Editorial
| Date | 01 February 2018 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/imig.12427 |
| Published date | 01 February 2018 |
Editorial
This issue begins a new year for International Migration, and I would like to start with a warm
thanks to our reviewers for 2017 who served us so well and who we list separately in this issue.
Although the concept of peer review occasionally comes under scrutiny in the academic commu-
nity, we at International Migration continue to regard it, especially the double blind system which
we employ, to be at the heart of our credibility and integrity as a publication. Our reviewers are
owed the gratitude of not only us at the journal but that of our readers, too.
The beginning of a new year is always an opportunity to think back at the year that was and to
look for signs that the year ahead will somehow be better. Migration remained top of mind for
governments and the international community throughout 2017, with the situation of refugees and
asylum seekers at the forefront. At the time of writing this Editorial, the IOM reported that over
5,200 migrants had perished during their travel in 2017, with over 3,000 of those dying in their
attempt to cross the Mediterranean Sea to European destinations. While grim, these figures repre-
sent a decline over both 2016 and 2015, but still a significantly higher number than for 2014. The
year past also witnessed a concerted effort by member states of the United Nations towards a glo-
bal compact for migration and another for refugees, with both expected to be completed during the
current year. Although the United States withdrew, not entirely unexpectedly, from the process to
draft a compact on migration, we retain our hopes for significant progress on both fronts together
with commitments from member states to action towards better management of migration and refu-
gee affairs in the common best interests of host societies, the migrants and refugees, and their
countries of origin. Politically, migration continues to be a divisive topic throughout much of the
world with anti-migrant attitudes remaining strong both among leaders and citizens; we continue to
regard the Canadian case as refreshingly different with its broad support for immigration at ever
higher levels. What might other jurisdictions take from the Canadian lead?
Our articles open with considerations of migration taken from a number of different countries, a
reminder that it is not only Europe that experiences migration. We begin in Lebanon where Dibeh,
Fakih, and Marrouch looked at the many determinants of emigration by young people there; among
those determinants were unemployment, being male, having a university education, and for many,
being from a non-wealthy background. Kim and Kilkey report on South Korean policy on marriage
migration, particularly policy on multicultural families, coming to regard it as deliberately designed
to overcome the country’s severe fertility deficit and shoring up Korea’s next generation of human
capital. As seen in Lebanon, Arouri and Nguyen found that
emigr
es from Egypt tend to be men
with higher education. They found that the remittances sent home were instrumental in poverty
reduction, leading them to recommend increased migration as a development strategy. Li and Wong
found that migration patterns in China are a bit of the old becoming new again, with international
migrants originating, to a surprising degree, from the same source regions of China as produced its
migrants in the 19
th
century and with a strong entrepreneurial drive. Finally in this section, Tahir,
Kauser, and Bury look at irregular migration to Greece and report on their interviews with migrants
who failed to enter the country upon completing their journeys from Pakistan.
The articles in our next group consider the effects of remittances on different aspects of develop-
ment. Kumar et al compare the cases of Kyrgyzstan and Macedonia, both of which have witnessed
considerable growth in remittances over the past quarter century accompanied by long-term national
economic growth, but yet with significant differences between the two countries. Valatheeswaran
Dr. Howard Duncan, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
doi: 10.1111/imig.12427
©2018 The Author
International Migration ©2018 IOM
International Migration Vol. 56 (1) 2018
ISSN 0020-7985Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
To continue reading
Request your trial