A Discursive Analysis of the Phenomenon of Labor Migration - Essay Example

Introduction The European Union, as most critical observers recognize, is a political and economic phenomenon. The successful political and economicunification of a bloc of countries that share neither language, nor even history and a specific culture in common is, indeed, amazing. To underscore this, one need only look at the Arab countries and their failure to even achieve a shallow form of integration, not even a deep one, despite shared language, culture and several centuries of history. Furthermore, the European Union, from its earliest roots as a steel and mining trading unit between a limited numbers of countries, seems to be in a constant process of evolution and development. That is, it sets very comprehensive goals for itself, covering economic, political, social and regional and international security policy frameworks, in addition to future plans for the expansion of the Union. As a means of understanding the European Union's path and its goals, a brief overview of the evolution process of the Union will be helpful. This overview will provide the basis for a discursive analysis of the phenomenon of labor migration within the framework of the European Union. Labor migration, as the analysis shall highlight, has proven, despite some benefits, to be highly problematic especially since the Barcelona Declaration expanded the parameters of the stated to include migrant labor from within the larger EU neighborhood. In other words, labor migration within the EU is not confined to labor flows between member countries but has been expanded, and further complicated by the inward flow of labor from without the EU. Overview of EU Integration Most people would date the roots of the European Union to the 1940s, yet W.T.M. Molle, traces the roots of European integrationist dreams much further back. Specifically, during the Napoleonic era, marked by the emergence of a modern economic system, as compared to the feudal one that had come before it, certain economic policies were established in order to ease trade between the nations of the European continent.1 From that moment onwards, one finds several policies that attempt to encourage trade within the continent and overcome specific obstacles to trade. When one looks at this fact, one can conclude that from the earliest history, the European countries were guided by the understanding that regional trade and economic links were important for the economies of the different countries and for the purpose of development. The current structure of the European Union, however, does not have its roots in the policies discussed above; those policies only indicate the historical understanding of the importance of regional economic cooperation. Instead, the roots of the current structure are to be found in three distinct treaties. These, as mentioned by Molle, are the "ECSC, the EEC and the EAECP.2 These three treaties are the foundations of the European Union that has emerged nowadays, despite the fact of their having been limited in terms of countries that had been involved and the treaties themselves. For instance, the ECSC was a steel trading treaty that involved only six European nations. This can not be compared in scope to the current structure of the Union but, the fact of the matter is that the success of the Union and the reason why it has emerged today as a model for deep integration is that it proceeded in a step by step manner, dealing with limited areas of economic cooperation and limited numbers of countries so that they could stabilize each step and move safely to a new level of expanding integration.3 Even though the European Union sought to stabilize and fortify each step in the unification process before progression to the next step, problems inevitably arose. Among the more challenging of these problems directly pertains to the removal of restrictions on capital flow, included in which is labor. The comparatively unchecked labor movement between the variant member countries, on the one hand, and from the larger neighborhood, on the other, has created a serious imbalance between both general and specific labor supply and demand, as shall be illustrated through a discursive analysis of current policies and labor migration statistics. Intra-EU Labor Migration Policy As of 1st May 2004, the European Union had expanded to a regional bloc comprising "25 countries, with a combined population of more than 450 million and GDP of almost E100000 billion."4 European Union expansion, even though it occurred subsequent to the new members' fulfillment of the stringent economic and political prerequisites for entry, has been criticized by labor economist as having proceeded prior to the resolution of the problems relating to intra-EU labor migration.5 Even before the expansion of the EU, the existent members countries suffered from two notable labor migration problems rising from the fact that the integration process had effectively annihilated all artificial barriers to human capital movement within. The first of these problems was that some member countries were perceived of as attractive job markets, such as the United