"The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) was a manifestation of widespread public concern over the volume of undocumented immigration into the United States. The principal innovation of this legislation-the provision to impose penalties on employers who knowingly hire undocumented immigrants-was a response to this concern. This effort at restriction was tempered in IRCA by other provisions permitting the legalization of two types of undocumented immigrantsthose who had resided in the United States since January 1, 1982; and what were called special agricultural workers (SAWs), persons who had worked in perishable crop agriculture for at least 90 days during specified periods from 1983 to 1986. Approximately 3.1 million persons sought legalization (what is popularly referred to as amnesty) under these two provisions. The breakdown was roughly 1.8 million under the regular program and 1.3 million as SAWs. Mexicans made up 75 percent of the combined legalization requests."

Manuel Orozco moves beyond the numbers to provide a uniquely comprehensive, historically informed overview and analysis of the complex role of migrant remittances in the global economy. How do patterns of migration and remittances differ across regions? What kinds of regulatory and institutional frameworks best support the contributions of remittances to local development? What has been the impact of remittances on migrants and their families? Drawing on empirical data from five continents and firmly grounded in theory, Orozco¿s work reflects the evolution of our understanding about the importance of migrant remittances and the policies that govern them.

"The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) was a manifestation of widespread public concern over the volume of undocumented immigration into the United States. The principal innovation of this legislation-the provision to impose penalties on employers who knowingly hire undocumented immigrants-was a response to this concern. This effort at restriction was tempered in IRCA by other provisions permitting the legalization of two types of undocumented immigrantsthose who had resided in the United States since January 1, 1982; and what were called special agricultural workers (SAWs), persons who had worked in perishable crop agriculture for at least 90 days during specified periods from 1983 to 1986. Approximately 3.1 million persons sought legalization (what is popularly referred to as amnesty) under these two provisions. The breakdown was roughly 1.8 million under the regular program and 1.3 million as SAWs. Mexicans made up 75 percent of the combined legalization requests."

International migration, the movement of people across international boundaries to improve economic opportunity, has enormous implications for growth and welfare in both origin and destination countries. An important benefit to developing countries is the receipt of remittances or transfers from income earned by overseas emigrants. Official data show that development countries' remittance receipts totaled 160 billion in 2004, more than twice the size of official aid. This year's edition of Global Economic Prospects focuses on remittances and migration. The bulk of the book covers remittances.

This publication presents the current situation with regard to the magnitude and economic impact of migrants’ remittances to their countries of origin.

During the 2008 financial crisis, the possible changes in remittance-sending behavior and potential avenues to alleviate a probable decline in remittance flows became concerns. This book brings together a wide array of studies from around the world focusing on the recent trends in remittance flows. The authors have gathered a select group of researchers from academic, practitioner and policy making bodies. Thus the book can be seen as a conversation between the different stakeholders involved in or affected by remittance flows globally. The book is a first-of-its-kind attempt to analyze the effects of an ongoing crisis on remittance flows globally. Data analyzed by the book reveals three trends. First, The more diversified the destinations and the labour markets for migrants the more resilient are the remittances sent by migrants. Second, the lower the barriers to labor mobility, the stronger the link between remittances and economic cycles in that corridor. And third, as remittances proved to be relatively resilient in comparison to private capital flows, many remittance-dependent countries became even more dependent on remittance inflows for meeting external financing needs. There are several reasons for migration and remittances to be relatively resilient to the crisis. First, remittances are sent by the stock (cumulative flows) of migrants, not only by the recent arrivals (in fact, recent arrivals often do not remit as regularly as they must establish themselves in their new homes). Second, contrary to expectations, return migration did not take place as expected even as the financial crisis reduced employment opportunities in the US and Europe. Third, in addition to the persistence of migrant stocks that lent persistence to remittance flows, existing migrants often absorbed income shocks and continued to send money home. Fourth, if some migrants did return or had the intention to return, they tended to take their savings back to their country of origin. Finally, exchange rate movements during the crisis caused unexpected changes in remittance behavior: as local currencies of many remittance recipient countries depreciated sharply against the US dollar, they produced a “sale” effect on remittance behavior of migrants in the US and other destination countries.

"South-South Migration and Remittances" reports on preliminary results from an ongoing effort to improve data on bilateral migration stocks. It sets out some working hypotheses on the determinants and socioeconomic implications of South-South migration. Contrary to popular perception that migration is mostly a South-North phenomenon, South-South migration is large. Available data from national censuses suggest that nearly half of the migrants from developing countries reside in other developing countries. Almost 80 percent of South-South migration takes place between countries with contiguous borders. Estimates of South-South remittances range from 9 to 30 percent of developing countries' remittance receipts in 2005. Although the impact of South-South migration on the income of migrants and natives is smaller than for South-North migration, small increases in income can have substantial welfare implications for the poor. The costs of South-South remittances are even higher than those of North-South remittances. These findings suggest that policymakers should pay attention to the complex challenges that developing countries face not only as countries of origin, but also as countries of destination.