230 likes | 242 Views
Explore the challenges and impacts of labour migration from Bulgaria to the EU. This paper focuses on legal labour migrants and discusses the positive and negative effects of migration on sending countries.
E N D
6th IZA/ASE Workshop on EU Enlargement and the Labor Markets • BULGARIAN LABOUR ISSUES AND LABOUR MOBILITY TO THE EU Prof. D. Sc. Rossitsa Rangelova Economic Research Institute Bulgarian Academy of Sciences Bucharest, 25-26 November 2013
Basic points: - Bulgaria was among the most concerned countries in the Balkan region regarding the socio-economic crisis in the 1990s in terms of the so-called push factor. - People in Bulgaria are strongly inclined to emigrate. The experience of the country is indicative of migration trends and specificity from and in the Southeastern Europe, which could provide reliable implications for useful conclusions and an adequate migration policy both in the national and the international perspective.
Regarding participation of migrants in foreign labour markets, three basic groups can be divided: • those who are connected with the 'brain drain' phenomenon • legal labour migrants • and illegal migrants Two main types of migration channels can be distinguished:permanent migration, and temporary, including circulation. The paper is focused on the legal labour migrants, for which the differences evolve mainly from professional specificity.
Government’s estimates on the number of Bulgarian immigrants by country, 2008 Destination country Number of immigrants from Bulgaria USA Around 200,000 Spain Over 120,000 Greece Around 110,000 (non-official 200,000) United Kingdom Over 60,000 Germany Over 50,000 Italy Around 50,000 Canada Around 45,000 Austria Around 25,000 Total number Around 700,000
Today Bulgaria remains among the main • migrant sending countries in the EU. The global financial and economic crisis has severely affected Bulgaria this has led to a sharp increase in numbers of emigrants since 2009 while there is no clear evidence of return migration (as the theoretical rules and past practices show).
Bulgaria: External migration - total, 2007-2012 (number), NSI
It is indicative that parents in Bulgaria • strongly encourage their children to migrate. Nearly 90% of the persons surveyed by the NSI in 2001 declared that they encourage their children to study or work abroad. The percentage of people urging their children to resettle abroad is lower than the proportion of those who push them to study or work abroad, but nevertheless it remains very high - nearly 55%.
Possible positive effects of migration in sending countries: • Inflow of remittances benefiting receiving individuals and countries •Emigration may reduce unemployment in some sectors • Investments from diasporas and returnees • Improvement of human capital of migrants / returnees
Possible negativeeffects of migration in sending countries: • Loss of highly skilled workers followed by reduced growth and productivity • Reduced quality and availability of essential services (e.g. medical and social services, education) • Labour force withdrawal by migrant family members receiving remittances
Possible negative effects of migration in sending countries: Progressive ageing and increased dependency ratio • Neglected care for children and elderly left behind • Lower school performance and enrolment of children left behind • Family disintegration
Age structure of the population in Bulgaria, 2011, Total=100,%
Projection of the population number by age in Bulgaria, young (0-14) and old people (65 and over), 2003-2050
Population structure in Bulgaria by ethnical groups, 2011, Total=100%
Labour market issues • Large-scale emigration of mainly young and active people led to declining number of the labour force in Bulgaria. • Migration is likely to affect individual sectors of the economy differently, which contributes to distortion of the production structure and economic activity in the country, and generates imbalances in some sectors such as health care sector, as out-migration of doctors and nurses is a key challenge for the country.
In Greece • Bulgarians constitute the second largest nationality after Albanian migrants. Female emigrants predominate and migration is most likely individual. Bulgarians occupy niches in the labour market, mainly in agriculture and tourist services. Seasonal workers coming from the region of the Rhodopes Mountain in Bulgaria cross the border to work in Western Thrace in Greece.
In Spain • the emigrants are mostly men and migration is most likely family-based. The first is the husband who arrives and afterwards the relatives join him. • In Spain Bulgarians work in various service activities like: hotels and restaurants (15.9%), household/family activities (14.5%), and other public or personal service activities (13.9%); agriculture (12.2%), construction (11.1%), transport, storage and communication (9.4%). • The shares of men and women, working as low skilled workers are similar (25.2% and 22.2% respectively). About 23% of the Bulgarian migrants were unemployed in 2011, of which 64% are men and 36% are women. This level of unemployment is considerably higher compared to that before their departure from Bulgaria.
Level of unemployment in Bulgaria, 15 years and over, 1990-2012, %
Policy responses in Bulgaria Until recently and even now the policy of the Bulgaria’s officials and the public opinion looks like rather encouraging emigration, i.e. forcing the push factor than attracting people to live and work in their own country.
Policy responses in Bulgaria The successful future of this policy is not in the retention of human capital in Bulgaria, but in promoting its development via or during migration abroad and taking advantage of it in the country. In spite of the efforts undertaken by the national authorities, there are still no specific and sufficient services in place for people who return.
Policy responses in Bulgaria A common feature of the current Bulgarian migration policy remains the substantial number of strategies, action plans, programs, etc. but they have pure declarative character and the lack of goals set out in them with indicators for the achievement of actual results.