Kingdom, France, (West) Germany, and Holland while others were viewed as providing limited opportunities for labor employment. The result was that a push and pull phenomenon entered into the equation with the end result being that those nations which were perceived of as labor-attractive had an over-supply of labor and those which were seen as providing limited labor opportunities, had an undersupply. The latter culminated in increased unemployment while the former implied that the countries in question did not have the labor requisite for continued economic growth and development.6 The second pre-expansion labor migration problem cannot be separated from the one articulated in the above, insofar as it is a by-product of the push and pull phenomenon referred to. This is the problem of youth brain drain.7 Quite simply stated, and especially as pertains to East Germany and Eastern Europe, the youth migrated from their home economies to the more stable and labor attractive economies of the EU, depriving their home economies, whether on a temporary or permanent basis, of the labor and talent they require in order, not just to grow, but to remain competitive.8 As such, pre-expansion intra-European Union labor migrations was economically problematic and as labor economist contend, had a directly negative economic impact upon the countries which pushed labor out as well as those who pulled labor in, insofar as the first gradually suffered from labor shortage and the second from an oversupply culminating in increased unemployment.9 Within the contextual framework of the above, labor economists have argued that the 2004 expansion of the European Union was hardly the optimal step to take at that particular stage in the integrative process.10 Instead, the existent labor migration problems should have been resolved prior to expansion, with expansion here being defined as the magnification of the labor supply and demand imbalance consequent to the fact that the inclusion of Eastern European nations effectively meant lifting all barriers to the flow of labor away from the Eastern European countries to the Western European ones. In order to determine the validity of the articulated critique, it is necessary to examine current labor migration policy in an effort to determine their shortcomings and analyze existent labor migration statistics, in order o determine whether or not the figures support the popular labor economic criticism. Intra-EU Labor Migration Policy The creation and entrance into force of the Single European Act in 1986 established the free movement of capital goods within the member states of the European Union. Within the context of this Act, capital goods included human labor.11 By 2001, and as per the Schengen agreement which effectively removed border controls between the European Union member states while establishing common border controls from without those member states, 13 of the then 15 member EU states had mutually free flowing labor migration,12 irrespective of the conditions of the labor market within specific national economies. In other words, and as further articulated by labor economists, the free movement of labor was not optimally based on supply and demand, as had been assumed that it would but was based upon labor's imagined perception of the opportunities provided by one economy, as compared to another. Therefore, while it was assumed that labor, as with any other capital good, would rationally operate by the market laws of supply and demand, it did not. Instead, numerous other variables entered into the equation, whereby labor movement was eventually governed by perceptions pertaining o standards of living, economic opportunities provided, welfare services, and in the case of the youth, entertainment.13 Hence, not only was labor movement eventually determined by variables other than demand versus supply of labor within a given member economy but by perceptions regarding supply and demand levels, not facts concomitant with other lifestyle-consideration variables. Labor migration, therefore, did not proceed along rational economic laws. The above stated des not imply a negation of the fact ht there were some controls and mechanisms for labor migration within the EU, as policies and mechanisms did exist and still do. As noted by Givens and Luedtke, intra-European labor migration is theoretically governed by the European Commission and Parliament and a set of labor policies.14 In further elaboration on the existent labor migration policies, it should be noted that they are primarily related to the concept of citizenship. The implication here is hat the free movement of labor between the European Union member states pertains only to those who are actually citizens of a member state as opposed to foreign migrant labor living within one of those states.15 Labor migration, as in the free low of labor, is therefore limited to those who actually hold citizenship status n a member country and does not include non-citizen resident who have work permit in specific EU economy. Were intra-European labor migration limited by the above stated, some labor economists have contended that the situation would probably have been quite manageable. Certainly, the