SavedAdd your journal

Journals / International Journal of Social Inquiry / 2026 / Cilt: 15 Sayı: 1

International Migration in the Framework of Neoclassical Macro Migration Theory: An Analysis of the Countries Receiving the Most Immigration

Neoklasik Makro Göç Kuramı Çerçevesinde Uluslararası Göç: En Çok Göç Alan Ülkeler Üzerine Bir Analiz

Şeyma Bozkaya(NEVŞEHİR HACI BEKTAŞ VELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, İKTİSADİ VE İDARİ BİLİMLER FAKÜLTESİ, İKTİSAT BÖLÜMÜ)0000-0001-8589-6608
Hakan Kum(NEVŞEHİR HACI BEKTAŞ VELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, İKTİSADİ VE İDARİ BİLİMLER FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0002-7880-8355
Pages
177–194
Publication Date
2022-06-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

According to the findings obtained as a result of the application, it has been determined that there is a bidirectional causality between migration, GDP per capita, employment rates and average annual wage.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:International migration theories generally focus on labor migration from the first theory developed.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study includes annual data for the period 1990-2017.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the findings obtained as a result of the application, it has been determined that there is a bidirectional causality between migration, GDP per capita, employment rates and average annual wage.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Uluslararası Göç · Neoklasik Makro Göç Teorisi · Beklenen Gelir

Abstract

International migration theories generally focus on labor migration from the first theory developed. According to these theories, the flow of immigrants creates a labor supply within the economic system. This labor supply brings along the demand for labor. Migration theories focus on the differences in wage levels, income differences, employment opportunities among the countries that are important factors that motivate migration. Based on the economic differences between the countries, this study deals with the immigration factors of the countries that receive the most immigration according to the International Migration Institute within the framework of the Neo-classical Macro Migration Theory. The study includes annual data for the period 1990-2017. Dumitrescu-Hurlin causality test, which is a heterogeneous panel causality test, was used. According to the findings obtained as a result of the application, it has been determined that there is a bidirectional causality between migration, GDP per capita, employment rates and average annual wage.

Özet

Uluslararası göç teorileri genel anlamda geliştirilen ilk teoriden itibaren emek göçü üzerine odaklanmaktadır. Bu teorilere göre göçmen akışı ekonomik sistem içinde bir emek arzı oluşturmaktadır. Oluşan bu emek arzı emek talebini de beraberinde getirmektedir. Göç teorileri ülkeler arasındaki ücret düzeyi farklılıkları, gelir farklılıkları, istihdam imkanları göçü harekete geçiren önemli unsurlar üzerinde durmaktadır. Ülkeler arasındaki ekonomik farklılıklardan hareketle bu çalışma Uluslararası Göç Enstitüsüne göre en çok göç alan ülkelerin göç alma faktörlerini Neo-klasik Makro Göç Teorisi çerçevesinde ele almaktadır. Çalışma 1990-2017 dönemini kapsamaktadır. Heterojen panel nedensellik testi olan Dumitrescu-Hurlin nedensellik testinden faydalanılmıştır. Uygulama sonucunda elde edilen bulgulara göre göçün, kişi başı GSYİH, istihdam oranları ve ortalama yıllık ücret ile arasında çift yönlü bir nedenselliğin varlığı tespit edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Bozkaya, Ş., Kum, H. (2022). International Migration in the Framework of Neoclassical Macro Migration Theory: An Analysis of the Countries Receiving the Most Immigration. International Journal of Social Inquiry, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 1, 177–194. https://doi.org/10.37093/ijsi.1007970

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (41)

