<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<title>THE SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF AFRICAN MIGRANTS IN SELECTED  GLOBAL NORTH DESTINATIONS</title>
<link href="http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/1182" rel="alternate"/>
<subtitle/>
<id>http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/1182</id>
<updated>2026-04-15T10:35:02Z</updated>
<dc:date>2026-04-15T10:35:02Z</dc:date>
<entry>
<title>THE SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF AFRICAN MIGRANTS IN SELECTED  GLOBAL NORTH DESTINATIONS</title>
<link href="http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/1183" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>OLARINDE, OMOLOLA SMARIA</name>
</author>
<id>http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/1183</id>
<updated>2022-02-16T09:50:58Z</updated>
<published>2021-03-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">THE SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF AFRICAN MIGRANTS IN SELECTED  GLOBAL NORTH DESTINATIONS
OLARINDE, OMOLOLA SMARIA
The uneven distribution of international migrants raises concerns, for countries with high migrant &#13;
inflows, most of which are in the global north, about the efficient allocation of labour according &#13;
to market demand and supply. The extant literature on socio-economic conditions and networks &#13;
as major determinants of African migration patterns had not accounted for the effect of imperfect &#13;
markets on the destination choices of African migrants. The literature on the role of productive &#13;
markets on migrant distribution has largely not been extended to explain African migration &#13;
patterns. This study was therefore designed to estimate the effects of destination markets &#13;
characterised by productivity, and migration costs on African migrants’ distribution in the global &#13;
north, for the decades 1990 to 2010, and 2017. &#13;
The study was rooted in the New Economic Geography Theory. A Linear Gravity Model was &#13;
estimated to capture the effects of destination country markets (measured by the wage potential; &#13;
employment disaggregated by agriculture, industry and service sectors; size of destination &#13;
economy; and networks) and migration costs (defined as distance and restrictive policy) on the &#13;
volume of migration. A Helpman Agglomeration Model was also estimated to determine the &#13;
cumulative effects of these destination country factors on migration. Emigration from 10 &#13;
countries, which do not have a significant history of internal conflict from Africa, comprising &#13;
Egypt, Morocco, Botswana, South Africa, Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya, Malawi, Mauritius and &#13;
Seychelles were considered. Five previously common destinations- Canada, France, Germany, &#13;
United Kingdom, United States, and five emerging ones: Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden &#13;
and Switzerland, were covered on account of data availability. The mixed effects technique was &#13;
deployed to estimate the model based on country specific conditions. Data were collected from &#13;
World Bank Bilateral Migrant Stock, the Determinants of International Migration and &#13;
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Statistical databases. Data were &#13;
validated at α≤0.05. &#13;
The size of destination countries positively increased migration between 6.0% and 15.0% &#13;
indicating that larger markets were attractive to African migrants. Increased wage opportunities &#13;
raised migration from Ghana 4.0% (2.7) and Botswana 7.0% (2.2). Geographical distance &#13;
reduced migration from Morocco 3.0% (-3.5), Kenya 9.0% (-7.8), Malawi 9.0% (-2.8), Mauritius &#13;
7.0% (-3.4) and Seychelles 3.0% (-2.4). The influence of networks increased migrant distribution &#13;
in most cases by less than 1.0% and at a higher magnitude for South Africa 7.0% (4.29) and &#13;
Seychelles 6.0% (2.75). Restrictive destination country policy interventions deterred migration &#13;
from Seychelles (-2.3) and Ghana (-2.8) at 3.0% each. The agglomeration of African migrants &#13;
was responsive to employment in the service sector at a magnitude of between 1.0% and 7.0%,&#13;
and to the wage potential at 4.0% in the cases of Egypt (5.7) and Ghana (2.0). The market &#13;
potential between 3.0% and 8.0% was not strong enough to indicate core-periphery &#13;
redistributions. &#13;
African migrants moved to destinations of larger geographical size, with employment &#13;
opportunities, influenced by networks, but were deterred by distance, and, in exceptional cases, &#13;
by restrictive policy. African countries could cooperate with destination economies to organise &#13;
migrant distribution by labour market demand and supply, and to reduce migration costs
</summary>
<dc:date>2021-03-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
</feed>
