Search results

The purpose of this research was to conduct a comparison of the push and pull factors affecting migration between Poland and Romania. The study aimed to find out which among the push and pull factors have a greater effect overall and individually on the migration activities. The study was conducted using primary data collected from migrants in both countries using a structured questionnaire. There were data from 298 and 288 surveys for Poland and Romania, respectively. The push and pull migration framework was applied to guide the study. The model suitability was confirmed satisfactory on validity, reliability and factor analysis. The hypothesis was analyzed and evaluated using multiple regression analysis. The findings of the study indicated that pull factors have a greater influence on migration in these two countries as compared to the push factors. Five out of six (economic, political and social in Poland and economic and political in Romania) pull factors were found significant as compared to two (social in Poland and in Romania) out of six push factors. Pull economic factors were significant determinants of migration in all the countries. Pull political factors were found to have the highest effect in both countries, because they influenced migrants in Romania. Economic factors are the major factors that influence migration, including the hope of finding better jobs and better life in the foreign countries, and these factors should be addressed in the effort to reduce migration. In addition, political issues such as unfair legal system, violent conflicts, underdevelopment, poverty, political instability and corruption should be addressed to control the issue of migration.

The purpose of this research was to conduct a comparison of the push and pull factors affecting migration between Poland and Romania. The study aimed to find out which among the push and pull factors have a greater effect overall and individually on the migration activities. The study was conducted using primary data collected from migrants in both countries using a structured questionnaire. There were data from 298 and 288 surveys for Poland and Romania, respectively. The push and pull migration framework was applied to guide the study. The model suitability was confirmed satisfactory on validity, reliability and factor analysis. The hypothesis was analyzed and evaluated using multiple regression analysis. The findings of the study indicated that pull factors have a greater influence on migration in these two countries as compared to the push factors. Five out of six (economic, political and social in Poland and economic and political in Romania) pull factors were found significant as compared to two (social in Poland and in Romania) out of six push factors. Pull economic factors were significant determinants of migration in all the countries. Pull political factors were found to have the highest effect in both countries, because they influenced migrants in Romania. Economic factors are the major factors that influence migration, including the hope of finding better jobs and better life in the foreign countries, and these factors should be addressed in the effort to reduce migration. In addition, political issues such as unfair legal system, violent conflicts, underdevelopment, poverty, political instability and corruption should be addressed to control the issue of migration.

Peoples of the Caribbean in general, and Jamaicans in particular, have always been a migratory people. However, over the last 30 years, the emigration rates have increased substantially, with alarming rates in particular, of highly skilled individuals. There are four major factors which emerged in this study and influence this phenomenon: 1. Crime, violence, lawlessness and general societal indiscipline, 2. Occupation and skill mismatch, 3. Lack of economic opportunities, and 4. Lack of social opportunities. This study suggests that both the direct and indirect effects of crime in general and violent crimes in particular, combined with suitable employment for the migrant's skill set, have forced some members of Jamaica's professional class to gravitate towards First World countries, taking their skill set which their home country has financed. This places their host country in an advantageous position as these skills contribute to that country's development and growth. In return, such countries offer migrants secure economic (e.g., skill-career match and ability to afford their desired lifestyle) and social opportunities (e.g., desired health care) currently unavailable in the country of origin.

