ABSTRACT
Today's dominant position in the migration-development discourse–an open stance, 'it depends on the circumstances' – may appear neutral or uncommitted. Similarly, Charles Kindleberger et al. simultaneously regret that migration means the emigration of 'cream' labour, and welcome the export of an 'unemployed and underemployed' surplus population. True, development is necessary to stem migration, but it will not by itself greatly reduce migration movements. When analysts try to make sense of the contradictory evidence on the migration-development link, they come up with rather self-evident formulas, e.g. that development and emigration have 'coincided' when the basic ingredients for development predated the temporary emigration of labour. Migration policy thus moves into the security policy arena – the security of the North – in the guise of prevention. Without at least a preliminary understanding of the development—ecology links, any discussion of migration and development will lack an essential component.
