Читать статья по эктеории: "Refugees as a factor of economic development in host countries of migration" Страница 5

(Назад) (Cкачать работу)

The costs for supporting refugees in the OECD countries per refugee are bigger than similar rates in developing countries, but they are much smaller compared to the share of GDP. Thus, budget costs for one refugee in Germany amount to EUR 10-12 thsd. per year, respectively, an estimated number of 1 million refugees in 2015 required EUR 10-12 bln. In the most pessimistic scenario the influx of refugees in the 2015-18 will require EUR 65 bln. during the said period, partially to be covered by EUR 20 bln. of income received from increased production provided by the inflow of new labour force into the country. Net expenses of EUR 45 bln. on refugees within five years may be completely covered through the budget surplus without changing a tax burden or increasing the public debt. Stability indicators for the Italian economy are much worse than for the German one, including in terms of unemployment, and therefore Italy has fewer opportunities for productive use of new labour force. However, as in the case of Germany, the tax effects of receiving more migrants over the next five years is not a decisive or even a significant factor affecting economic development [Dadush, 2016].

Refugees often have some limited resources at their disposal upon arrival to the country, which in turn leads to increased demand for local goods and services, however, in order to maintain the level of effective demand, the option of possible inclusion of refugees into the local labour market is of critical importance. The way of settling refugees is important as well. If refugees live in special camps, the chances that they will find a job in the legal sector are lower. In Europe, asylum seekers have an average of over 9 months of waiting for a work permit. This period has been shortened to 5.5 months in Germany [15]. According to some estimates [20], if forced migrants have to be quickly integrated into the labour markets, the influx of refugees could lead to GDP growth in the EU by additional 0.2% due to the effect of demand in the short and the effect of supply in the long term.

Conclusions. Mismatch of supply and demand for certain skills on the labour market is much more of a challenge for developing countries because they receive large volumes of refugees in relation to the total population of their countries and have far fewer opportunities to levelling the imbalance in the economy by attracting additional amount of capital.

Regardless of whether the host country of refugees is a developed or developing one, the fiscal effects of forced migration primarily depend on the effectiveness of policy integration of refugees into the legal labour market, and, accordingly, the possibility of creating tax revenues by them.

Over time the economic impact of forced migration, provided there is a free access of such migrants to the labour market of the host country, is drawing closer to the same influence of voluntary migration on countries importing labour. Even if forced to migrate for non-economic reasons, such as finding a high-paying job, most of the refugees fill in either formal or informal labour market in the host country, as the case of Syrian refugees in Germany demonstrates. For the countries of the North, the economic efficiency of permanent migration, both voluntary and involuntary shall be determined by:

• impact on wages, especially those of unskilled workers,

• impact on unemployment,

• long-term fiscal effects of immigration

• impact on overall economic growth, its efficiency being closely connected with the involvement of an additional amount of capital and, most importantly, the labour productivity. References 1. UN General Assembly, The United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 28 July 1951, United Nations Treaty Series 189:137.

2. Aljuni S., Kawar M. ‘The impact of the Syrian refugee crisis on the labour market in Jordan: A preliminary analysis’, International Labour Organization,

3. BoubtaneE., Dumont J., Rault. C. (2014) ‘Immigration and economic growth in the OECD countries, 1986-2006’, Institute for the Study of Labor, Discussion Paper No. 8681, November,

4. Chadwick V., Von der BurchardH. (2015) ‘EU expecting 3 million more migrants by 2017’, Politico, 6 November,

5. Dadush U., Niebuhr M. (2016) ‘The economic impact of forced migration’, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 22 April,

6. Ianchovichina E., Ivanic M. (2014) ‘Economic effects of the Syrian war and the spread of the Islamic State on the Levant’, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 7135, 1 December,

7. Karakas C. ‘Economic challenges and prospects of the refugee influx’, European Parliamentary Research Service,

8. Masri S., Srour I. ‘Assessment of the impact of Syrian refugees in Lebanon and their employment profile’, International Labour Organization,

9. Muysken J., Ziesemer T. (2013) ‘A permanent effect of temporary immigration on economic growth’, Applied Economics 45/28: 4050-4059.

10. Razina A., Sadkaa E., Swagelb P ‘Tax burden and migration: A political economy theory and evidence’, NBER Working Paper,

11. Reznikova N., Vidiakina M. (2016) ‘Developing countries as actors of neo-dependency: The role of foreign direct investment in the global dominance’, Scientific Journal ‘Economics and Finance’: Economics, Management,

Похожие работы