Neo-Classical Migration Theory

963 Words4 Pages
Unlike the neo-classical migration theory, the new economy of labour migration argues that the migration decision is not only for an individual but for his whole family, with the main reason for his migration not only to maximize income but also to minimize possible risks, insecurity or relative poverty. The Palace (2014, page 20) to illustrate labour migration shows an example of a rural family that does not have enough income to modernize and lives in an area where the insurance and credit market is insufficiently developed. For this reason, he sends one of his educated members to the city. He regularly sends money to the family, allowing him to raise his overall income and minimize risk (through diversification of resources). Another difference of this theory from the neoclassical theory of migration is the way of assessing poverty. The neoclassical model perceives absolute poverty, whereas the new economy of labour migration considers it to be relative. In this sense, there is a comparison of the living standards of individual households, where the difference between the families that have opted for labour migration and those who do not. The migration theory mentioned deals with the…show more content…
Under this theory, it is assumed that there is a continuous and endless accumulation of capital on the market that moves the whole system, including migration. Migration is viewed from this perspective as a consequence of capital accumulation and penetration of economic capitalist relationships into peripheral areas. Migration is linked to inequalities that exist between underdeveloped peripheral areas and developed core regions. For instance, the fact that rural households are forced to leave for larger cities or foreign ones, where they attract higher earnings they also loses their
Open Document