As European leadership prepares for the sixteenth EU-India Summit, both sides must reckon with trade-offs in order to secure a mutually beneficial Free Trade Agreement.
Dinakar Peri
{
"authors": [],
"type": "pressRelease",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [],
"topics": [
"Economy",
"Trade"
]
}REQUIRED IMAGE
Robert E. B. Lucas finds in a new report that the net impact of migration is positive for the migrants and high-income countries, and more gains are feasible. At the same time, he finds more ambiguous effects on developing countries, which may suffer from growing brain-drain; only temporary migration among southern hemisphere countries seemed to provide clear benefits.
WASHINGTON, Oct 14—As globalization spread dramatically over the last twenty years, migration expanded less rapidly than either trade or foreign investment. Yet migration remains contentious, often being blamed for income stagnation, even as some economists praise it as the fastest route to raising world incomes. The reality is more limited and nuanced.
Money sent by migrants to their home countries can promote rapid growth in developing regions, and the withdrawal of laborers can induce higher wages or less underemployment for those left behind. However, the flow of money can dry up quickly and unexpectedly, as has happened recently in Mexico.
Robert E. B. Lucas finds in a new report that the net impact of migration is positive for the migrants and high-income countries, and more gains are feasible. At the same time, he finds more ambiguous effects on developing countries, which may suffer from growing brain-drain; only temporary migration among southern hemisphere countries seemed to provide clear benefits.
Key findings:
Lucas concludes:
“The net potential gains to migrants entering the industrialized countries are extremely high. Yet the impacts of any additional migrations on the incomes of those left at home and of natives in the host countries are more ambiguous. While migrants are clearly the big winners, others may even lose.”
###

As European leadership prepares for the sixteenth EU-India Summit, both sides must reckon with trade-offs in order to secure a mutually beneficial Free Trade Agreement.
Dinakar Peri
In Donald Trump’s second term in office, the transatlantic relationship that helped define the postwar European project and global order appears broken. Is it time for Brussels to chart its own path?
Nathalie Tocci, Jan Techau
Beset by an increasingly hostile United States, internal divisions, and the threat of Russian aggression, the EU finds itself in a make-or-break moment. U.S. President Donald Trump calls it a decaying group of nations headed by weak leaders. Is Europe able to prove him wrong?
Thomas de Waal
Hard-line approaches to asylum policy are increasingly common, with crackdowns proposed even by parties that traditionally hold liberal views on migration. Does this shift represent a break with Europe’s fundamental values?
Thomas de Waal
Despite the strategic importance of relations between the EU and the African Union, deep divisions remain between the blocs. At their upcoming summit, both partners should strive to build a mutually beneficial cooperation.
Marta Martinelli