DOES MIGRANT CONTRIBUTE TO SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN BRAZIL

The close link between migration and social development has been acknowledged for some time. However, recently, there has been a dramatic shift where there has been a keen concern between social development and migration in different countries (Langford, 2010: 89). As a result, it was realized that diaspora and migrant remittance play a great role in promoting the development of countries. Traditionally, migration was viewed as a challenge and it was associated with negative development implications. On the contrary, today, there has been a growing recognition that basically, migrants and migration promote a nation’s social development. One of the principal factors that is associated with this change of thought is the increasing acknowledgement of the significance of remittances (Langford, 2010: 87).

Brazil is identified as the 5^th largest country globally as far as population and area are concerned. Primarily, the country is acknowledged as Europe’s former immigration country and an attractive destination for holidays. Between the 2^nd World War and the 1^st 16^th century’s Portuguese settlement, more than 4 million individuals migrated to this country and a majority of them were Europeans (Barrientos & Hulme, 2008). It is worth noting that the situation reversed in the 1980s. to date, approximately 3 million Brazilians have already left their country. Initially, the primary destination was the United States of America (Hanlon, 2004: 380). However, increasingly, the Brazilians are also aiming for Japan and Europe. Owing to the fact that Brazil has enjoyed a stabilized economic situation for the previous one year, it is acknowledged as a rewarding refugees’ and migrant workers’ destination. A majority of the immigration in Brazil is irregular. Regardless of the fact that Brazil is the 9th largest national economy, it is marked by larger social inequality compared to any other country universally (Gentilini, 2009: 160).

Remittances constitute 2.97 percent of the GDP (ODI 2007). In absolute terms, Brazil is a vital remittance-receiving nation. In 2007, remittance inflows were more than 2.87 billion USD. The outflows were less; 0.04 percent of the GDP (Gentilini, 2009: 160). A majority of the migrants move to Paraguay, Japan, and US. Money obtained from remittances is used for education, health, consumption, commercial investment, savings, and housing (Clemens, Kenny & Moss, 2007: 740). Notably, remittances have been very crucial in reducing poverty and improving health and education.

In Brazil, labor migration is not viewed as a response to absolute poverty and destitution but a livelihood strategy that social groups and households pursue. Usually, this is a response to relative deprivation and is aimed at increasing and securing income, spreading livelihood risks, and acquiring investment capital. Remittances among the diaspora and migrants in Brazil are considered a central element of the strategies used by households in overcoming local development constraints (Hulme, 2010: 22). To some extent, the extent to which remittances contribute to social development in Brazil depends on the particular circumstances under which households were forced to migrate. In fact, these circumstances are attributable for the returns, selectivity, and destination to migration.

In Brazil, remittances are primarily viewed as a strategy for enhancing livelihood security via income diversification. This is attributable to the fact that welfare gains are relatively minute (Hulme, 2010: 22). Depending on the country of migration, households accumulate various amounts of wealth. Research identifies two motives for remitting; self-interest so as to secure inheritance as well as invest in assets at home with the expectation of returns (Hulme, 2010: 20). Through investing in assets at home, migrants are able to contribute to social development. In this regard, remittances are a constituent of the risk diversification strategy for households as well as an investment capital source that could be utilized for education entrepreneurial activities, and facilitating other household members’ migration (Minujin & Delamonica, 2003: 400).

In the discussion above, it can be concluded that a mixture of familial and individualistic motives and this determines the size and likelihood of remittances. Increase in income results to higher proportion and propensity of the labor earnings sent back home for self- and family-provided insurance. Usually, negative income shocks are minimal for households where they do not receive remittances regularly (Clemens, Kenny & Moss, 2007: 740). More remittances is sent in cases where families are experiencing declined fortunes. Therefore, people who receive remittances regularly are better guarded from the fluctuations of exchange-rate and are in a better position to assist relatives in the rural areas during crisis times (Adams, 2003). Therefore, it can be said that in Brazil, remittances act as income insurance and in addition, protect individuals from income shocks that result from climate vagaries, political conflicts, and economic downturns (Clemens, Kenny & Moss, 2007: 740). Moreover, the remittance from the diaspora and migrants contribute positively to general living conditions, health, food, nutrition, and household welfare in regions and places of origin. A majority of the household in Brazil rely on remittances entirely. To many of these households, there is doubled income as opposed to households that do not receive remittances (Barrientos & Hulme, 2008). In Brazil, remittances contribute forty three percent of the recipient’s annual income (ODI 2007).

In addition to the social development that households and individuals reap from remittances, there are also benefits at the national level (Adams & Page, 2005: 1650). The Brazilian government considers remittance as a relatively stable and significant external finance source, which often contribute critically to social insurance role particularly during times of political and economic crisis (Gore, 2000: 800). It is acknowledged that remittances are less pro-cyclical and less volatile. Therefore, they are a more reliable foreign currency source as opposed to other capital flows including development aid and direct investment (Barnes & Brown, 2011: 170).

