Is it time to take free movement of people in Southern Africa seriously?

Neo-liberal scholars and experts of regional integration highlight the alleged virtues of common markets, where capital and goods flow freely within economically integrated regions. Yet, they tend to forget that the other key factor of production, labour, is arguably even more important in supporting the creation of sustainable regional economic communities (RECs). Indeed, labour mobility may allow for cultural and social exchanges (which are not produced by mere flows of capital) and further support the diversification of national economies. For example, a country with a surplus of good doctors can assist another in which healthcare systems are inefficient, in exchange for side payments or incoming flows of labour in other areas. German doctors, for instance often migrate to Scandinavian countries, which are in need of qualified health professionals and offer better pays. Similarly, unemployed engineers, architects and builders move to Germany from other countries in the region, as the former seeks this type of qualifications. Labour mobility also helps regulate migration flows, thus guaranteeing the rights of migrants and the needs of both receiving economies and sending countries. Most of the negative side effects of labour migration, which include downward impacts on wages and working conditions in receiving countries, tensions between domestic and foreign workers and brain drain in the sending countries, can be limited by a governance framework allowing for a multilateral approach to regional development as opposed to unilateral approaches sharpening regional inequalities.

Southern Africa needs a radically different approach to migration management, given the imbalances of the past and the debatable outcomes of current policies, with a view to strengthening sustainable development and regional cohesion. Unfortunately, the issue of migration is often talked about in terms that elicit negative reactions, xenophobic fears and security concerns. At the SADC level, a draft protocol on free movement was prepared in the mid-1990s, but never materialized. It was then superseded by a protocol on ‘facilitation of movement,’ which is not yet operational because of ratification issues among member states. As recent research has shown, no formal regional labour migration governance system currently exists within SADC, although there is a South African unilateral approach that translates into bilateral agreements with most countries in the region. By contrast, other African regions such as ECOWAS, for instance, enforced an ambitious protocol on free movement, residence and establishment as early as 1980 that was then fully implemented, in three phases, by 1995. In addition, a policy paper on migration – the ECOWAS Common Approach on Migration – indicates further commitment and political will to achieving regional free movement. Currently, ECOWAS grants citizens with valid travel documents and international health certificates the right to entry, residence and establishment in any other country of the region. Citizens can choose from one of three documents when travelling in ECOWAS: the Travel Certificate, the common passport or the national identity cards. In East Africa, regional cooperation has resulted in a common East African passport and freely exchangeable currencies throughout the East African Community (EAC). EAC States also have a general consensus to ensure EAC citizens enjoy the rights of establishment and residence.

Outside of Africa, regional migration policies are also progressing. In Southeast Asia, the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) is preparing to launch a managed migration regime in 2015. ASEAN will allow free movement for skilled labour. Traders, professionals and specialists in accounting, architecture, nursing, medicine, dentistry and natural resources, among others, will participate in a pilot free regional labour market. Migrant workers will be issued with visas and employment passes. In South America, the organization UNASUR (which represents members of both Mercosur and the Andean Community) has also launched a common passport for all citizens of the member states.

The European Union (EU) is notorious for having realized the most ambitious free movement area in the world. Although the current economic crisis has fuelled inward looking debates within some member states, the free movement of people is considered a fundamental pillar of the integration process. Moreover, countries like Ireland, which have been severely affected by the crisis, have decided to open their borders even further with a view to jump-starting their economies out of the recession. In particular, the Irish government allowed labour immigration from Romania and Bulgaria two years ahead of schedule. Throughout the European common market, the amount of people who have decided to move their physical and fiscal residence to another country of the Union is less than 5% of the entire population. In Africa, both Kenya and Rwanda have abolished work permit requirements. Yet, neither country has been inundated by immigrants from other EAC states. These examples show that freedom of movement need not result in an apocalyptic exodus of migrants from low-income to high-income countries: it rather allows for crossborder cooperation of business and labour, with many workers returning home regularly.

Recent studies confirm that regional migration in Southern Africa is currently dominated by informality and bilateralism. The region is characterized by a de facto laissez-faire regime, as borders remain porous and there are not enough resources to enforce a comprehensive system of control, with recurrent deportations and forced displacement (mainly out of South Africa). South Africa has established bilateral agreements with most countries in the region, but implementing them is revealing very costly. For each sector, data on the country’s actual needs is of poor quality, which partly explains why key sectors such as healthcare and education show systematic shortages, even though the region could provide a wealth of qualified doctors and teachers. Irregularity in migration flows also generates evident paradoxes, whereby highly skilled professionals end up operating in labour intensive sectors such as agriculture, security or construction, instead of supporting the South African economy in areas for which they could really add value.

Evidence from other areas of the world shows that a clear regional framework for labour migration is less destabilizing than many in Southern African would have us believe. Much to the contrary, clear governance systems guarantee migrant workers, their countries and the economies that receive them. Turning a blind eye to this means supporting informal migration channels, which strengthen criminality and reinforce prejudice and xenophobia. Has time come for a constructive debate on free movement in Southern Africa?

Originally published by the African Development Bank at:

One response to “Is it time to take free movement of people in Southern Africa seriously?

  1. I just found your blog and without a shade of doubt this is my best blog yet. Thought provoking and speaks of issues relevant to us as Africans.

    I absolutely agree with this article. There is a wealth of knowledge that our neighbours could share with us if only we give them a fair chance to do so. However, with the constant spite of xenophobic attacks on foreigners I feel that the majority of South Africans are just not ready for this.

    I have found Zimbabweans to be a highly astute people. And have learned a lot about, not only the history of Africa but also on colonialism and where they come from as a country. The whole xenophobia thing is just disgusting and makes me embarrassed to be a part of such ignorant tarts. I won’t blame Bantu Education but I do feel like if we stopped learning about the Anglo-Boer War( who even cares anymore?) and taught our own people’s history we could be in the right direction towards doing away with whatever stereotypes associated with our neighbours. Perhaps when we can better appreciate each other’s struggles then we will better know each other.

    I digress… Back to the subject… I’m all for it. Other than the major economic gains already stated above another point to consider is how porous our borders are. And the truth is, unless we start spending the type of money Israel spends on its borders then that fence will be porous for a long time to come. We simply do not have that kind of money.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s