No matter what the problems of international migration are reduced to and how they are solved, this phenomenon is based on the natural desire of migrants to improve their living conditions. In the absence of any natural and / or socio-political cataclysms that force people to leave their habitable place against their own will, migration is caused by the desire for employment, higher earnings, higher levels of education and / or vocational training, based on their subsequent economic returns. Therefore, the decision on migration is usually made at the family council or by the community. But being a purely private matter, international migration has a tangible impact on the overall course of world development.

In the early stages of capitalism, during the era of initial accumulation, accompanied by the total impoverishment of large segments of the population, migration flows were formed mainly in its ancestral homeland - in Western Europe and were directed primarily to the sparsely populated continents of the world, where it was relatively easy to settle down. Having exterminated and pushed back the small indigenous population to areas that were not suitable for living, European settlers created highly productive agriculture on the occupied lands and developed the development of minerals, the products of which were mainly intended for export to the mother countries. The growth of international trade, in turn, served as an impetus for the industrialization of the economies developed by the colonists, and provided the necessary material prerequisites for this in the form of industrial equipment and technologies.

As a result, four new industrial centers and hotbeds of economic attraction (in addition to the European ones) were formed on the territory of the present-day USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, significantly expanding and strengthening the launch pad of world economic progress. Due to the lack of statistical data, it is difficult to present a complete picture of their expansion. But by the beginning of the XX century, these four countries already had about 1/4 of the population concentrated and created more than 1/3 of the total GDP of the countries of the economic vanguard [World Economy..., 2003, p. 497, 503]. Although it has become more difficult to set up a business there, the economic boom in the eyes of potential migrants has only added to their attractiveness. Another thing is that due to two World Wars and the Great Depression, international migration lost its value for a long time.1
1 At the same time, the forced movement (on the basis of bonded contracts) of people from densely populated areas of South and East Asia (mainly India and China) to the Tropical zone to work in the mines and plantations created there also sank into oblivion during the period of intense colonial seizures.

page 108
GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF MODERN MIGRATION PROCESSES

The current stage of international migration actually began after the end of World War II, which recorded the victory of the anti-Hitler coalition, which laid the foundations for a new world order based on the right of nations to self-determination. With the modification of historical conditions, the content and general outline of migration have changed. Since then, the bulk of migrants have come from underdeveloped, poor countries, most of them united by the concept of "developing". The countries of Western Europe, in full accordance with their economic status, along with the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand act primarily and mainly as their recipients.

To be fair, however, it should be noted that not all Western European countries acted in this capacity in the first few post-war decades. Some of them grew to this status only thanks to the completion of industrialization, which was carried out, by the way, with the active assistance of the UES. In the 1970s, the oil-rich countries of the Persian Gulf became another center of attraction for migrants, and towards the end of the twentieth century, Japan, new industrial countries, and some other relatively prosperous countries in East Asia.

The collapse of real socialism also brought about a noticeable change in the configuration of international migration. And this is not just a matter of the accompanying intensification of international migration, as such. Some post-socialist countries, especially Russia, have found themselves in an ambivalent position, becoming both its donors and recipients. Moreover, the outflow of migrants from these countries, in contrast to their influx, is mainly represented by specialists of a high educational and qualification level. How long these countries can remain in this position and in what direction this situation will change depends on them. First of all, it depends on the time when they reach industrial maturity and enter the post-industrial phase of development.

One of the important features of the current stage of international migration is undoubtedly its consistently high dynamics. Moreover, the above-mentioned change in the migration status of a number of European and Asian countries can only partially explain it. The main reason for this, obviously, lies in the post-war dynamization of scientific and technological progress.

At first, it seemed that this dynamization was due only to the belated development of the civilian component of dual-use technologies that "accumulated" during the war years, and those that did not find full-scale application during the Great Depression. Meanwhile, some of these technologies served as an impetus for the further deployment of NTP, thereby giving it an additional acceleration. This, in turn, has contributed to an increase in the unevenness of economic development, which inevitably accompanies the deepening of cross-country gaps in development levels. These differences have increased not only between developed and developing countries, but also among developing countries, thus strengthening the forces of both pushing out and attracting migrants.

Particularly noteworthy is the revolution in transport and communications, which radically reduced the cost of cross-country travel and increased the comfort of staying away from home, and played a significant role in the intensification of the entire system of international economic and cultural relations. In the same direction, by the way, the formation of national diasporas and all sorts of fellow countrymen in the recipient countries is working, which in many ways facilitates the arrangement of newly arriving compatriots.

page 109
According to the United Nations and the World Bank (which relies on regularly updated UN demographic statistics), in the 1990s the rate of influx of international migrants to rich countries with high per capita incomes, the majority of which are represented by the world's economic vanguard, increased to 3.1% against 2.9% in the 1980s, 2.4% in 1970-e and 1.9% - in the 1960s [World Economic..., 2004, p. 24; Global Economic..., 2006, p. 27]. But international migration is not just about changing your place of residence. It is an integral part of temporary migration, including seasonal migration, for up to a year. Therefore, as well as due to natural population growth, the share of migrants in the total population is growing more slowly than migration itself.