push and pull phenomenon, as dominated by perceptions rather than facts and statistics, may have operated for a while but it would have eventually self-adjusted. However, the fact of the matter is that applying this, or any other existent labor migration policy, designed to control flow in an effort to avoid, or offset, imbalanced intra-EU labor distribution, and has been extremely problematic. It has been problematic because of the virtual impossibility of controlling non-citizen intra-EU movement since border controls and checks between member states are virtually inoperative.16 Hence, the implementation of existing policies is very difficult. The above situation has been exacerbated by another more problematic one. While, as earlier stated, some labor economists have argued that of labor flows were limited to the EU citizens, the situation would have been manageable, this is not at all true. Just to solidify that claim, one may refer to the post-Berlin Wall collapse labor migration situation. Within less than three years following the collapse, 1.5 million East German laborers had migrated to West Germany.17 The implications are very serious. This is because the aforementioned effectively means that the East German economy, which was in dire need of labor in order to rebuild and restructure itself and eventually reach the standard of the East German economy, was deprived of much needed labor whereas the West German economy, which already had unemployment and did not need additional labor, was flooded by an oversupply of labor.18 Were one to use the lesson contained herein, one would realize that the expansion of the EU, and especially as pertains to the embrace of Eastern European states within the parameters of the EU, would result in a similar situation, only on a much more magnified and expansive scale. Therefore, the fact is that intra-EU labor migration is not, at present, manageable and it is not operating along rational economic laws. It is within the context of he stated that the exigencies of revising current intra-EU labor migration policies are emphasized, not to mention the necessity of establishing a mechanism to ensure the avoidance of serious maldistribution of labor across the EU. Intra-EU Labor Migration Statistics Statistics indicate that, without exception, all EU member states have an unemployment problem of varying dimensions whereby each and every member state has national economic programs and strategies in place for the resolution of this particular problem.19Resolving this problem, however, is extremely difficult in light of labor fluidity. In an effort to articulate the extent to which labor and unemployment issues are gradually and certainly escaping the control of national policy makers, it is worthwhile to note that labor migration from Eastern European to Western European states is likely to result in crisis. Estimates suggest that within the next decade, Eastern European labor migration to Western Europe may have reached the fifty million figure.20 In other words, not only re the Western European member states confronted with the challenge of creating jobs to resolve the existing labor unemployment problems but of creating such jobs as would absorb the expected labor migration figure. Doing so would be extremely challenging and borders on the impossible if only because the flow is both mercurial and fluid, and impossible to actually pin down and accurately estimate.21 Quite simply stated, labor migration potential is alarming. Inter-European Labor Migration Not only is the EU confronted with the problem of intra-European labor migration but prior to resolving this problem and establishing a framework for the control of intra-EU labor flows, it established a framework for inter-neighborhood labor migration. As shall now be illustrated, despite the arguments which support the Barcelona Declaration and which articulate the exigencies of the EU adopting steps to stabilize the political economy of its greater neighborhood, its capacity to absorb non-EU labor is highly questionable. The Barcelona Declaration and Euro-Mediterranean Partnership The Barcelona Declaration, signed in 1995, established a new stage in the European Union's development. However, it is a stage that is distinguished from the earlier ones in an important respect. The most fundamental concern of the Barcelona Declaration and the Euro-Mediterranean partnership was external relations with the European Union's neighborhood, as compared to the earlier fundamental concern with the internal relations within the European Union itself .22 In specific, the Barcelona Declaration set down the European Union's strategic interests regarding the Mediterranean region and established a policy framework for the achieving of these goals. To fully appreciate the implications of this development and its concern with the question of labor immigration, we will now take a look at the Declaration's own expressions of its concerns regarding its neighborhood and why it determined that the economic and political stabilization of the Mediterranean was inseparable from the interests of the European Union. The European Union's security, political and economic interests