It is worth pointing out that remittances are mainly sent through informal channels and, thus, the actual significance of remittance is actually larger than the official acknowledged figures (Yates, Cooper & Holland, 2006). Remittances largely contribute to Brazil’s survival and livelihood as opposed to humanitarian and development aid put together. They cater for a larger portion of trade deficits, improve the external borrowing creditworthiness, and permit access to lower borrowing costs and capital (Conway & Norton, 2002: 538).

A majority of the Brazilian migrants have created a continuous economic and social interaction with the communities of origin. Thereby, they play special roles as change agents and more particularly in regard to social development (Bendixen & Onge, 2005). International development agencies, financial institutions, and the Brazilian government cannot dare ignore the ever-escalating impact of migrants’ financial flows on the social and economic development (Barrientos & Hulme, 2009: 450).

Many poor households in the rural areas depend on remittances as the sole source of their food (Stiglitz, 2010). Therefore, they constitute a highly efficient strategy through which to face adversities including instable and inherent risks of farming activities as well as minimal agricultural productivity. Remittances are also viewed as insurance for countering or improving crisis situations. This in turn limits the negative consequences on food security (Johnson & Krishnamurthy, 2010: 650). It has been established that in Brazil, remittances and migration are regarded as a vital insurance against risky circumstances for the vulnerable, destitute households. For instance, people from poor rural households in Brazil rely on remittances to overcome and survive hardships that result from severe famine, draught, and floods (Adams, 2003). Moreover, they play a huge role in mitigating the impacts that are experienced following high inflation periods (Pattenden, 2011: 470).

Migration brings positive results on development at the national, regional, and local level. In this regard, migration is a household strategy where social and economic links between a migrant and his household are upheld. There are immense benefits that arise from resource transfer to rural areas. There is also transmission and generation of innovative and new ideas and skills as people seek to utilize the remittance sent to them (ODI 2007). Basically, collective and individual remittances contribute hugely to the well-being and subsistence of rural families. In many areas, migrants’ income is normally invested in non-farm activities and farms as well as increased consumption (Gore, 2000: 800). This is vital in that it creates employment both indirectly and directly (Slater, 2004).

The Brazilian government, having realized the immense benefits associated with remittances, has laid down policies aimed at increasing the financial, economic, and social links between the migrants and their places of origin (Onis & Senses, 2005: 270). The impacts remittances and migration has on rural employment and agriculture depends directly on the trends of investments, expenditure, and labor allocation of the migrant households (Onis & Senses, 2005: 270). Indirectly, it depends on the remittances’ multiplier effects and transformations in the services, goods, and labor markets.

One of the areas where remittances have a remarkable impact is the agricultural sector. The impact is highly contextual and mixed. Remittances and migration in Brazil foster agricultural production and household farm investment (Munro, 2008). Even in cases where productive adults and youths who can work in farms have migrated, remittances are used to pay employed labor in addition to other farm inputs (Stiglitz, 2010). People from poor households in the rural areas also depend on remittances to send children to school, clothe, and seek health care services. Some services such as family planning may be expensive for poor rural households but with remittances, their accessibility is easy. People also use remittances to travel to other places to visit friends and families. This plays a great role in promoting cohesiveness and unity (Rodrik, 2006: 25). In addition, there is transfer of knowledge and skills, which promotes social development.

Migration is a vital win-win pro-development chance for both the destination and origin countries. There is a positive link between poverty reduction, development, and remittances (Stiglitz, 2010). If harnessed appropriately, remittances have a multiplier impact on social and economic development. Therefore, the Brazilian government should enact proactive policy measures so as to induce the productive and effective utilization of remittances as well as capitalize maximally on diaspora networks and enhance development (Standing, 2007: 520).

In a nut shell, remittances and migration are basically a constituent of the co-insurance and risk-spreading livelihood strategies that families and households in Brazil pursue. On the same note, remittances and migration also possess the potential of improving well-being, minimizing poverty indirectly and directly, and stimulating economic growth, while their repercussions on inequality are greatly ambiguous (Slater, 2004). Notwithstanding the numerous blessings that remittances and migration offer communities, households, and individuals, they are no panacea through which more social development challenges can be solved. If Brazil fails to implement general social reform appropriately, remittances and migration will barely contribute to sustainable development nationally (Gore, 2000: 800). One principal rule as far as remittances and migration are concerned is that they cannot be blamed for absence of development and neither can they be anticipated to awaken takeoff development in investment environments that are generally unattractive (Munro, 2008). In this regard, there is a need for Brazil to come up with policies that are aimed at escalating people’s welfare, improving public services including education and health, improving social security, and creating functioning markets (Ratha, 2005). This will help in promoting the contribution made by remittances and migration in making social development.

References

Adams Jr, RH & Page, J 2005, ‘Do international migration and remittances reduce poverty in developing countries?’ World Development, vol. 33 iss. 10, pp. 1645-1669.

Adams, R 2003, ‘International migration, remittances, and the brain drain,’ Policy Research Working Paper, 3069.

Barnes, A & Brown, WG 2011, ‘The Idea of Partnership within the Millennium Development Goals:Context, Instrumentality, and the Normative Demands of Partnership, Third World Quarterly,’ Third World Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 1, 2011, pp. 165–180.

Barrientos, A & Hulme, D 2008, Social Protection for the Poor and Poorest: Concepts, Policies and Politics, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.

Barrientos, A & Hulme, D 2009, ‘Social Protection for the Poor and Poorest in Developing Countries: Reflections on a Quiet Revolution,’ Oxford Development Studies, vol. 37 iss. 4: pp. 439-456.

Bendixen, S & Onge, ES 2005, ‘Remittances from the United States and Japan to Latin America: An in-depth look using public opinion research,’ Beyond small change: Making migrant remittances count, pp. 41.

Clemens, M, Kenny, C & Moss, T 2007 ‘The Trouble with the MDGs: Confronting Expectations of Aid and Development Success,’ World Development vol. 35 iss. 5: pp.735-51.

Conway, T & Norton, A 2002, ‘Nets, Ropes, Ladders and Trampolines: The place of Social Protection within Current Debates on Poverty Reduction,’ Development Policy Review vol. 20 iss. 5: pp. 533-540.

Gentilini, U 2009, ‘Social Protection in the ‘Real World’: Issues, Models and Challenges,’ Development Policy Review, vol. 27 iss. 2: pp. 147-166.

Gore, C 2000, ‘The Rise and Fall of the Washington Consensus as a Paradigm for Developing Countries,’ World Development, Vol. 28, No. 5, pp.789 –804.

Hanlon, J 2004, ‘Is it Possible to Just Give Money to the Poor?’ Development and Change vol. 35 iss. 2: pp. 375-383.

Hulme, D 2010, ‘Lessons from the Making of the MDGs: Human Development Meets Results based Management in an Unfair World,’ IDS Bulletin vol. 41 iss. 1: pp. 15–25.

Johnson, A & Krishnamurthy, K 2010, ‘Dealing with displacement: Can “social protection” facilitate long-term adaptation to climate change?,’ Global Environmental Change, vol. 20: pp. 648-55.

Langford, M 2010, ‘A Poverty of Rights: Six Ways to Fix the MDGs’, IDS Bulletin vol. 41 iss. 1: pp. 83–91.

Minujin, A & Delamonica, E 2003, ‘Mind the Gap! Widening Child Mortality Disparities’, Journal of Human Development vol. 4 iss. 3: pp. 396–418.

Munro, LT 2008, Risks, Rights and Needs: Compatible or contradictory Bases for Social Protection, In A. Barrientos and D. Hulme (eds.), Social Protection for the Poor and Poorest: Concepts, Policies and Politics, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.

ODI 2007, Linking social protection and productive sectors, ODI Briefing Paper, October 2007, London: Overseas Development Institute, available at www.odi.org.uk

Onis, Z & Senses, F 2005, ‘Rethinking the emergence post-Washington consensus,’ Development change, vol. 36 iss. 2, pp. 263-290.

Pattenden, J 2011, ‘Social Protection and Class Relations: Evidence from Scheduled Caste Women’s Associations in Rural South India,’ Development and Change, vol. 42 iss. 2: pp. 469–498.

Ratha, D 2005, ‘Leveraging remittances for international capital market access,’ World Bank.

Rodrik, D 2006, ‘Goodbye Washington Consensus, Hello Washington Confusion?’ Paper prepared for the Journal of Economic Literature. Harvard University, January, pp. 1- 29.

Slater, R 2004, Implications of HIV/AIDS for Social Protection, Overseas Development Institute, London.

Standing, G 2007, ‘Social Protection,’ Development in Practice, vol. 17 iss. 4: pp. 511-522.

The Impact of Economic crisis on the poor: See Stiglitz, J (2010) The global crisis, social protection and jobs, International Labour Review, Vol. 148 (2009), No. 1–2- available at http://www.ilo.org/public/english/revue/download/pdf/s1_stiglitz2009_1_2.pdf

Yates, J, Cooper, R & Holland, J 2006, ‘Social protection and health: experiences in Uganda,’ Development Policy Review, vol. 24 iss. 3: pp. 339-356.