Nevertheless, the share of migrants in the total population of countries with high per capita income increased more than twofold over the thirty years (1971-2000) and exceeded 8% [ibid.]. Such an impressive increase is not least due to the slowdown in population growth in this group of countries from 0.7% in 1970.up to 0.5% in the last decade of the 20th century. This trend was particularly pronounced in Germany, Italy and Sweden, where the population would have declined in absolute terms, excluding migrants who settled there. In the traditional group of developing countries with high demographic dynamics, the situation is quite different. Despite an annual average migration rate of 1.3%, their share of the total population of these countries has declined over the same thirty years.

According to the latest updated UN data, in 1991-2005 the total number of migrants in the world (persons born outside their countries of residence) increased from 154.8 to 190.6 million people [International Migration..., 2006, Table 2]. The majority of this growth (which also occurred at an increasing rate) is accounted for by countries with high per capita incomes, including more than 80% of the countries of the economic vanguard. States with average per capita incomes, which often act as a kind of" transshipment bases", accumulated only 3% of their total number. In other developing countries, the total number of migrants has declined in absolute terms, confirming once again the transitory, essentially random nature of this trend of international migration, which is primarily and mainly produced by all sorts of cataclysms.

For example, in India, the number of migrants decreased from 7.4 million to 5.7 million over the same decade and a half, and in Pakistan, from 6.6 million to 3.3 million. In 1990, Iran (3.8 million) and Argentina (1.6 million) were also among the top twenty countries in terms of the number of migrants who were outside the country in 2005. Meanwhile, in Côte d'Ivoire, the total number of migrants has increased (from 2.0 million to 2.4 million) due to ongoing ethnic strife and armed conflicts in Tropical Africa. An even more significant increase in the number of migrants occurred for the same reason in Jordan, which in 2005 came very close to Ivory Coast in this indicator and eventually also appeared in the top twenty.

Standard migration statistics used by international organizations record only the total number of migrants settling in host countries, without dividing them into the categories underlying migration permits. As a result, the scale of labor migration itself, which is the backbone of international migration processes, remains virtually behind the scenes. The problem is also that the actual status of migrants often changes upon arrival in the host countries. Migrants who have passed through the category of "family reunification" or, say, receiving an education, sometimes get a job, while those who have worked, on the contrary, lose it. According to the ILO estimate, which was also adopted by the UN, about 95 million people were employed in 2005 [United Nations..., 2005],

page 110
this means that in fact, half of all migrants were supported by their own earnings and participated in the creation of the total income of the host country.

Migrant labor is especially intensively used in those countries that appeared on the economic map of the world in their current capacity just due to the massive influx of migrants in the XVIII and XIX centuries. SOPEMI estimates in the UN Secretary-General's report that migrants accounted for almost 15% of all workers in the United States in 2003, about 20% in Canada and New Zealand, and almost 25% in Australia. Europe, on the other hand, which turned out to be the main supplier of international migrants in the initial phase of capitalism, despite all the subsequent troubles that resulted in considerable human losses, occupies an incomparably more modest place in this indicator. The only exceptions are tiny Luxembourg, where migrants occupied 45% of jobs in 2003, and Switzerland-21.8%. In all other European countries, the influx of migrants did not reach even 1/10 of the total number of employees. Migrants occupied 9.5% of jobs in Greece, 9.2% in Austria, 9% in Germany, 7.7% in Belgium, 6.5% in Ireland, 5.2% in France and 5.1% in England. In other Western European countries, their share was even lower [International Migration..., 2006, Table 10].

When it comes to forced international migration, there are different reasons for choosing a country to work in or relocate to. Prominent among them are geographical proximity and cultural ties, often including those that have their roots in the colonial past, as the education system in the country of origin usually bears their imprint. In addition, these connections affect the population's knowledge of foreign languages. For example, migrants from Mexico mostly go to the United States, from North Africa-to Southern Europe, and from Eastern Europe - to Western Europe. Migrants from sub-Saharan Africa prefer Belgium, France, Portugal and England, while Latin Americans heading to Europe prefer Spain and Portugal. In a sense, all this is dominated by the United States, which has been setting the tone for global economic development for more than a century [Trends..., 2005; World Migration 2005, 2005].

The arrival of migrants in the host countries, in contrast to the previous departure from their homeland, is usually more or less strictly regulated. But regulation does not exclude illegal migration, which sometimes far exceeds legal migration. When determining migrant quotas, they are guided mainly by economic considerations. First of all, this concerns the number, but sometimes also the professional and qualification composition of migrants. Therefore, "family reunification" appears among the motives for allowing migration.

