In recent weeks, again, issues relating to migration have gained strength on the European political agenda. Among the measures to be taken, the need to promote the development of territories which are migratory centres has been heard on more than one occasion. Thus, it is emphasized that to calm the flows, but not only that, the migrants themselves can drive this development. Interestingly, this discourse can be heard at the extremes of the debate on migration. The French National Front has used it with the argument of the breakdown of migratory flows, but it is often also used by organisations working in development cooperation. As you can imagine, with very different interests and objectives.

The premise underlying this idea is that, at least within the framework of a progressive vision, migration generates development in the society of destination, but it can also emerge in the society of origin, promoting the association between both centers. Somehow, the society of origin and destination would appear victorious to both, the win win win scenario.

Is it really possible to get this virtuous equation? I see great problems. One of the arguments put forward by proponents of the previous approach is that the different contributions of migration, especially “remedies”, can favor the development of the territory of origin. Although this may occur, it is not automatic and the context conditions the use and success of “remedies”. In order to achieve genuine internal development in a territory, real development policies must be pursued. Putting the development challenge on migrants is too much and will inevitably lead to failure.

Furthermore, we must not forget that the relations between the society of origin and the society of destination are completely asymmetrical. Migration often leads to an excessive reduction in the active population of the territory of origin, with negative consequences for development. But not only that, although the contribution of migrants from origin is positive, it is much more beneficial in the society of destination, so it is the asymmetry that dominates and continues with the game of the title, if a virtuous relationship occurs, it depends on the relationship win, where some leave winning, but others are much more “winners”…

In short, desires and goodwill cannot be confused with reality. Migratory flows are also part of the globalised international economic system, in which inequalities and imbalances are present. If we do not take this into account, it will be difficult to achieve beneficial results within the framework of the debate on migration and development.