Table of contentsIntroductionMacro-theories of migrationMicro-theories of migrationFamily decision-making and the new economics of labor migrationIntroductionTheories of migration can be classified according to the level on which they concentrate. Micro-level theories focus on individual migration decisions, while macro-level theories examine overall migration trends and explain these trends with macro-level explanations. The meso level lies between the micro and macro level, for example at the household or community level, and can explain both the causes and perpetuation of migration. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get the original essayMacro-Theories of MigrationNeoclassical theories of macro-migration explain migration as part of economic development. According to Hagen (2008), internal migration results from geographic differences in labor supply and demand, primarily between the traditional rural agricultural sector and the modern urban manufacturing sector. The basic model (Lewis, 1954 and Ranis & Fei, 1961), derived from trade theory, assumes perfect markets and a surplus of labor in the traditional agricultural sector which is absorbed by the modern sector. The modern sector develops through the accumulation of capital and by poaching labor from the traditional sector. Rural workers are attracted by the positive wage gap and migrate to the urban sector, that is, they are pushed to migrate. In these models, migration occurs until wage equalization occurs. Todaro and Harris (Todaro, 1969 and Harris and Todaro, 1970) expanded this model to account for the significant urban unemployment seen in many less developed countries. Migration is not completely risk-free, because the migrant does not necessarily find a job upon arrival in the city. Migration may increase if urban wages increase or the urban employment rate increases (ceteris paribus). The authors (Todaro & Harris) show that it can be perfectly rational to migrate, despite urban unemployment, because of a positive expected income differential. This model has clear predictions and, although the importance of income gaps in the decision to migrate for work is unquestionable, it is probably not as excessive as Harris and Todaro describe. The model assumes that an equilibrium will occur, which we do not find in the real world and some other empirical predictions, for example wage equalization, have also not been found. The dual labor market theory (Priore, 1979) explains migration as the result of a temporary pull factor, namely a strong structural demand for labor in developed countries. According to this non-purely economic approach, there is an economic dualism in the labor market of developed countries and wages also reflect status and prestige. There is a primary sector offering well-paid jobs and a secondary sector, for unskilled jobs, for example in manufacturing. The demand for migrant labor arises from several factors. This model is important because it explains some of the post-war migration trends in Europe and the United States, but its scope is too narrow, with only one pull factor analyzed and without deeper analysis of people's decision-making. migrants. Another macro model explaining rural-urban migration in less developed countries is the migration as a system model of Mabogunje (1970), in which it explains migrationas a dynamic spatial process. Overall migration flows and interactions are modeled based on a pool of potential rural migrants that is affected by various factors in the decision to migrate. The rural control subsystem controls outflows (e.g. family or community norms), the urban control subsystem controls inflows (e.g. via employment agencies), information is fed back to migrants potential and the background environment also affects migratory flows (social and economic conditions, government policies, transport and communications, infrastructure, etc.). The environment and subsystems are constantly evolving, particularly due to migratory flows, which makes the system open and dynamic. Other authors (e.g. Kritz & Zlotnik, 1992) have also emphasized the importance of viewing international migration as an interdependent dynamic. system, with own but interconnected systems for sending and receiving countries and feedback and adjustment coming from the migration process itself. This can also be linked to world systems theory, discussed above. It is important to take note of the interactions between different actors and highlight the dynamic nature of migration. However, models of the migration system are vague and do not make it possible to concretely predict migration trends. Politics is important in migration theory because migration laws and thus the right to legally cross a border directly influence migration flows. These nation-state laws are the result of the relative power of different interest groups. They are influenced by profits (which ties in with Priore's dual labor market theory), national identity, national security considerations and the extent of multiculturalism within the state. In a historical analysis, it is important to emphasize that acquired rights, laws or existing institutions will always influence migration flows, regardless of economic considerations, such as the economic cycle (Hollifield, 2000). Globalization does not only affect the demand for labor or facilitate the migration of migrants. networks, but also leads to a loss of border control. Zolberg (1981) argues that it is not only economic factors that matter in the structural framework of migration; for example, some of the countries that would be considered peripheral in world systems theory (communist countries) have chosen to do so due to political reasons and political motivations also influence migration flows (e.g. refugees). The political context is therefore an important structural factor in migration decisions. Zelinsky's (1971) mobility transition hypothesis argues that migration is part of the economic and social changes inherent in the modernization process. It is part of a broader range of functionalist theories of social change and development, which attempt to relate theories to past empirical trends. It argues that migration patterns and rates can be closely linked to the stage of modernization (e.g. industrialization) and demographic factors (e.g. high birth rates). He emphasizes that the preference for more personal freedom is part of the modernization process. Although his theories make overall sense when looking at past migration patterns in industrialized countries, they are vague and do not differentiate between different types of migration and do not take into account individual migration decisions. Micro-theories ofMigration Lee (1966) was the first to formulate migration in a push-pull framework at the individual level, examining both the supply and demand side of migration. Positive and negative factors at origin and destination push and pull migrants towards (non)migration, hindered by intervening factors, e.g. migration laws, and influenced by personal factors, e.g. the migrant perceives these factors. It makes a number of predictions, such as that greater diversity among people leads to more migration and that this is why migration rates are high in the United States. This theory is barely a theory, rather it is a grouping of factors affecting migration, without considering the exact causal mechanisms. The human capital approach is the neoclassical theory of micro-level migration. Based on the work of Sjaastad (1962), migration is treated as an individual investment decision aimed at increasing the productivity of human capital, thus focusing again on the labor market, but at the same time explaining the selectivity of heterogeneous migrants. Individuals make a rational cost-benefit calculation of expected discounted returns from migration over future periods, migrating only when expected returns are positive. Wolpert's (1965) stress threshold model describes a behavioral model of internal migration, similar to a cost-benefit analysis, but assuming that individuals intend to be rational ex ante, but are not necessarily rational. . ex-post. Individuals have a threshold of utility to which they aspire. They compare the utilities of the place to this threshold in order to decide whether or not to migrate and to which place. Placement utilities for the current position are based on past and future rewards, while placement utilities for possible destinations depend on anticipated rewards. Knowledge is based on the subjective and incomplete knowledge that individuals possess in their personal action spaces, rationality is therefore limited. Action spaces depend on personal characteristics, environmental variability and the individual's life stage. Migration flows therefore result from these assessments of the utility of individual places and are not necessarily optimal according to rational and perfect information standards. This model leaves aside some of the unrealistic assumptions of the human capital approach, but it is even more difficult to test. In a way, Wolpert only changes the terminology in relation to the human capital approach. Another behavioral model, the expectancy-value model (Crawford, 1973), is a cognitive model in which migrants make a conscious decision to migrate based on considerations other than economic ones. The strength of the potential migrant's migration intentions depends on a multiplication of migration values. outcomes and the expectations that migration will actually lead to those outcomes. Values ​​are specific goals, for example wealth or autonomy. Values ​​and expectations depend on personal and family characteristics (e.g. education level) and societal norms. These values ​​do not necessarily have to be economic; for example, security or personal fulfillment may also be important to potential migrants. Migration depends on the strength of migratory intentions, the indirect influences of individual and societal factors and the modifying effects of constraints and facilitators. This approach is similar to Wolpert's place-utility approach and again shows that migration choices are made subjectively. There exists.