Due to the fact that the knowledge-based economy is moving to the forefront of global development, highly qualified specialists have recently been in high demand. First of all, from the number covered by the abbreviation STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics). That is why the influx of migrants with higher education is also growing faster. According to the latest population census, in 1991-2000 the number of migrants with higher education aged 25 years and older in the OECD countries increased from 12.5 to 20.4 million people [International Migration..., 2006, Table 12]. More than half of this growth is accounted for in the United States, 8.4% in England and 5.5% in Germany. However, the number of highly skilled migrants has increased especially significantly in Ireland, Finland and South Korea, which have made an impressive leap forward in the development of information and communication technologies.

The growing attention of developed countries to attracting highly qualified specialists is also evidenced by the impressive growth dynamics of the number of foreign students in their higher educational institutions. In the first three years of this century, the total number of international students in these countries has increased

page 111
by almost 390 thousand people, that is, it grew annually by an average of 7.3% and in 2003 exceeded 2 million [International Migration..., 2006, Table 8]. There were more than 100,000 international students each in Japan and Australia, over 200,000 in England, Germany and France, and almost 570,000 in the United States. The leader in terms of the influx of international students is Australia, where their total number has increased more than 11 times. The second place in this indicator (3.4 times) is taken by England, and the top three (2.7 times) is closed by Japan. In fourth place (2.3 times) is Germany, in fifth (1.6 times) - France. And only the sixth - the United States. But, apparently, not only and not so much due to the previously achieved huge superiority in the total number of foreign students, but because of the September 2001 tragedy, which forced them to significantly increase their caution when issuing entry visas.

We should not discount the growing mobility of educational institutions themselves, many of which, with the support of the state, develop partnerships with foreign universities, and sometimes even set up their branches there, which promises, among other things, good profits. Developing countries themselves are also interested in this, hoping to strengthen their educational potential, and perhaps even slow down the outflow of promising young people. Some of them have established international student campuses for this purpose. These include China, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Nigeria and South Africa.

Despite the rapid influx of qualified specialists with higher education, the majority of migrants in developed countries are still represented by the so-called unskilled and low-skilled labor force or are used in this capacity. This part of migrants works mainly in agriculture, construction and service industries, filling those jobs that, due to low (by local standards) wages and / or lack of prestige, are usually no longer of interest to indigenous people. The influx of such migrants, as if complementing the local labor resources, allows them to engage in more productive, and therefore better-paid work, while maintaining the jobs that are in demand by the economy and society, and thereby expanding the overall economic growth base of recipient countries by increasing the purchasing power of local markets.

The complementarity of the labor markets of the two groups of countries also contributes to the differences in the demographic situation. In developed countries, as opposed to developing countries, due to the decline in the birth rate and the increase in life expectancy, leading to a general aging of the population, the dependency burden on workers is approaching a dangerous threshold, which threatens the very possibility of continuing expanded reproduction. Thus, according to the UN Secretary-General's report on the relationship between international migration and development, in 2005, for every 100 people who reached the retirement age (60-64 years), in developed countries there were only 142 so - called potential workers (aged 20-24 years), compared to 342 in developing countries. Moreover, in the first group of countries, within 10 years, the number of young people aged (20-24 years) per 100 people who have reached retirement age (60-64 years) will be reduced to 87 [International Migration..., p. 25].

Equally impressive, if not more impressive, are the predictive estimates of the demographic situation in the group of developed countries used in the World Bank report. As this report highlights, the key driver of demand for international migrants in the current twenty years will be a slowdown in growth, and then an absolute reduction in the total number of employees in these countries. The age group that provides the bulk of the labor force (15-65 years) will reach its peak of 500 million people in 2010 and will be reduced to 475 million people by 2025. Together

page 112
with the expected reduction in the labor force, the dependency ratio (the ratio of all non-employees to the total number of employees) will increase. According to the forecast used by the Bank, the dependency ratio for the entire group of developed countries will reach the sacramental unit in 2009, and in 2025 there will be 111 unemployed people for every 100 employees [Global Economic..., 2006, p. 29].

OTKHODNICHESTVO IN THE HOUSEHOLD SYSTEM

The initial link and backbone of international migration, like any otkhodnichestvo, is obviously the household (in its macroeconomic sense). Be that as it may, it is the household that acts as a supplier of migrants to the world market, and it is also the recipient of remittances, for which, in fact, migration takes place and which is usually associated with certain hopes for improving the socio-economic situation of developing countries. Therefore, in order to better understand how this migration affects the state and prospects of developing economies taken as a whole, it is advisable to touch on what happens to the households themselves, from which international migration draws its resources.

Much depends on the initial situation: the economic and demographic characteristics of each "migrant" farm, and above all on the ratio of its productive (number of breadwinners-employees) and consumption (total number of families) potentials, "industry" affiliation, material assets, the degree of involvement in commodity-money relations, real aggregate and per capita income, etc. Naturally, it depends on the migrants themselves, their education, work skills, and other individual characteristics that affect the amount of their earnings and money transfers. However, due to the large and difficult-to-fix differences in all these parameters, coupled with the lack of systematic statistical measurements and the methodology for their accounting, any generalizations seem rather conditional. They capture opportunities and more or less clearly defined trends rather than developments that can serve as a basis for unambiguous conclusions.