  1. Altunç, Ö. F., Ucan, O., and Akyıldız, A. (2017), Dış göçlerin Türkiye ekonomisinde işsizlik enflasyon ve ekonomik büyüme üzerine etkileri: Ekonometrik bir analiz (1985-2015). Researcher: Social Science Studies, 5(8), 197−212.
  2. Aydemir, A., & Borjas, G. J. (2007). Cross-country variation in the impact of international migration: Canada, Mexico, and the United States. Journal of The European Economic Association, 5(4), 663−708.
  3. Azam, M. (2015). The role of migrant workers remittances in fostering economic growth: The four Asian developing countries’ experiences. International Journal of Social Economics, 42(8), 690−705. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSE-11-2013-0255
  4. Baltagi, B. H. (2008). Forecasting with panel data. Journal of forecasting, 27(2), 153−173. https://doi.org/10.1002/for.1047
  5. Barbu, T. C., Mariana Vuță, M., Străchinaru, A. L. & Cioacă, S. I. (2017). An assessment of the immigration impact on the international housing price. Amfiteatru Economic Journal, 19(46), 682−695.
  6. Barcellos, S. H. (2010, March). The dynamics of immigration and wages (RAND Labor and Population Working Paper No. WR-755). RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/working_papers/WR755.html
  7. Borjas, G. J. (1989). Economic theory and international migration, International Migration Review, 23(3), 457–485.
  8. Boubtane, E., Dumont, J-C., & Rault, C. (2014). Immigration and economic growth in the OECD countries, 1986-2006 (IZA Discussion Papers No. 8681). Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA), Bonn.
  9. Bauer, T. K., & Zimmermann, K. F. (1999, July). Assessment of Possible Migration Pressure and its Labour Market Impact Following EU Enlargement to Central and Eastern Europe (IZA Research Report No.3). Institute of Labor Economics. https://docs.iza.org/report_pdfs/iza_report_03.pdf
  10. Bove, V., & Elia, L. (2017). Migration, diversity and economic growth. World Development, (89), 227−239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.08.012
  11. Card, D. (1989). The impact of the Mariel Boatlift on the Miami Labor Market (Working Paper No. 3069). National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  12. Castelli, F. (2018). Drivers of migration: Why do people move? Journal of Travel Medicine, 25(1), 1−7. https://doi.org/10.1093/jtm/tay040
  13. Cooray, A. (2012), The impact of migrant remittances on economic growth: Evidence from South Asia. Review of International Economics, 20(5), 985−998. https://doi.org/10.1111/roie.12008
  14. Damette, O., & Fromentin, V. (2013). Migration and labour markets in OECD countries: A panel cointegration approach. Applied Economics, 45(16), 2295−2304. https://doi.org/10.1080/000368 46.2012.661400
  15. Dolado, J., Goria, A., & Ichino, A. (1994), Immigration, human capital and growth in the host country. Journal of Population Economics (7), 193−215.
  16. Furlaretto, F., & Robstad, O. (2019). Immigration and the macroeconomy: Some new emprical evidence. Review of Economics Dynamics, (34), 1−19.
  17. Göv, A., & Dürü, Z. (2017). Göç ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: Seçilmiş beş ülke üzerine bir ekonometrik analiz. International Journal of Economic Studies, 3(4), 490−502.
  18. Harris, J. R., & Todaro, M. P. (1970). Migration, unemployment and development: A two-sector analysis. The American Economic Review, 60(1), 126−142
  19. Hicks, J. R. (1932). The theory of wages. Macmillan.
  20. Hurlin,C., & Dumitrescu, E. (2012). Testing for Granger Non-causality in Heterogeneous Panels. 2012. ffhalshs-00224434v2f
  21. Iqbal, K., Peng, H., & Hafeez, M-K. (2020). Analyzing the effect of ICT on migration and economic growth in Belt and Road (BRI) countries. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 21(1), 307−318
  22. Kritz, M. M., Lim, L. L., & Zlotnik, H. (Ed.). (1992). International migration systems: A global approach. Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press.
  23. Kum, H. & Bozkaya, Ş. (2020), İstihdam ve göç ilişkisi; Avustralya örneği (1984-2018), 8th International Conference on Culture and Civilization, August 21−22, Trabzon 2020.
  24. Kurekova, L. (2011, April). Theories of migration: Conceptual review and empirical testing in the context of the EU East-West flows. In interdisciplinary conference on migration. Economic change, social challenge (Vol. 4, pp. 6-9).
  25. Lewis, W. A. (1954), Economic devolopment with unlimited suplies of labour. The Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies, 22(2), 139−191.
  26. Massey, D. S., Arango, J., Hugo, G., Kouaouci, A., Pellegrino, A., & Taylor, J. E. (1993). Theories of international migration: A review and appraisal. Population and Development Review, 19(3), 431−466. https://doi.org/10.2307/2938462
  27. Meçik, O., & Koyuncu, T. (2020). Türkiye’de göç ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: Toda-Yamamoto nedensellik testi. İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 9(3), 2618−2635. https://doi.org/10.15869/itobiad.748770
  28. Menyah, K., Nazlıoğlu, Ş., & Wolde-Rufael, Y. (2014). Financial Development, Trade Openness and Economic Growth in African Countries: New Insights from a Panel Causality Approach. Economic Modelling, 37, ss. 386−394.
  29. Ottaviano, G. I. P., & Peri, G. (2006, August). Rethinking the effects of immigration on wages (Working Paper No. 12497). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w12497/w12497.pdf
  30. Peri, G. (2006). The effects of immigration on California’s labor market (Working Paper No. 06−37). University of California, Department of Economics. https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/31377
  31. Peri, G., & Sparber, C. (2008), Task specialization, immigration, and wages (Working Paper No. 09-1). University of California, Department of Economics.
  32. Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels (Working Paper No. 0435). University of Cambridge. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_ id=572504.
  33. Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), 50-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2007.05.010
  34. Porumbescu, A. (2018). Critical perspective on the neoclassical economics and labor migration theory. Revista Universitara de Sociologie, 14(2), 8−17. http://www.sociologiecraiova.ro/revista
  35. Prakash, N. (2009). The development impact of workers’ remittances in Fiji [Master Thesis, Massey University]. https://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/1281
  36. Ravenstein, E. G. (1885). The laws of migration. Journal of the Statistical Society of London, 48(2), 167−235. https://doi.org/10.2307/2979181
  37. Sevinç, H., Bozkurt, E., Künü, S., & Eroğlu Sevinç, D. (2016). Ekonomik büyüme ve göç ilişkisi: Gelişmekte olan ülkelere dayalı bir analiz. Internetional Conference on Eurosan Economics 2016 (ss. 398-403). SESSION 2C: Kalkınma II.
  38. Swamy, P.A.V.B. (1970), Efficient Inference in Random Coefficient Regression Model, Econometrica, 38, ss. 311−23.
  39. Todaro, M. P., & Smith, S. C. (2006). Economic development. Pearson Addison Wesley.
  40. Venturini, A., & Villosio, C. (2002, April), Are immigrants competing with natives in the Italian labour market? The employment effect (IZA Research Report No.3). Institute of Labor Economics. https://docs.iza.org/dp467.pdf
  41. Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels (Working Paper No. 0435). University of Cambridge. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_ id=572504.