cannot be separated from the conditions that exist in its neighborhood. In "Europe, the Mediterranean, and the Middle East," Simon Serfaty explicitly lays out the relationship between the conditions that exist in the Mediterranean neighborhood, including the Middle East and the impact on Europe. In the simplest terms possible, conflict in the neighborhood region, poor economic conditions and very little hope for those conditions to improve, and political suppression, influences the European Union's own political and economic conditions in several ways. First of all, it prevents it from taking full advantage of the opportunity for economic cooperation with the neighboring region. In the second place, it places the European Union too close to a centre of conflict and instability. In the third place, it will increase immigration to the European Union from the neighborhood countries.23 All these factors combined have a negative prospect for the future of the European Union, in regards to its aim for growth, greater economic development and an increased international political role. These concerns are expressed in the following lines from the Barcelona Declaration, stating that the objective of the European Union is "turning the Mediterranean region into an area of dialogue, exchange and co-operation guaranteeing peace, stability and prosperity."24 That is, turning it into a stable region that would have a positive, not negative relationship with the European Union. Immigration Policy Among the primary concerns of the European Union regarding the Mediterranean neighborhood and most specifically, the countries of North Africa, is unstructured and unchecked labor immigration. The migration of citizens of North African countries into European ones is a historical phenomenon.25 Ever since the two regions came into contact with one another, initially through the expansion of the Islamic Empire, there have been flows of migration. However, in recent decades, this migration was motivated by specific political and economic conditions of instability, lack of opportunities and oppression.26 For many North African citizens, the incentives for immigration are tremendous. In the first place, and this is especially true regarding the Maghreb states and France and, to a lesser extent Spain, there is no language barrier. Many in the Arab Maghreb countries, due to the colonial history, are fluent in French and can get by in Spanish because of its common roots with the French language (59). In the second place, the economic incentives for this movement are very tempting. Besides the fact that there are very few career opportunities for the masses in the Maghreb region and even less opportunities for social mobility, there is a very high income and wage gap. As stated by Farsakh, "in 1997, per capita income in France was in the order of 22,000$ compared to less than 2000$ in the Maghreb states."27 In the third place, many seek immigration as an escape from political oppression which can range from actual persecution, as in the situation of the Berbers to simply feeling that there is no opportunity for freedom and stating one's mind without consideration of the fact that there could be consequences to doing so. Therefore, immigration carries with it the opportunity for a better economic and political environment for living.28 It is obvious that the conditions that push many in the Maghreb to immigrant to European countries is political economic conditions. As stated by a member of the European Commission, Guido Brunner, "the Europeans are worried across the Mediterranean they see rising fundamentalism, political instability, booming population growth, deepening poverty, and most of all, a surge of immigration to their southern shores."29 The real problem is that there are social, political and economic consequences to the great flow in immigration. First of all, the immigrants are treated as outsiders, are not integrated into the European culture systems, are denied access to social security and are exploited as cheap labor. In other words, as can be understood from Ben Jones' article, the illegal status of many of the immigrants encourage economic and social abuse, without there being an opportunity for them to seek legal protection, simply as they themselves have an illegal status. Therefore, the alternative, as further explained by Abdellah Boudahrain to the option of seeking legal protection from exploitation and abuse is the development of social tension between the immigrants and the natives. Consequently, on the social level, the effect of tremendous levels of immigration have been, among others, social tension within some of the countries of the European Union.30 On the economic side, the effect of these high immigration levels is that it provides a cheaper source of labor than the natives. Therefore immigrant labor is viewed as taking jobs away from the natives of the countries.31 On the political level, there is also the fear that these immigrants are bringing the conditions of political instability, fundamentalism and extremism with them. Therefore, in sum, the European Union countries have accurately identified the need to address the labor immigration