The UN global compact on migration contains this line :

Ensure the full and effective implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda by fostering and facilitating the positive effects of migration for the realization of all Sustainable Development Goals

I was wondering what impact migration had on sustainable development. It certainly has an effect on reducing inequality which is one of the sustainable development goals 1.

However, I am having difficulty understanding how migration induces growth in the receiving country and the emitting country.

2 Answers 2


Advantages of migration on sustainable development

There are reasons why migration contributes to sustainable development...

  1. Migration helps SDG 1 (No Poverty) by migrating remittance because when migrates come to another country for a better life, whether because of unemployment, climate change, political and sociological conflicts.., they'd want to support and promote their beloved ones and others who are stranded or couldn't make the journey to their dream country by supporting them with money and sending money abroad (migrate remittance), which would decline the poverty rate as their capable of following daily life with enough budget. Say I'm from Pakistan and I'd want to send money to my father, about 250$. If I change currency, 300$ would be around 49125 Pakistani Rupee which would be way enough for my father!
  2. Through migrate remittance sustainable SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) can be promoted in the agricultural sector as through migrating remittance people can purchase farming tools (tractors...) to hasten agricultural productivity and gain more harvest to decline Hunger and even boost an economy (SDG 8/12)
  3. Education is one of the most important, even most important privileges for developing a country and a society for transforming economies but also to overcome political, sociological, and ecological challenges of not only one nation but the entire intercontinental plane. Through migrating remittance SDG 4 (Quality Education) can be obtained as education can be financed as good as possible, so they can shape the destiny of their country. Through Education, people can contribute to fixing country problems and contribute to better standards of living, more digitalization, contribution to a country's GDP, more health service,...
  4. As through remittance comes Education! Through Education, one could cultivate medical doctors, who can contribute to fighting diseases like HIV or AIDS and can fight to bring more life expectance which would promote SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-Being), as diseases bring lots of challenges to poor countries and remittance can also make medicine more financeable.

Note: Even if immigrants are sent back to their original country, some will stay and won't go back. The skills some learnt in their migrated country, they can still use to contribute to their country of birth and make progress. The point is that one must also look at the bright side of things and the media must learn not to exaggerate when it comes to topics like migration but rather also look at advantages and ways to help, not spread hatred!

enter image description here


Migration is good for the receiving country because they get more people of working age to contribute to the economy, generally without having to foot the bill for raising and educating them. And it’s good for their countries of origin, if they’re developing countries, because the economic value of the migrants’ labour would be very much lower in that country, and migrants often send hard currency back home to their families — the money sent to developing countries in remittances from migrant workers is a lot more than the amount they receive in international aid.

This UN document is very relevant.

  • 2
    It is also bad for the country of origin if highly skilled, highly motivated workers leave ("brain drain"). This must be balanced against remittances and I suspect the net effect varies from country to country.
    – o.m.
    Oct 10, 2020 at 15:22
  • 1
    More workers is not a strictly good thing. Supply and demand applies to labor just as much as merchandise.
    – Ryan_L
    Oct 10, 2020 at 16:30
  • @Ryan_L No, it doesn’t, because merchandise doesn’t buy merchandise, but workers buy the products of labour and so increase demand as well as supply.
    – Mike Scott
    Oct 10, 2020 at 16:59
  • 1
    @MikeScott Laborers make more products than they consume.
    – Ryan_L
    Oct 10, 2020 at 17:04
  • 4
    Immigrants aren't automatically a boon to their host country. It depends on their skills, capacity to integrate (which comes both from the immigrants' willingness and ability to do so and the host country's openness) and employability. Most of the time, well-managed, immigration can be a boon. But there are plenty of cases in Europe where it demonstrably isn't, especially when you get persistent 2nd and 3rd generation underclasses due to host country prejudices. Oct 10, 2020 at 19:46

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .