Migration and development: Changing times for Diaspora organisations in Europe

While the developmental potentials of migration have been acknowledged in both policy and academic circles, the conditions under which diasporas (individuals, communities and associations/organisations) are able to maximise on their development potentials are increasingly changing fast. These changes relate to the overall policy shift in the aftermath of the recent economic crisis as well as the political shift in most countries in Europe where right leaning political parties have wrenched the power from the hands of the socialist oriented political parties. The recent change of government in the Netherlands is a case in point where previous governments have over the last decade had policies that have been favourable to migrant organisations and development corporation in general, but that has changed with the new coalition which is heavily neo-liberal and immigration phobic in orientation. These policy shifts in Europe in general are also exacerbated by the increasing immigration phobias and political populism being used by right wing groups to capture the disaffection and apathy in the majority of natives and communities whose problems are explained as externally generated especially by immigration. Migrant communities often mobilise resources from various sources using different strategies. The common strategies include mobilisation of financial resources through income for those in the labour market or those who have own businesses. Majority of the much talked about remittances are derived from these sources since they are personal decisions, often motivated by reasons for emigration from the countries of origin. Secondly migrant communities regardless of their backgrounds often set up associations, organisations and projects in the countries of residence largely aimed at addressing the needs of their community in the country of residence. Examples include welfare, integration, and psychological support. Those groups or individuals that have settled and relatively integrated often begin to focus on development issues in the countries of origin. In the process they begin to interact with institutions and development agencies in the countries of origin. Consequently these interactions open up avenues for access to various opportunities both in the country of residence and for the countries of origin. It is in this domain of migrant engagement that they endeavour to mobilise and organise in a more structured way in order to be able to engage with institutions and other actors. Although some of these are informal and very personal initiatives, migrant organisations have become the main vehicle for resource mobilisation for large-scale development input in both the countries of residence and origin. The main resources here are is always through the subsidies from governments and development agencies in the country of residence and in recent years from the EU. However, due to the economic crisis and in some cases politically correct measures meant to hoodwink the public of seriousness by governments in the form of cost cutting, migration as a policy area readily becomes the first choice for austerity measures. Immigration is an emotive policy area but also one,

which can be sacrificed easily since the target groups are always without full citizenship. Hence they are unable to change the course of politics at the local level or demand their rights on equal measure as the natives. Migration (immigration) in this case becomes a scapegoat for all governance ills, mismanagement and under performance in areas that touch on the livelihood of natives. Immigration in this case becomes the punching bag for cheap politicians or those natives who are allergic to globalisation. The contradiction here is that human mobility is treated with a lot of disdain, while financial and material mobility is never an issue. The kind of demagoguery displayed by most populist politicians blindfolds many people to appreciate the positive impact of globalisation, which they benefit from in private (cheap food, clothing, profits from abroad, cheap labour in dirty section of the economy) but deny in public. Migrants in most cases have been portrayed as the invading and all taking creatures which is going to deprive the natives of good life, safety in the neighbourhoods, the cause of reduced spending in essential services such as health, education, degeneration of quality services in the old people’s homes and the relocation of businesses for huge profit making and tax evasion in the developing countries. In this regard, political mileage in most countries in Europe today is possible to achieve through migrant bashing and voter recruitment based on xenophobic rhetoric. In the context of these developments, which are not new, since they re-occur periodically depending on which political party is in power, migrants need to re-think their strategies for resource mobilisation if their activities are to remain sustainable. Handouts alone will not help much under these circumstances. Moreover there is increased competition for the same resources or subsidies by development agencies and other groups within the countries of residence. The competition for these resources is also taking shape at the EU level, which implies more competition and jockeying for influence and multiple levels. Therefore migrant organisations need to begin to rethink their resource mobilisation strategies by building new alliances, developing effective networks and keeping track of changes in the development cooperation as well as policies of governments in the countries of origin and at the EU towards their regions and countries of origin. The point here is that subsidies for migrant organisations are also linked to policy choices that develop agencies and governments make towards their regions and countries. Hence a broad but also in-depth understanding of these dynamics is very important if migrant communities and organisations are to remain relevant in terms of issues they pursue and resources they are likely to mobilise for the realisation of these objectives. Lastly, migrant communities and their organisations must raise up to the challenge of being visible and taking their rightful place in the communities and countries their live in. It is clear that migrant existence has been made obvious by the rhetoric and cheap politics of right wing populist politicians and xenophobic reactions within the populace in the countries of residence. Such reactions are largely informed by failure to grasp the current socio-economic and political, dynamics and the added value of global mobility. Migrants are already playing a role in the development of the communities they live in through taxes they pay as employees or businesses, services and products they buy and cultural

enrichment they bring to these communities. While stereotypes may not change over night, migrants also have a responsibility to show case their worth by doing the right thing. Being on high alert psychologically around the clock can be mentally taxing, but normal behaviour, flexibility, interaction, getting into productive engagement, willingness to learn and adapt are essential ingredients to claiming their rightful place in the new society. Antony Otieno Ong’ayo Antony Otieno Ong’ayo is a Research Fellow, Migration and Development, International Development Studies, Utrecht University, African Migration and Development Policy Centre (AMADPOC)- Nairobi and European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM), Maastricht/Brussels