Photo by J. Stephen Conn/Flickr (Creative Commons)In the last week or so, much of the talk regarding illegal immigration from Mexico has turned to how more would-be migrants are staying home. Last week, a widely-circulated New York Times story profiled a family in the longtime migrant-sending state of Jalisco, pointing to economic and educational improvements there as one of the reasons why those who would lave left a decade ago may now be opting to skip the trip north.
This week, a new study from the RAND Corporation addressed diminished cross-border movement in both directions, with fewer migrants heading north, though fewer of those who are already in the United States are returning south in light of the economic recession.
The Times story generated some skepticism from longtime Mexico watchers, who noted that the improvements described aren’t universal in all Mexican states. But it did generate a good conversation about what is needed in Mexico in order to level the playing field, neutralize the appeal of illegal immigration and make for better trading partners.
Arturo Carmona, executive director of the Consejo de Federaciones Mexicanas en Norteamérica, or COFEM, is among those closest to what’s happening in migrant sending towns. COFEM is a Los Angeles-based umbrella group of 312 Mexican hometown associations composed of immigrants and their families, whose mission it is to raise money for infrastructure and quality-of-life improvement projects. One of their goals is economic sustainability for these hometowns, with the idea of making them less dependent on migrant remittances.
M-A: The New York Times story connected slowed migration to a series of educational, economic and other improvements in Mexico. How realistic do you think this picture is?
Carmona: I think that it the article offered an important perspective, but I think we need to be cautious abut being over-optimistic. The reality is that there is still much to do in Mexico. Large sectors of the population remain in deep poverty, particularly in many areas that are beginning to create migratory patterns towards the U.S. I think that states like Jalisco and Zacatecas have had migratory patterns for so many years, so many generations, that you are starting to see more of a lull.
But in many regions where poverty is much harsher, you are beginning to see a cultivation of migration. More work needs to be done at the federal level in the U.S. to promote sustainable economic development that will allow the country to grow more rapidly. U.S. investment in Mexico will only help the U.S. in the long run in further strengthening our trade and commerce. We are starting to see some sings of that, but we are far from the goal of economic development that Mexico requires to compete at a level playing field.
M-A: Which are the non-traditional sending areas from where new migrants have been coming?
Carmona: Chiapas, Oaxaca, Puebla, some of states within the Sierra Mixteca, and other states like Hidalgo and Yucatan. You’re seeing migration to places that have not had migration before, like to New York or the South. You may not see them in L.A.,where they have old migratory patterns. But I think there needs to be a holistic perspective as we analyze this article, because under the economic growth that is being said in certain regions, there remains an economic crisis and very high levels of severe poverty in others. Mexico’s elite continue to control a disproportionate portion of the nation’s wealth and over a third of the population remains in severe poverty. There is also a war on drugs in Mexico that has affected migrants, not only from Central America but from the southern states.
