Immigration can help economies become more dynamic and efficient, and research shows that inclusive policies create a net benefit, but they are increasingly a politically difficult sell. How are countries and regions around the world handling the challenge?
Refugees show their skills in metal processing works during a media tour at a workshop for refugees organised by German industrial group Siemens in Berlin, Germany
Image: Reuters
Voters concerned about immigration helped swing both the Brexit vote and the election of Donald Trump, but the anxiety doesn’t end with Britain and the United States. Workers in many countries are putting pressure on their lawmakers to counter perceived threats from immigration. While there are common drivers of such anxiety, immigration in each nation operates within a very different legal, historical, and sociological context. Global Network Perspectives asked faculty members from schools around the Global Network for Advanced Management to provide local context.
In recent decades, Brazil—long a net exporter of workers—has also seen small inflows of both unskilled and skilled workers. In his Global Network Perspectives contribution, Professor Guilherme Stolle Paixão e Casarões of the Sao Paolo School of Business Administration notes that recession, bureaucracy, and an inward-looking business culture have delayed a reckoning over the need for dramatic opening of Brazil’s borders. He adds, “If Brazil keeps opening up at a slow rate for foreign workers, it will most certainly lag behind more dynamic emerging economies in the future.”
Some Western European countries are questioning the free of flow goods, people, and services at the core of the European Union’s common market. The low wages of Eastern European workers have devastated many trucking and construction companies in the West. “This has hurt the low-skilled workers previously employed in that sector—and their wages could not fall, given mandated minimum-wage floors,” writes Tomasz Michalski of HEC Paris. “This resulted in unemployment and fueled anti-EU, anti-immigrant sentiment that profited populist political parties.”
[This article has been reproduced with permission from Qn, a publication of the Yale School of Management http://qn.som.yale.edu]