Experts of the World Bank, which published a solid study of the problems caused by the development of international migration as recently as 2006, identify four issues that are particularly prominent in describing the household's response to migrant transfers and the impact of these transfers on its condition and development.

The first, perhaps the most relevant one in the current situation, concerns reducing poverty and smoothing inequality. Based on data from household surveys in various countries and using economic and mathematical methods and modeling, the Bank's experts argue that transfers help reduce poverty. But this is already clear in principle. If only because they significantly exceed in their significance what was actually produced by migrants before their departure or could have been produced with their participation.

However, it's not that simple. More than what might be doesn't mean that it's enough to overcome poverty. For it is important not only, and perhaps not so much, the volume of additional benefits provided by migrant transfers, but how and for what needs this "welding" is used. It is completely eaten up - which is not at all surprising in case of hopeless poverty-or it is still invested in something in one part or another, thereby creating prerequisites for development.

It is also important which category of households is fueled by transfers. It is no secret that, despite a sharp decline in transport costs, for a significant part of households in developing countries, international migration is exorbitant

page 113
expensive and risky business. The vast majority of migrants come from families with an average income for their community. Migration from poor families is carried out much less frequently and, as a rule, only with the assistance of fellow countrymen and relatives who have previously settled abroad. Meanwhile, the possibilities of international migration, despite the irreversible upward trend, are by no means unlimited. And since the bulk of transfers in full accordance with the actual composition of migrants goes far from the poorest, linking the problem of smoothing inequality with international migration seems not entirely correct, if not far-fetched.

According to special studies, remittances from international migrants are used primarily and primarily to meet the most urgent primary needs. Meanwhile, an analysis of household spending with and without international migrants shows that the former allocate more funds for investment than the latter. Consequently, migrant transfers help not only to improve consumption, but also to increase the productivity of the households receiving them.

First of all, this is manifested in the development of "human capital" through increased spending on education and medical services. But then, and sometimes simultaneously, other problems are solved, some of them without any real costs, and along the way, thanks to the very appearance of a regularly renewed monetary resource in the household.

In a semi-natural economy, when official credit is virtually unavailable, money transfers are used as start-up capital for mini-businesses and (or) make up for the chronic shortage of working capital necessary to maintain the reproduction process. In addition, transfers are an indispensable tool in emergency situations: during droughts, floods and other natural disasters, protecting recipients from the worst, and sometimes a kind of collateral that allows them to receive, although very small, but extremely necessary borrowed resources (mini-loans).

As a kind of payment for the part of the productive potential that is transferred to foreign economies, however, transfers cannot always compensate for its weakening. And if the household is unable to make up for this loss by using its own resources or hiring the missing workers, it is forced to suffer losses in the form of a decline in the already low standard of living. But if or when this problem is solved in one way or another, there are opportunities for some investments in development.

Moreover, along with households that have migrants, a number of other households that do not have migrants also have a certain opportunity for development. This possibility is due to the multiplicative effect of purchasing goods and services from other members of the community, and then from economic entities interacting with it outside of the community.

However, it should not be forgotten that productive use of money transfers is hindered by the same factors that hinder development and encourage international migration of those seeking decent and / or additional earnings. At the same time, migrants ' remittances, and often the fact that they leave for work, improve the economic situation of households rather than worsen it. Although there may be all sorts of exceptions to this.

Meanwhile, the question of how all these and similar processes, including the multiplier of current and investment expenditures that have their origins in migrant transfers, ultimately affect the rate and quality of economic growth in countries that are the main source of international migration, is largely debated.

page 114
the question remains open. Despite a huge and growing body of research on this problem, it is still poorly understood from this perspective. Macro-economic measurements of money transfers, as well as the processes that preceded them, are of particular interest in this regard.

INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION AND DEVELOPMENT

The economic effect of international migration at the macro level, as well as at the household level, depends primarily on changes in the ratio of productive and consumer potentials of each individual developing society, which are represented in the first approximation by the total number of employees and the number of people who feed from the income they create. Looking at migration from this angle provides an overview of its impact on the local labor market and the overall level of its remuneration in the countries of origin. Obviously, different options are possible here.

In a situation where migration contributes to the resolution of unemployment and underemployment, its positive effect can hardly be doubted. Especially if it does not violate other vital balances. The problem, however, is that with the current state of statistics and the level of our knowledge, it is not easy to identify such details. Especially if we take into account that they (these details) are manifested primarily and mainly at the industry level.

Meanwhile, regardless of the accompanying circumstances, international migration is a source of foreign currency, which, as is well known, is of particular importance for developing economies, since it opens up access to any goods and services traded on the world market. And in this capacity, it can probably be considered as a kind of compensation for "leaks" from the local labor potential. In fact, this is the most direct and tangible benefit that developing countries derive from international migration. Therefore, addressing the impact of international migration on the development of catching-up economies, it is advisable first of all to clarify the situation with migrant money transfers, which, for obvious reasons, cannot be carried out otherwise than in foreign currency.

