Return Migration

Studying the Phenomenon

Estimates of the rate of return have varied, with some reports as high as 25% to 35%. Few governments track the movements of individual migrants from home to destination and back. Thus, a variety of approaches must be used to study returnees. Techniques have included statistical analysis of data compiled from census and other governmental sources and official population registries; examination of historical passenger lists; the study of biographies, letters, and diaries of migrants who returned to their homeland; and in-person interviews with returnees.

One of the most ambitious studies of emigrants and returnees is the Mexican Migration Project (MMP). This collaborative research project, based at Princeton University and the University of Guadalajara, has surveyed thousands of households in communities in Mexico and in the United States. Demographic and socioeconomic information has been collected, along with number and duration of trips to the United States, legal status, wages earned, occupations, and use of funds upon return to Mexico.

A typology of return migration may be constructed from studies of returnees. The typology, formulated by Italian Sociologist Francesco Cerase, distinguishes between the temporary or permanent settlement plans of the migrant, the reasons for return, and the duration of the stay in the destination country. According to this typology, migrants are classified as “failed” migrants, “conservative” returnees, “innovative” returnees, and retired returnees.

“Failed” migrants are those who are unable to find work or to adjust to the social conditions of the receiving country. This typically occurs in the first few months or years of the migration experience. “Conservative” returnees are those whose original intention was to work toward a target savings or for a given period and then to return to their homelands. This classification may also include those who migrate for education or training purposes.

“Innovative” returnees include long-term migrants whose goal may have been to settle in the destination country but return because of changing political, economic, or social conditions in the receiving or native countries. A “reverse brain drain” of high-tech workers, scientists, and engineers would be an example. These “innovators” see themselves as catalysts for change in their home countries. The final category corresponds to successful long-term migrants who find that return to the native country will help maximize their retirement savings. Returned retirees take advantage of wage differences in their working years and cost-of-living differences in their retirement.

...