Today, we live in the migration era where people moving from one country to another for various reason. Migration has been defined in general as a movement of people from one place to another. There are two types of migration: international and regional. International migration involving individual who move between countries, while regional deals only with one region of a country. Migration have been categorized as 'population mobility' and it could be permanent or non-permanent. Experts say that migration is the result of social transformation, which has a reciprocal impact on society. Today, the countries most in demand for residents to migrate are Asia and Europe. More than six of ten migrants choose to reside in Asia or Europe and these migration patterns are persistent for 17 years, started since 2000. On the other hand, currently, migration act are reaping some controversy concerning of human rights such discrimination, exploitation and marginalization towards the migrants. However, outside of this context, and after being analysed through various points of view about whether migration give more positive impacts such as encourage development for both countries or not is still highly debated.
Back in the 1950s-1960s, population movements in the southern and eastern regions of the world are supported by new industrial economies in Southeast Asia and Latin America. During that time, economists have emphasized that labor migration is a crucial factor of modernization. In this era, countries such as Morocco, Turkey and the Philippines shared the same point of view about the benefits of migration. These countries support the indigenous population to move to the region of Western Europe or the USA, because the labor export produced will encourage economic growth in the country of origin. Clearly, besides the economic benefit obtained by the country, migration also has a positive impact on social, technological and cultural aspects to the region. These arguments is also in line with my personal view, where I see that migration provides more positive impacts for the country if it has well-organized regulations.
According to the international migration report published by OECD and United Nation, an estimated 258 million people or just under 3% of the world's population are living outside their original countries of birth. The organization also stated that migration is a sign or 'face of globalization'. We can't neglect the developments that occur in the world, where a country need to fill their labour forces by bringing immigrants to their country as they cope with population ageing. From my own perspective which has been supported by several credible sources, migration is generally a good thing for a country. For instance, in developing countries such as Indonesia and India, remittances paid by immigrants has become a main emphasis for economic growth (World Bank, 2006). In India, even the society assumes that people who decide to migrate are considered as 'heroes of development' (Khadria, 2008). Even many smaller scale countries such as Moldova, Lesotho and Haiti have primary economic dependence on migrant remittances because employment opportunities in the country are very small. Migration is a common thing to do and is classified as young labor-market entrants in these countries. Not only in recipient countries, remittances also have a very broad impact on macroeconomic aspects of sending countries such as India, because the amount has exceeded Government's expenditure in the social and health (Chishti, 2007).
Moreover, in the aspects of employment, the migration process absorbs large numbers of workers to cover the lack of experts in the host country. For the sending country, the total stress of economic will begin to decrease after workers are sent to the host country and it could reduce unemployment rate. From the survey conducted by George J. Borjas from Harvard University, after being investigated using theoretical implications and empirical significance, migration after all affects economic opportunities not only in the host country, but in the source country as well. For the host country, the effects extend far beyond the labour market that make up the welfare state as long as immigrants and natives differ in their productive endowments. He analysed using simple economic framework and the result was a perfect substitutes in production, if the work force contains native and migrant workers. Dustmann, Frattini and Glitz in their research also stated that the combination of native-migrant workers also considered as a consequence of low-skilled native workers, because those who migrate are often categorized as the best, whether as blue-collar workers or as college-educated professionals (Ellerman, 2003).
As supporting evidence, from the insight pointed out in one of Malaysia's economic portal, Malaysian Government recognises the contribution of foreign workers in meeting Malaysia's skill requirements through the improvement of services under the supervision of Immigration Department of Malaysia. The Government has created various initiatives to engage top workers in the long-term. However, there are some views that the high-skilled number of foreign workers will defeat local resources in the professional world, or in another case, the country of origin will lack of experts because they have migrated. This is called the 'brain drain'. This cannot be justified on one side because the term 'brain drain' has been replaced by 'brain circulation', where the main point emphasized are equal distribution and balanced circulation between the number of workers and skills to make the economic sector grow rapidly.
In the case of migration in developed countries such as Britain, above the fact that the number of migrants in Britain has exceeded the limit, this activity is still seen as positive. UK Prime Minister, David Cameron, also stated clearly in his speech in 2011 that migrants have contributed and benefited the UK immeasurably in many fields, especially the economy, education and health. These sectors can work well because of the support of foreign workers from various parts of the world who decide to work in the UK. We could not neglect the fact that Britain is also dealing with migration problems such as illegal workers and mass migration. However, to minimize this, David Cameron aimed to control level of migration and bringing it down the illegal migration through various system. This also applies to all migration destination countries in the world, not just Britain. He gives a perspective that as a world population, individuals should be open-minded towards migration activities. In closing his speech, David Cameron gave the statement that "Britain will always be open to the best and brightest from around the world and those fleeing persecution" because despite all of the pros and cons, and outside the remittance context, migrants have also provided many positive impacts that acknowledge by local resident such as: bringing good cultural diversity, innovation, transfer home skills and good attitudes towards the local people. Thus, it will give positives impact if they can manage, regulate and assimilate these things well.
To summarize, migration is merely a side effect of globalization and it's inevitable for world population nowadays. Today, just under 3% of the world's population are living outside their home country due to various reasons. Migration act seen from the economic and employment aspects has several benefits in general especially for developing countries that highly dependent on migrant remittances. Started from the 50's, many countries started to encourage their population to move during the industrial economy to support economic growth in the country of origin. The biggest impact given by migration activities up until now is economic remittance. Many developing countries highly depend on remittances from their foreign workers to reduce poverty. On employment sector, the research conducted by Dustmann, Frattini and Glitz showed that migrants will create a perfect substitute in production for the host country, if they join the work force with native workers. In addition, migration could intensify the labour market that make up the welfare state as long as immigrants and natives differ in their productive endowments. Many sectors in a country could work well because of the support of foreign workers from various parts of the world who decide to work outside their home country and this has been acknowledged especially on developed countries in ther economy, education and health sector. Migration also absorbs large numbers of workers to cover the lack of experts in the host country and for the sending country, the total stress on economy of the state will begin to decrease and it could reduce unemployment rate. On top of the many benefits that can be gained from migration activities, we still cannot neglect that there are some risks that must be faced. Instead of thinking and focusing ourselves towards migration risks can be disruptive for the country, what is better done according to UK Prime Minister is to find solutions to tackled and overcome these risks so that both parties (countries and individuals) can maximize the benefits of these activities.