problem as a practical method of protecting the European Union from the negative consequence of immigration. Therefore, political and economic conditions that produce labor immigration conditions are addressed by the Barcelona Declaration, specifically the Euro-Mediterranean partnership, as a method for reducing, and controlling the labor immigration from the Arab Maghreb to the European Union member countries. Accordingly, the European Union has adopted development and democratization programs in the Middle East neighborhood region as a means of self-protection. However, even as it places restrictions of labor immigration, the European Union stated within the Barcelona Declaration that following the economic and political development and stabilization of the region, there will be consideration of creating "visa-free access" to citizens of the neighborhood countries.32 Having defined the interrelationship and interdependence between itself and its neighborhood, the European Union has tried to take positive steps that would address the factors that motivate immigration. As explained in an interview conducted by Robert J. Guttman with Miguel Moritinos, the European Union, for example is investing very heavily in developing the infrastructure of a Palestinian state and in the economic development of Maghreb and other Middle Eastern countries in order to create, within the region, favorable economic conditions that would reduce the motives for immigration. Furthermore, it is working towards the democratization of the region and conflict prevention, for the same purpose.33 Therefore, within the aim of resolving the problem of labor immigration, the European Union is adopting policies that would address the conditions that encourage immigration. Conclusion The EU is confronting a labor problem. On the one hand, intra-EU labor flows are unchecked and are culminating in the uneven distribution of labor across the member states of the EU. The push and pull migration forces have resulted in a situation wherein some member states have a labor shortage and others have an oversupply. Needless to say, this will have a detrimental impact on both the under- and over-supplied economies. Hence, the imperatives of addressing and resolving this problem cannot be overemphasized. However, prior to addressing this problem, the EU entered into the Barcelona agreement, effectively expanding the aforementioned labor flow problem since it now embraces inter-neighborhood labor flows. It is incumbent upon EU policy makers to undertake a critical evaluation of the situation and to introduce such mechanisms and policies which would simultaneously control labor flows and balance out labor distribution across member states. Bibliography Balz , Vladimr, Allan M., Williams and Daniel Kollr "Temporary versus Permanent Youth Brain Drain: Economic Implications." International Migration, 42, 4, 2004. Boudahrain, Abdellah. "The Insecure Social Protection of Migrant Workers from the Maghreb," International Social Security Review, 63, 9 (April 2000). Farsakh, Leila. "North African Labour Flows and the Euro-Med Partnership," European Journal of Developmental Research, 12, 1 (June 2000). Givens, Terri and Adam Luedtke. "The Politics of European Union Immigration Policy: Institutions, Salience, and Harmonization." The Policy Studies Journal, 32, 1 (2004). Guttman, Robert J. "The European Union Special Envoy Miguel Moritinos," Europe, 882 (Dec 98/Jan 99). Jileva, Elena. "Visa And Free Movement Of Labor: The Uneven Imposition Of The EU Acquis On The Accession States," Journal of Ethnic & Migration Studies, 28, 4 (Oct2002). Jones, Ben "Immigration Pushes Europe to Steady Southern France," Christian Science Monitor, 88, 1 (11/27/95) . Molle, Willem T. "External Relations," in Willem Molle. The Economic of European Integration: Theory, Practice and Policy, 4th edition, Ashgate, Hants, England, 2001. Rendall, Michael S., Cecilia Tomassini and David J. Elliot, "Estimation of annual international migration from the Labor Force Surveys of the United Kingdom and the continental European Union," Statistical Journal of the UN Economic Commission for Europe, 20, , 2003. Schneider, Fredrick and Christina Burger. "Formal and Informal Labor Markets: Challenges and Policy in Central and Eastern New EU Members and Candidate Countries." CESifo Economic Studies, 51, 1 (2005). Serafty, Simon. "Europe, The Mediterranean, and the Middle East," Joint Force Quarterly, 24 (Spring 2000). Spencer, Claire. "The Euro-Mediterranean Partnership: Changing Context in 2000." Mediterranean Politics, 6, 1 (Spring 2001). Vendomme, Francois. "Labour Mobility Within the European Union: Findings, Stakes and Prospects," International Labour Review, 139, 4 (2000). Wider Europe - Neighbourhood: A New Framework for Our Relations With Our Eastern and Southern Neighbours," Commission of the European Union, 2005. Zaafrane and Mahjoub. "The Euro-Mediterranean Free Trade Zone: Economic Challenges and Social Impact on the countries of the South and East Mediterranean," Mediterranean Politics 5 , 1 (Spring 2000). Zimmerman, Klaus F. "Tackling the European Migration Problem," The Journal of Economic Perspectives 9, 2 (Spring 1995). Read More