This article investigates Lithuanian "brain drain"causes: push and pull factors and its manifestation betweendifferent migrant groups. Traditionally internationallabour migration is interpreted as a response tothe existing gaps in wage levels between countries. Butthe causes of migration should not be simplified to economic(usually wage/income) conditions. Even if economicfactors dominate in most countries migratoryprocesses, migration flows of each country are still influencedby the specific conditions or changes in localeconomy as well as country's historical perspective.Therefore migration determinants might be different inseparate countries, especially when talking about highlyskilledmigration. Perception of dominating factors in theLithuania's highly-skilled migration is needed to obtainan objective evaluation of the "brain drain" problem andto solve it in proper ways.Empirical research gives us a general picture of aLithuanian highly-skilled migrant as being a young personwith higher skills who treats his or her socioeconomicstatus at rather satisfactory level before departureand is more inspired by pull effects.Factor analysis reveals us four main factors of interrelatedvariables in Lithuania's highly-skilled migration:professional attraction in foreign countries, socioeconomicconditions having mostly push effects, stateacademic system and collaboration manifesting itselfboth in push and pull effects, and state macroeconomicconditions and governmental policy showing mostly migrants'discontent with the general situation of Lithuania.Other factors such as ecological conditions and familyreunification play much lesser role in this phenomenonof brain drain.The article consist of two parts: first part deals withthe concept of "brain drain" and its recent tendencies, inthe second part Lithuanian brain drain causes: push andpull factors and their manifestation between different migrantgroups are investigated.

Objectives. Drawing specifically on the German case, I argue that individuals' motivations for immigration, or so‐called push‐pull factors, have a lasting impact beyond the decision to immigrate and, in fact, profoundly influence immigrants' political integration in the host country. Specifically, economic push‐pull factors are likely to impede immigrants' political integration, whereas political push‐pull factors lead immigrants to remain more interested and engaged in politics while abroad.Methods. I test these hypotheses using a combination of qualitative interviews conducted in 2002 with first‐generation Turkish immigrants living in Berlin, and quantitative survey data from the 1998 German Socio‐Economic Panel (GSOEP).Results. Results from both analyses lend considerable support to these assertions.Conclusions. The positive findings suggest that factors unique to the immigrant experience contribute to a fundamentally different understanding of immigrants' political integration from that of natives.

Objectives: Drawing specifically on the German case, I argue that individuals' motivations for immigration, or so-called push-pull factors, have a lasting impact beyond the decision to immigrate and, in fact, profoundly influence immigrants' political integration in the host country. Specifically, economic push-pull factors are likely to impede immigrants' political integration, whereas political push-pull factors lead immigrants to remain more interested and engaged in politics while abroad. Methods: I test these hypotheses using a combination of qualitative interviews conducted in 2002 with first-generation Turkish immigrants living in Berlin, and quantitative survey data from the 1998 German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). Results: Results from both analyses lend considerable support to these assertions. Conclusions: The positive findings suggest that factors unique to the immigrant experience contribute to a fundamentally different understanding of immigrants' political integration from that of natives. Tables, References. Adapted from the source document.

Objectives: Drawing specifically on the German case, I argue that individuals' motivations for immigration, or so-called push-pull factors, have a lasting impact beyond the decision to immigrate and, in fact, profoundly influence immigrants' political integration in the host country. Specifically, economic push-pull factors are likely to impede immigrants' political integration, whereas political push-pull factors lead immigrants to remain more interested and engaged in politics while abroad. Methods: I test these hypotheses using a combination of qualitative interviews conducted in 2002 with first-generation Turkish immigrants living in Berlin, and quantitative survey data from the 1998 German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). Results: Results from both analyses lend considerable support to these assertions. Conclusions: The positive findings suggest that factors unique to the immigrant experience contribute to a fundamentally different understanding of immigrants' political integration from that of natives. Tables, References. Adapted from the source document.

This article overviews the push/pull factors of citizens' participation in Nigerian politics. Citizens' participation in state politics is both integral and an indispensable part of every political system and development. However, it is determined by numerous factors which are universal, but relative in terms of contexts. Such a participation is affected by many factors in Nigeria. The study uses secondary sources to collect data and perform qualitative analysis. The study is timely and significant in view of the critical roles where participation plays in shaping and influencing Nigerian politics, especially at the current moment when it is being characterized by apathy and participation on two ends. It is concentrated on an atmosphere of push and pull forces, negative and positive issues and developments, this environment is manipulated by elites/politicians. This needs a change for the better, to inculcate hope, overcome despair, anxiety as well as increased ethno-religious and electoral tensions.