The World Bank estimates, based on balance of payments data, that in the 15 years since 2005, the total amount of remittances sent by migrants to their families and friends has increased 3.4 times worldwide, compared with 5.3 times in developing countries. As a result, the share of remittances sent to developing countries increased from 45% in 1990 ($31.2 billion) to 72% in 2005 ($166.9 billion), once again confirming the leading role of this group of countries in international migration [Global Economic Prospects..., 2006, Table 4.1] (Table. 1).

The most significant inflows of remittances, both in relative and absolute terms, are in East Asia (39.8% of the total increase). Latin America ranked second (36.6%), which was the leader until 2002, and South Asia ranked third (26.4%). Meanwhile, sub-Saharan Africa accounted for only 4.6% of the total growth ($6.2 billion). Such significant differences in the volume of transfers received in different regions are mainly due to their simultaneous involvement in the international migration process. However, the main reason for these differences, obviously, lies in the scale and educational and qualification structure of migration, which, in turn, depend on the stage and dynamics of development of each of the regions.

This can be confirmed by a certain correlation between the level of development of the countries of origin of migration and the volume of transfers received by them.-

page 115
Table 1

Migrant transfers to developing countries, 1990-2005, USD billion

1990

1995

2000

2003

2004*

2005*

All countries

68.6

101.6

131.5

220.2

225.8

232.3

Developing countries

31.2

57.8

85.6

142.1

160.4

166.9

Latin America

5.8

13.4

20.1

34.8

40.7

42.4

South Asia

5.6

10.0

17.2

31.1

31.4

32.0

East Asia and Oceania

3.3

9.7

16.7

35.8

40.9

43.1

Middle East and North Africa

11.4

13.4

13.2

18.6

20.3

21.3

Europe and Central Asia

3.2

8.1

13.4

15.1

19.4

19.9

Sub-Saharan Africa

1.9

3.2

4.9

6.8

7.7

8.1

By income level

Lower Middle

13.9

30.0

42.6

72.5

83.5

88.0

Upper Middle

9.1

14.5

20.0

27.8

33.0

33.8

Low

8.1

13.3

22.8

41.8

43.9

45.0

* Rating.

Источник: [Global Economic Prospects..., 2006; World Economic Implications..., 2006. Table 4.1].

It is noteworthy that the main "motor" of international migration is the countries with the lowest average level of per capita income (according to the World Bank classification), whose income from transfers has grown 6.5 times in absolute terms over the past fifteen years, which has increased their share in the total amount of transfers to developing countries from 44.4% to 52.7%. The second position, strange as it may seem at first glance, was taken by countries with low per capita income, and only in the third place are countries with upper middle income, whose share in the total amount of income decreased almost 1.5 times (from 29.6 to 20.3%).

At the same time, transfers grew much faster than the number of migrants. As a result, the average transfer amount per migrant has more than quadrupled to $ 8,756 in 2005. [calculated from: Global Economic..., 2006, Table 4.1; International Migration..., Table 2]. Adjusted for inflation, this means more than a threefold increase in 2, which is 1.4 times the growth of the total GDP of developing (including post-socialist) countries. Obviously, this is partly due to the increase in wages in the host countries of migrants. But the main thing, apparently, is to improve the qualification composition of migrants themselves as a result of the increased attention of developed countries to attracting highly qualified specialists to fill and prevent gaps in this vital area for them.

As the amount of transfers increased, so did their contribution to the economies of developing countries. The same Bank estimates that in 2004, officially recorded remittance receipts equated in size to 6.7% of total imports of developing countries and 7.5% of their domestic (own) investments. But perhaps particularly noteworthy in this regard is the outpacing growth of remittances in comparison with the inflow of "official development assistance" (ODA) and foreign direct investment (FDI). In 1995 - 2004, with an increase in ODA by 1.34 times and FDI by 1.55 times, transfers increased by 2.76 times [calculated from: Global Economic..., 2006, p. 86-87]. In 2004, remittance inflows outstripped ODA and FDI combined in 36 developing countries, and export revenues in 12 countries.-

2 Calculated by G. I. Machavariani, to whom the author expresses his sincere gratitude for permission to use the results of his work.

page 116
Table 2

Twenty countries with the highest volume of remittances and the highest share of remittances in GDP, 2004

