was also during this era that the transcontinental railroad was completed, linking the East Coast and West Coast for the first time in a meaningful way. Most immigrants during this time came from England, Scotland, Ireland, Germany, and Scandinavia. More than 1.5 million also came from Ireland in just ten years (1845–1855) when the potato crop failed due to blight (disease), a period known as the Great Hunger. The only significant non-European immigrants arrived as a result of the Burlingame Seward Treaty of 1868, which welcomed Chinese workers, as China also opened its borders to American businesses, students, and missionaries. Migration from China was short-lived, however, during the subsequent era.

Phase 2 (1880–1910) ushered in a dramatic shift as the number of new arrivals soared to unprecedented levels. Moreover, the source countries also changed as immigrants began to arrive from southern and eastern European countries such as Italy, Greece, Russia, and Poland. American imagery, stories, legends, books, and films tend to focus heavily on this period, because it was the most intense era of movement from Europe, and most were arriving via Ellis Island by ship before settling into distinctly ethnic neighborhoods in cities across the US. It was also an era of massive industrialization that demanded a large source of low-cost workers, which immigration provided. Coal mines, steel mills, and factories were growing at unprecedented levels as the US raced to “catch up” with the great cities of the world, building bridges, skyscrapers, museums, sports stadiums, and other large structures at unprecedented levels. The period also produced a new era of exclusion as the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 prohibited immigration, naturalization, and citizenship for anyone of Chinese descent, including those who had immigrated previously under legal means.

During Phase 3 (1910–1965), the US dramatically curtailed the number of immigrants permitted to enter the country legally. The great Western settlement had ended, and high birth rates in the US created enough new workers to meet the demand of the continued industrialization of the country. A series of new exclusionary laws prevented all “Asiatic People” from entering the country, as American nationalism fanned by white power and eugenic movements sought to exclude and divide the people of the world into categories of “civilized,” “savage,” and “semi-civilized.” Also banned were “polygamists, anarchists, beggars, and importers of prostitutes.” (For an excellent graphical overview of US immigration legislation, visit the Pew Research Center website: http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/28/selected-us-immigration-legislation-and-executive-actions-1790-2014).

During this period, immigration levels declined precipitously as the country grappled with questions of heritage, identity, and cohesion. National legislation was crafted to maintain the racial and ethnic balance of the country as mistrust between nations erupted in two world wars. Quotas were established to allow immigration of only a limited number of people from specific European countries, while all others were kept out. Ellis Island closed its doors in 1954 after having processed more than 12 million immigrants. However, a dramatic social shift was on the horizon, as the 1960s would dramatically alter US immigration in the coming decades.

Immigration into the US in the current era, Phase 4 (1965–Present), is characterized by (1) enormous growth and (2) a new diversity of source countries, dominated by the regions of Asia and Latin America. While the percentage of foreign-born residents is similar to that of the early 1900s, the 47 million (in 2016) living in the US represents an unprecedented historical high, with one out of every four children having at least one parent who is an immigrant. The Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965 dramatically shifted the nature of immigration into the US from one with low numbers from a handful of predetermined countries to a system that favors those with particular skills (e.g. scientists, engineers, and doctors) and for family reunification. As more Americans entered college, the demand for manual labor also grew. Jobs that were once done by children and teenagers, such as harvesting crops, cutting grass, or washing dishes in restaurants, were increasingly being filled by immigrants willing to work long hours for little pay. Asian exclusion laws and quotas were abolished, as progressive civil rights–era provisions took a “colorblind” approach to welcome those from all regions of the world as long as they had the skills and education that would benefit the American economy. Laws also made it much easier for existing citizens to legally bring immediate relatives from abroad so that families would not be divided by restrictive immigration policies. Speaking to a sparse crowd in 1965 about the new immigration bill, President Lyndon B. Johnson said, this “is not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions . . . It will not reshape the structure of our daily lives or add importantly to either our wealth or our power.”¹ Yet in the three decades after its passage, more than 18 million people arrived legally, tripling the number of immigrants from the previous three decades. The “face” of immigration changed dramatically. In 2016, the largest number of foreign-born were those from Mexico, China, India, the Philippines, and Vietnam. Moreover, immigrants are responsible for 25 percent of all new businesses and more than half of all start-up companies valued at more than $1 billion. Sometimes, presidents are wrong.

