Circular migration: A “win-win” situation for the labour market

The Global Forum on Migration and Development (2007) used the following working definition of circular migration: “the fluid movement of people between countries, including temporary or permanent movement, which, when it occurs voluntarily and is linked to labor needs of countries of origin and destination, can be beneficial to all involved.” (GFMD 2007) Without underestimating challenges such as the protection of the rights of short-term migrant workers and of their reintegration back home, considerable political momentum has developed around promoting circular migration (EC, COM 2007). In the specific context of development in origin countries, its advantages include the fact that human capital is not lost permanently, that circular migrants may be particularly incentivized to send home remittances to prepare for their return, and that when they do return they may bring back new skills. In this paper, we would like to explain the benefits of circular migration (i.e. benefits for receiving countries through meeting labor market shortages, for sending countries through guaranteeing remittances for development, and for migrants themselves through offering employment and control over the use of their wages) in the context of Mediterranean migration and offer a model of migration policy that could be applied for Romania and Spain. The debate around circular migration has to do with the way migration itself has changed in the last decades. As the age of “one way ticket migration” has passed (Phizacklea 2002, pp.23-27), we more often deal with temporary migration made possible by a diversity of factors (just to name a few, globalization, New Media, the creation of strong social networks and online diasporas etc.). The Global Commission on International Migration (GCIM) declared that “the old paradigm of permanent migrant settlement is progressively giving way to temporary and circular migration. The Commission underlined the need to grasp the developmental opportunities that this important shift in migration patterns provides for countries of origin” (GCIM 2005, p. 31). In order to make the most out of this process, GCIM recommended that the countries of destinations should promote circular migration by providing mechanisms and channels that enable migrants to move easily between their country of origin and country of destination. Case Study: circular migration between Romania and Spain Moreover, the World Bank?s Europe and Central Asia Region section has produced a major study on international labor migration in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union (World Bank 2006). This report suggests that managed circular migration might increase broad opportunities for trade and investment linkages reduce „brain drain? by facilitating the international transfer of skills, and reduce negative social and familial consequences associated with illegal migration. Although the World Bank does not affirm that circular migration will necessarily provide superior economic benefits, it pragmatically proposes (World Bank 2006, pp. 212-218) to use circular migration in places where public opinion shows strong resistance to permanent migration of the unskilled (a fact which often occurs in time of crisis). Current dynamics of international mobility in economic downturn manifested at the same time in countries of origin and in countries of destination for migrant workers show a complex and multidimensional nature of labor migration. It has been observed that EU migrants (unlike other migrants), when they lose their jobs, are more likely to return to their home countries (IOM 2011, Stoiciu 2011, pp. 93-95,). This return is often only temporary, the strategy of EU migrants being that of returning to the country of destination if economic opportunities do appear. This trend is also true for Romanian migrants in Spain and through this study we aim to evaluate the impact of circular Romanian labor migration to Spain. We will examine the different ways in which circular migration can be encouraged (e.g. creating appropriate rewards for the migrants who take part in the circular scheme, allowing priority for further temporary employment to workers who have already worked under such schemes and have returned at the end of their contact etc.). In the end we would like to envisage the expected results that voluntary return of migrants would bring on a micro and macro level for each of the above mentioned countries. To answer the question we will proceed as it follows. Methodology: We will use in our research qualitative methods, such as analysis of documents and structured interviews. The first part of our study consists in interpreting statistics on the evolution of remittances in times of crisis and their impact on Romanian and Spanish economy (World Bank 2011, Stoiciu 2011). Then we will move on to study the socio-demographic profile of Romanian circular migrants in Spain and we will measure the extent to which they acquired professional skills and qualifications. We will then examine what measures encouraging circular migration were adopted in Romania and Spain and what can be done further.