Transfers USD billion

Attitude to exports, %

Share of GDP, %

Share of GDP, %

India

21.7

19.4

3.1

Tonga

31.1

China

21.3

2.7

1.3

Moldova

27.1

Mexico

18.3

9.6

2.7

Lesotho

25.8

Philippines

11.6

22.7

13.4

Haiti

24.8

Morocco

4.2

23.9

8.4

Bosnia and Herzegovina

22.5

Serbia and Montenegro

4.1

102.4

17.2

Jordan

20.4

Pakistan

3.9

23.9

4.1

Jamaica

17.4

Brazil

3.6

3.3

0.6

Serbia and Montenegro

17.2

Bangladesh

3.4

42.5

6.0

El Salvador

16.2

Egypt

3.3

13.0

4.4

Honduras

15.5

Vietnam

3.2

10.9

7.1

Philippines

13.5

Colombia

3.2

16.4

3.3

Dominican Republic

13.2

Nigeria

2.8

7.9

3.9

Lebanon

12.4

Dominican Republic

2.3*

26.2*

13.2

Samoa

12.4

Jordan

2.2*

48.1*

20.4

Tadjikistan

12.1

El Salvador

2.1*

53.2*

16.2

Nicaragua

11.9

Thailand

1.6*

1.7*

1.1*

Albania

11.7

Ecuador

1.5*

21.8*

5.5*

Nepal

11.7

Yemen

1.3*

29.9*

10.0*

Kiribati

11.3

Tunisia

1.3*

11.4*

5.2*

Yemen

10.0

* 2003

Compiled and calculated by: [Global Economic Prospects..., 2006, World Bank. Wash., 2006, Fig. 4.1; Handbook of UNCTAD ..., 2004. Table 6.3A; Handbook of UNCTAD..., 2005. Tables 3.1A, 5.1; World Economic Outlook, Sept. 2006].

The author expresses his sincere gratitude for G. I. Machavariani's help in the calculations.

In 28 countries, revenue from the most significant export product (in Sri Lanka, revenue from tea exports, and in Morocco, from tourism, etc.), while in Mexico, migrant remittances exceeded FDI in volume [ibid.However, the overall contribution of remittances to the economies of developing countries is still quite modest. In the same year, 2004, transfers in low - income countries per capita accounted for 0.3% of their total GDP, in low-middle-income countries-0.2%, and in high-middle-income countries-0.7% of GDP [ibid.].

A more complete picture of the cross-country distribution of transfers and their significance for the economies of developing countries can be obtained from the data in Table 1. 2. It is based on the calculations of the World Bank, which selected the 20 countries with the largest volume of remittances and the 20 countries with the highest share of remittances in GDP in 2004. Naturally, we used data for all countries of the world. Meanwhile, in the table. 2 only data for developing countries are included. At the same time, the first column of the table, which ranks countries by the amount of transfers received, for greater clarity, added information that was not available in the original version on the ratio of transfers to total exports of goods and services and the share of transfers in GDP. The second column, which ranks countries by the largest share of remittances in GDP, has not changed, since in developed economies, by definition, transfers cannot have any significant significance.

page 117
The restructuring of this table, while clarifying the geographical distribution of transfers among developing countries, also highlights some noteworthy nuances.

First,the converted table includes only 35 countries instead of 40. As five countries in accordance with the accepted criteria were represented in both ranking columns at once. Second, the top 20 countries selected for the largest transfers include the 8 largest and most populous countries, led by China and India. As a result, 63% of the population of the entire developing (including post-socialist) world is concentrated in these 20 countries. And they account for a total of $ 117 billion, or 73% of the total amount of transfers received in 2004 by all countries in this group. Third, in addition to the 5 countries represented in both ranking columns, 5 large countries from the first column also showed a sensitive dependence on transfers. This includes giant India, which received 16.2% of total foreign exchange earnings from this source. But the Philippines, with its population of 85 million, is particularly notable in this regard, ranking fourth in terms of remittances received and eleventh in terms of the share of remittances in GDP.

A more complete picture of the macroeconomic significance of transfers for developing countries than can be seen from Table 2 can be obtained by taking into account changes in the composition of the countries in each of the two ranked columns, both those that receive the largest transfers and those with the largest share of transfers in GDP.

The lack of data does not allow us to look into the distant past. But in view of the growing acceleration of international migration, I think this is not so important. In 2001, Turkey and Sri Lanka were among the top 20 recipients of transfers from those not included in the 2004 list (1.5% of the population and 2.3% of the total GDP of the catching-up countries), and in 2002 - Guatemala and Poland (0.8% of the population and 1.9% of GDP). Among the leaders in terms of the share of remittances in GDP were not Haiti, Kiribati, Lebanon, Nepal, Samoa, Tonga and Jamaica, but Guyana, Guatemala, Morocco, Cape Verde Islands, Sudan, Uganda and Sri Lanka were present (2.3 and 1.3%, respectively) [selected and calculated by: Glushchenko, 2006, p. 35; World Economic..., 2004, Fig. IV. 2, IV. 3; World Economy..., Appendix 2.5]. Moreover, all these movements, regardless of the reasons that led to them, were in line with the upward trend, which is fully consonant with the growing dynamics of international migration.

Meanwhile, the real significance of transfers for the country as a whole, as well as for a single household, is determined not only, and perhaps not so much by the absolute size and (or) their share in foreign exchange earnings, but by their intended purpose and efficiency of use. And there are many problems that can be solved depending on specific circumstances, which require in-depth country-by-country research.