3.3.4 Regional Migration Flows: Asia

Migration within Asia is difficult to summarize given the massive size and scope of a region with 4.4 billion people! However, if you revisit the world migration map (https://www.iom.int/world-migration https://worldmigrationreport.iom.int/wmr-2022-interactive/), you will notice that even the largest countries in the world (China and India) contain relatively few foreign-born people compared to those in Europe and North America. Can you think of reasons why this might be the case? The first explanation is simple. Large-scale human settlement and political development occurred much earlier than in Europe or in North America. Early Chinese civilizations had already emerged more than 5,000 years ago, and many in Asia can trace ancestral lineages back thousands of years as well. As such, Asia (for the most part) wasn’t “discovered,” conquered, or colonized during the time of European imperialism. Apart from a small number of missionaries, entrepreneurs, and adventurers, Asia did not become a major destination for those from foreign lands (there are several notable exceptions, particularly in the case of the British Empire). Second, most Asian countries simply do not allow for permanent immigration, except in the case of marriage (which also can be a very slow and tedious process). Nonetheless, in the age of globalization and migration, more people are on the move in Asia in the twenty-first century than ever before.

With a population of 1.412 billion (2021) and a fast-growing economy, China tends to dominate the East Asia region. The Chinese Diaspora is a term that refers to the 46 million people who identify themselves as Chinese but live outside of China, with the largest number making their homes in Southeast Asia and others in Australia, North America, or Europe. Many fled China during times of political instability before and after WWII and under early communist rule, but today, many of those who leave China are wealthy and educated and do so because their skills are in demand in other parts of the world.

The most significant movement of people anywhere in the history of the world has been taking place recently inside both China and India as rural farmers have been leaving the countryside and moving into cities. Nearly 200 million people have left the interior of China to re-settle and seek work in China’s dynamic cities, mostly located along the eastern part of the country. While they do not cross international borders, the distance and socioeconomic differences between rural and urban areas in China are very similar to an international move for many. The motivation is largely economic in that farmers can barely earn a few dollars a day in rural areas; new manufacturing jobs in coastal cities pay several times that.

3.4 DEMOGRAPHIC TRANSITION, MIGRATION, AND POLITICAL POLICY

3.4.1 What is the relationship between population structure and migration?

Even though people generally migrate to find/make a better life for themselves and their families, the benefits and pitfalls of migration affect different countries and regions in very different ways. Demography (age structure) has a lot to do with understanding how such a differentiation occurs. (Hint: You may need to go back to Chapter 2 to review your understanding of the Demographic Transition Model or click here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/geography/population/ population_change_structure_rev4.shtml.)

The Demographic Transition Model explains how countries experience different stages of population growth and family sizes, but the model also works well to understand sources and destinations for migrants. Before the explanation continues, take a look at the model to see if you can predict the stages during which you would expect large-scale emigration versus immigration. Do you feel confident in your guesses? Why or why not?

Geographers note that countries of emigration tend to be in late stage 2 or early stage 3, while countries of immigration tend to be in late stage 4 or stage 5. Let’s think about this for just a moment. At what age are people most likely to take the risk to move to a completely different country to seek their fortune? Would you move to Slovenia next year if you could earn triple your current salary? Most international migrants tend to be relatively young (18-35), during the prime of their working years. Countries that tend to have an abundance of working-age people also tend to be in early stage 3 of the model. Countries like Mexico, Guatemala, the Philippines, and India had large families a generation ago. As those children enter their working years, there are not enough jobs created due to an “oversupply” of laborers. Meanwhile, countries in late stage 4 find that because of low fertility rates a generation earlier, the economy now faces a shortage of working-age residents to do all kinds of jobs. Birth rates were high during the 1950s in the US, but as women had fewer children in subsequent generations, fewer workers were entering the workforce every year. Unsurprisingly, young workers from Mexico, El Salvador, Jamaica, etc. began to immigrate as the demand for their labor increased. In Europe, the same pattern occurred as those from higher fertility countries like Turkey migrated to lower fertility countries like Germany.

3.4.2 Why do some countries benefit from migration while others do not?