Migration policy frameworks have long straddled the tension between national sovereignty, economic imperatives, and humanitarian obligations. Yet, empirical evidence increasingly reveals a paradox: more restrictive legal migration policies often coincide with rising levels of irregular migration. This study investigates the “Migration Policy Paradox” by analyzing longitudinal data (2000-2024) from four countries the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and South Africa characterized by distinct legal migration regimes and patterns of irregular migration. Drawing on secondary data from international agencies such as the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), and national immigration bureaus, this research employs correlation and regression analyses to explore the relationships between legal migration options and the incidence of unauthorized migration. The findings demonstrate that restrictive visa policies, reduced asylum access, and heightened deportation mechanisms are not reliably associated with lower irregular migration. In fact, countries with structured and broader legal migration pathways such as Canada exhibited significantly lower levels of illicit entry, suggesting that accessible legal avenues may function as deterrents against irregular flows. The results challenge the efficacy of punitive border enforcement strategies and advocate for a policy recalibration that expands legal access while addressing root socioeconomic and geopolitical drivers of migration. By presenting a data-informed “Migration Paradox Framework”, this study contributes to migration theory and offers actionable insights for policymakers aiming to manage migration humanely and effectively in an era of global displacement and demographic shifts.
References
[1]
African Union (2022). Continental Migration Policy Framework: Progress Review Report. African Union Commission.
[2]
Borjas, G. J. (1989). Economic Theory and International Migration. International Migration Review, 23, 457-485. https://doi.org/10.1177/019791838902300304
[3]
Casarico, A., Facchini, G., & Frattini, T. (2015). Illegal Immigration: Policy Perspectives and Challenges. CESifo Economic Studies, 61, 673-700. https://doi.org/10.1093/cesifo/ifv004
[4]
Castles, S., de Haas, H., & Miller, M. J. (2020). The Age of Migration: International Population Movements in the Modern World (6th ed.). Guilford Press.
[5]
Cooper, R. (2019). Legal Pathways Effects on Irregular Migration: Helpdesk Report. University of Birmingham. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5cd99936e5274a38bed21639/569_Regular_Pathways_Effects_on_Iregular_Migration.pdf
[6]
Cornelius, W. A. (2004). Impacts of Border Enforcement on Unauthorized Mexican Migration. International Migration Review, 38, 439-450.
[7]
Crush, J., Tawodzera, G., & Chikanda, A. (2023). The Politics of Migration Policy in South Africa. Southern African Migration Programme. https://samponline.org/migration-policy-series/
[8]
Czaika, M., & de Haas, H. (2017). The Effect of Visas on Migration Processes. International Migration Review, 51, 893-926. https://doi.org/10.1111/imre.12261
[9]
De Haas, H. (2010). Migration and Development: A Theoretical Perspective. International Migration Institute, University of Oxford, Working Paper No. 24. https://www.migrationinstitute.org/publications/wp-24-10
[10]
De Haas, H. et al (2018). International Migration: Trends, Determinants, and Policy Effects. DEMIG/IMI Working Paper No. 142. International Migration Institute. https://heindehaas.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/de-haas-et-al-2019.pdf
[11]
De Haas, H. (2022). Paradoxes of Migration and Development. International Migration Institute, University of Amsterdam. https://heindehaas.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/de-haas-paradoxes-of-migration-and-development.pdf
[12]
Djuric, O., & Wright, D. (2022). Evaluating Canada’s Express Entry System: Outcomes and Equity. Canadian Journal of Public Policy, 48, 215-234.
[13]
Donato, K. M., & Massey, D. S. (2016). Twenty-First-Century Global Migration: The Role of Policy and Economic Inequality. Social Science Quarterly, 97, 939-953.
[14]
FitzGerald, D. S., & Arar, R. (2018). The Sociology of Refugee Migration. Annual Review of Sociology, 44, 387-406. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073117-041204
[15]
Hollifield, J. F. (1992). Immigrants, Markets, and States: The Political Economy of Postwar Europe. Harvard University Press.
[16]
Huysmans, J. (2006). The Politics of Insecurity: Fear, Migration and Asylum in the EU. Routledge.
[17]
IOM (2022). Irregular Migration. Migration Data Portal. https://www.migrationdataportal.org/themes/irregular-migration
[18]
International Organization for Migration (IOM) (2024a). World Migration Report 2024. Edited by M. McAuliffe, & L. A. Oucho. IOM. https://publications.iom.int/books/world-migration-report-2024
[19]
IOM (2024b). Immigration and Border Governance in Nigeria. IOM Nigeria.
[20]
IRCC (2024). Departmental Plan 2024-2025. Government of Canada. https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/publications-manuals/departmental-plans/departmental-plan-2024-2025/departmental-plan-2024-2025-full.html
[21]
Kraler, A., & Ahrens, J. (2023). Conceptualising Irregular Migration for Measurement Purposes. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4915712
[22]
Kritz, M. M., Lim, L. L., & Zlotnik, H. (1992). International Migration Systems: A Global Approach. Clarendon Press.
[23]
Landau, L. B. (2017). The Deadly Perils of Populism: Migration Policy in South Africa. Centre for Migration Studies.
[24]
Mabogunje, A. L. (1970). Systems Approach to a Theory of Rural‐Urban Migration. Geographical Analysis, 2, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1538-4632.1970.tb00140.x
[25]
Massey, D. S., Arango, J., Hugo, G., Kouaouci, A., Pellegrino, A., & Taylor, J. E. (2005). Worlds in Motion: Understanding International Migration at the End of the Millennium. Oxford University Press.
[26]
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) (2023). Migration Policy Debates: Legal Pathways and Irregular Migration. OECD Publishing.
[27]
Papademetriou, D. G., & Sumption, M. (2013). Attracting and Selecting from the Global Talent Pool—Policy Challenges. Migration Policy Institute.
[28]
Park, A. (2024). Understanding Immigrant Restrictions: Quotas, Border Control, Visa Restrictions, and Deportation. Senioritis. https://senioritis.io/social-science/sociology/understanding-immigrant-restrictions-quotas-border-control-visa-restrictions-and-deportation/
[29]
Pierson, P. (1993). When Effect Becomes Cause: Policy Feedback and Political Change. World Politics, 45, 595-628.
[30]
Ruhs, M., & Martin, P. (2008). Numbers Vs. Rights: Trade-Offs and Guest Worker Programs. International Migration Review, 42, 249-265. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2007.00120.x
[31]
South African Department of Home Affairs (DHA) (2024). Migration Trends and Policy Review. Government of South Africa.
[32]
Todaro, M. P. (1969). A Model of Labor Migration and Urban Unemployment in Less Developed Countries. The American Economic Review, 59, 138-148.
[33]
Todaro, M. P., & Smith, S. C. (2006). Economic Development (9th ed.). Pearson Education Limited.
[34]
UNHCR (2023). Complementary Pathways and Family Reunification. UNHCR.
[35]
United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) (2024). Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2024. UNHCR.
[36]
United Kingdom (UK) Home Office (2024). Immigration Statistics Quarterly Report. https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/immigration-statistics-quarterly-release
[37]
United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (2024). Yearbook of Immigration Statistics: 2000-2024. https://www.dhs.gov/immigration-statistics/yearbook