Money transfers can have different micro - and macro-economic effects when they appear in multiple guises at the same time. Most researchers agree that they have a direct positive impact on poverty alleviation, as they tend to fall directly into the hands of the poor themselves, helping to meet their basic needs for food, clothing, and other basic necessities.

The impact of remittances on economic growth is not so clear. It depends on many factors, first of all on what needs of households these transfers are spent on, on their size, duration of receipts, the purpose of the transfers themselves, as well as on the effectiveness of financial intermediation and national monetary systems. Contribution of money transfers to economic development

page 118
The development of recipient countries depends on the size of the share that is used for the accumulation of physical and "human capital" by their recipients or intermediary firms.

According to various surveys, an average of 80-85% of the total amount of transfers is spent on everyday household needs. In addition, they perform an important social function, insuring poor households against all kinds of shocks, can act as a kind of collateral that provides access to small loans, and to some extent compensate for the insufficient development of the financial system of recipient countries.

Although transfers are essentially an addition to household income spent on consumption, they are also sometimes used to invest in the expansion and modernization of agricultural production or entrepreneurship in the production of industrial products and services. Their contribution to savings seems to increase as per capita income increases: as basic needs are met, so does the share of transfers used for investment. There are cases when different groups of migrants have joined forces to build schools in their countries of origin for free.

Along with the microeconomic effect of increasing incomes and improving the overall situation of households, remittances in foreign currency form have a positive impact on the entire economy, easing the balance of payments tension, creating a barrier against excessive debt increases, and providing funds for the purchase of missing production and consumer goods. Moreover, migrant remittances are the most stable source of foreign exchange earnings.

Their stability helps smooth out fluctuations in the foreign trade environment and facilitates access to the global capital market. Expectations of significant future inflows of remittances in Russia increase the creditworthiness and rating of recipient countries in global financial markets. This opens up the possibility of attracting additional loans to finance imports that are necessary for diversification and the creation of new capacities or technological modernization, but it can also lead to unproductive use of them, which is fraught with an unjustified increase in external debt.

While migration reduces the burden of unemployment and generates income in the form of remittances, it also leads to losses in skilled labor and talent, thereby complicating the further development of the countries of origin. Migrants can only contribute to the development of their home country when they return, thanks to improved skills and entrepreneurship.

The United Nations annual Review of the World Economic and Social Situation for 2004, devoted to the problems of international migration, presents a kind of balance that brings together the positive and negative effects of international migration on countries of origin. Positive effects, in addition to the influx of remittances and their foreign currency form, include employment opportunities that are not available in the countries of origin of migration, and a softening of the situation in local labor markets suffering from a labor surplus [World Economic..., 2004, p.X-XIII; 97 - 111]. While I fully agree with these additions, I would just like to note that the lack of jobs for highly qualified specialists and the excess of low-skilled workers are, in fact, two sides of the same coin, called underdevelopment, which, in fact, pushes all those who need work to look for it in other, more developed countries. And this is precisely the case when the interests of migrants coincide with the interests of the country of their birth. But this is not always the case.

page 119
It is difficult to disagree with the fact that the outflow of educated people creates incentives for investment in education and increases individual motivation to improve vocational training. However, the attribution of these highly commendable motivations to the positive effects of migration is highly questionable.

All the rest, however, which UN experts attribute to the positive effects of international migration on developing economies, largely idealize the real situation and represent exceptions rather than its inevitable results. This can be said not only about the promotion of trade between the host and origin countries of migrants, but also about the transfer of technology, investment and venture capital to their home countries.

Such initiatives require a combination of sufficiently strong incentives and appropriate economic opportunities, which is not often the case. This combination is also necessary to increase the "human capital" during (and at the expense of) the return of migrants to their homeland. Be that as it may, but for the realization of all these opportunities, of course, you need to fight. Although for the bulk of countries with limited market potential, unstable economies, and uncertain futures - and there are an obvious majority of them in the developing world - the prospects for this struggle are not very bright.

It is characteristic that when illustrating the positive effects of international migration on developing economies, UN experts rely on examples from the life of China and India. And the increased attention to these two countries is hardly accidental. Because it is not so easy to find other, sufficiently convincing evidence of the significance of the positive effects noted by them.

Meanwhile, India and especially China represent the exception rather than the rule in this (as in many others) respect. And not only because they have an extraordinary market potential and a significant amount of highly qualified labor force in absolute terms, but also because they have migrant diasporas spread all over the world. It is also worth noting the extremely purposeful and fairly balanced economic policies of both countries, which are aimed, among other things, at making full use of the opportunities provided by the presence of such diasporas.

It is enough to recall only two circumstances in this connection. First, about the existence of Taiwan and the presence of a solid Chinese diaspora in the leading countries of Southeast Asia, which controls the most significant part of local business and largely predetermined the economic rise of the current NIS, as well as the countries that followed their example. Not the last place in the business elite of some of these countries is occupied by people from India. Second, that in 1995-1998, people from China and India led 29% of Silicon Valley companies (Hart, 2006).

But even if all the positive effects of international migration noted by UN experts in all catching-up economies were realized to the maximum, they would hardly be able to balance its negative consequences. What is worth only the previously mentioned "brain drain", especially in the era of the transition of the world community to the "knowledge economy". And it is obviously not only and not so much in the direct loss of funds spent on training and professional training of emigrated specialists. Much more important is the loss of the potential contribution of the departed specialists to the economic development of the countries of origin, taking into account its creative component, which is recognized in the world market.

Numerous studies show that the departure of specialists from the field of education and healthcare is particularly painful, which undermines the vital rise of "human capital" and forces them to leave the country.-

page 120
These countries are ready for emergency measures that require considerable "excess" costs. Obviously, as emphasized in the new theory of growth, we should also take into account the losses caused by the positive impact of top-level specialists on the productivity of their environment.

The growing brain drain, together with all the positive externalities that accompany it, has a depressing effect on the dynamics and quality of economic growth in developing countries, reducing the impact of public spending on education and health, and - most importantly - holding back vital increases in labor productivity and other factors of production. Another thing is also important. The clear preference given to highly skilled migrants in developed countries increases the segmentation of labor markets by skill levels, and contributes to deepening wage differentials in favor of more mobile and skilled labor segments. And this, obviously, is also not very consistent with the interests of developing economies.

Meanwhile, money transfers that "resist" all these problems do not differ in special excesses. As can be seen from the World Bank's assessment, which it used in the standard global general equilibrium model - Likage-to understand how migrants ' incomes are distributed, remittances to developing countries account for only about 17% of their total income, varying depending on the countries of origin and destination [World Economic..., 2006, p. 33].

Consequently, the majority of migrants ' earnings are realized in one form or another in the countries of their new residence, where the multiplicative effect of their use is mainly manifested. Moreover, due to the fundamental differences between the two groups of countries in the cost of living and the significant increase in the needs of migrants themselves, it probably cannot be otherwise. This reflects one of the fundamental features of the modern world order, which benefits from uneven socio-economic development.

The impact of international migration on the economy of developing countries largely resembles the effect of their production sharing with developed countries, based on the operational (intra-product) division of labor. Moreover, international migration is itself partly a product of this cooperation. After all, the basic part of R & D and the most technically and technologically complex segments of "joint" production are located at the headquarters of the TNCs that initiated its development, where the most qualified personnel are concentrated. In the end, the bulk of the added value is created there, which ensures the reproduction of these structures.

Meanwhile, such world-famous companies as eBay, Mittal, Google, Intel, are created by immigrants from developing countries. They also made a significant contribution to the development of world science, which is funded and actively used by the same TNCs. It is significant that today, as follows from the speech of UN Secretary-General Park Ki-moon at the World Forum on Migration in Brussels in July 2007, at least 20 Nobel laureates from former immigrants live in England alone [Novye Izvestia, 12.07.2007].

In general, as Park Ki-moon's report to the 60th session of the UN General Assembly rightly points out, " the conflict between the benefits of remittances and the loss of the labor force needed to increase productivity is, by and large, perhaps the only thing that prevents international migration from becoming a factor in promoting the development of its countries of origin." [International Migration..., 2006, p. 63]. But this problem is so complex and multifaceted that it is almost impossible to solve.

page 121
In such circumstances, the only way to significantly increase the contribution of international migration to the economy of developing countries is to overcome their cultural, scientific and technological backwardness. However, achieving this goal, among other things, rests on the need for systemic changes at the global level.

list of literature

Glushchenko G. I. Vliyanie trudovoi migratsii na razvitie mirovogo i natsional'nogo khozyaistva [The impact of labor migration on the development of the world and national economy].
World economy. Global trends for 100 years / Ed. by I. S. Korolev, Moscow: Ekonomist, 2003.

World economy: forecast to 2020. IMEMO RAS, Moscow: Magister Publ., 2007.

Novye izvestiya [New news]. 12.07.2007.

Handbook of UNCTAD Statistics 2004. UN. New Yourk and Geneva, 2004.

Handbook of UNCTAD Statistics 2005. UN. New Yourk and Geneva, 2005.

Hart, David M. Global Flows of Talent: Benchmarking the United States // The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. Nov. 2006.

International Migration and Development. Report of the Secretary-General. 18 May 2006-A\60\871. Table 2; Table 10.

Trends in International Migration. OECD, P., 2005; World Migration 2005. IOM, Geneva, 2005.

United Nations, Trends in International Migration, SOPEMI, 2005.

World Economic and Social Survey 2004. International Migration. United Nations, N.Y., 2004.

World Economic Prospects. Economic Implications of Remittances and Migration. World Bank. Wash., 2006.

Permanent link to this publication: