Future Migration Dynamics

Few books are timelier than Ian Goldin’s new The Shortest History of Migration. Drawing from his personal history as a South African emigrant and his experience working with Nelson Mandela, the Oxford based Goldin explores the when, why and how humans move - from the prehistoric peopling of the planet to today and tomorrow’s migrants. He addresses current political tensions, including J.D. Vance's recent criticisms of European migration policies and Elon Musk's controversial stance on immigration. Goldin argues that migration has been fundamental to human progress and economic growth, while acknowledging that there are legitimate questions about unregulated immigration policy.

Here are the five KEEN ON take-aways from our conversation with Goldin

* Migration patterns have remained remarkably consistent (about 3% of global population) over the past century, though absolute numbers have increased with population growth. However, what has changed dramatically is the creation of formal borders, passport controls, and our perception of migration.

* There's a growing disconnect between political rhetoric and economic reality. While many politicians take strong anti-immigration stances, economies actually need migrants for their dynamism, particularly in aging societies. This is evidenced by Silicon Valley's success, where over half of tech entrepreneurs are migrants.

* The distinction between economic migrants and refugees is crucial but often conflated in public discourse. Goldin argues that different policies are needed for each group - economic migration can be managed through choice, while refugee protection is a humanitarian obligation.

* Local pressures versus national benefits create tension in immigration debates. While immigration's economic benefits often accrue nationally and long-term, the immediate pressures on housing, public services, and infrastructure are felt locally, leading to public resistance.

* Future migration patterns will be dramatically reshaped by demographic changes, climate change, and automation by 2050. Goldin predicts that current debates about keeping people out may reverse as developed countries compete to attract migrants to address labor shortages and maintain economic growth.

Full transcript of the Goldin interview

KEEN: Migration is back in the news. A couple of days ago, J.D. Vance was in Europe, in Munich, attacking Europe over its migration policy. Meanwhile, European politicians have slammed France's call to be inclusive of far-right parties which are hostile to immigration. Immigration is really one of the most controversial issues of our age, perhaps of any age, as is underlined by my guest Ian Goldin, one of the great thinkers on globalization. He has a new book out this week in the U.S., "The Shortest History of Migration." Ian is joining us from Oxford, where he lives and teaches. Ian, what do you make of this latest violent spat in Europe? Is it something new or just more of the same?

GOLDIN: I think it is an escalation of previous trends. For the U.S. to come to Europe and talk about domestic policies represents a change not only in tone and intensity but also in diplomacy. Politicians don't tend to go to other countries—UK and European politicians don't go to the U.S. and tell the U.S. how to run itself. So it is different when the vice president of the U.S. comes to Europe and comments very directly about individuals, meets with far-right leaders, and basically tries to advise Europe on what to do. It's a big step up from what we've seen before, and it's very polarizing.

KEEN: This term "far right"—and it's not a term that I know you invented, you just used it—is it appropriate to describe these anti-immigrant parties in Europe and indeed in the U.S.? The AfD in Germany, the Reform Party in the UK, the MAGA movement in America. Are they all premised on hostility to immigration?

GOLDIN: Immigration unites parties across the political spectrum, and anti-immigration is certainly not the preserve of far-right parties. Even the Labor Party in the UK at the moment has come out as very hostile to immigration. But what's different about Vance's visit to the UK is that he met with the AfD leader in Germany, didn't meet with the leader of the government. He's the only major global leader who's met with the AfD. Similarly, we've seen members of Trump's cabinet, like Elon Musk, endorsing the Reform Party in the UK and pumping up what I think are legitimately described as far-right parties on the political spectrum in Europe. But as you say, it's not the exclusive domain of the far right to be anti-immigrant. This is sweeping the board across the spectrum in many European countries and in the U.S. The Democrats are also pretty anti-immigration.

KEEN: You brought up Musk. You have something in common with him—you're both South African migrants who've made good in the West. There's something very odd about Musk. Maybe you can make more sense of it, particularly given what you have in common. On the one hand, he is the poster child for globalization and migration. He was brought up in South Africa, came to the U.S., made a fortune, and now is the richest man in the world. On the other hand, he seems to be the funder of all these reactionary, anti-immigrant parties. What's going on here?

GOLDIN: There's a lot to be said. Musk was an immigrant himself, just like Trump's grandfather was to the U.S., just like many members of the Cabinet's forebears were. So there's a contradiction of people who really owe their histories and where they are to immigration being so anti-immigrant. Personally, I not only come from the same town and went to the same high school in Pretoria, South Africa, but I've met him. He came to Oxford—if you look on the Oxford Martin School website, you'll see a conversation we had when he brought the first Tesla up to Oxford. I think he's moved a long way in the last years. It's difficult to explain that, but clearly what he's saying today is not the same as he was saying 5 or 10 years ago.

He and others like Peter Thiel are very strong supporters not only of MAGA but of similar parties in Europe. I think it represents a new force—the amount of money these people have is very significant, and they do make a real impact on politics. Indeed, it's likely that Musk directly through his giving had material impact on the U.S. presidential election. Rich people have always given to political parties and owned media, but this is a whole new level of engagement where extremely rich people can influence outcomes.

KEEN: The subtitle of your book, "The Shortest History of Migration" is "When, Why, and How Humans Moved from the Prehistoric Peopling of the Planet to Today and Tomorrow's Migrants." It's an ambitious book, though short. Has something changed over the last 50 or 100 years? Humans have always been on the move, haven't they?

GOLDIN: There have been dramatic changes. One change is the creation of borders as we know them today and passports, border controls. That's relatively recent—before the First World War, people could basically move around without the controls and identity documents we know today. Secondly, there are many more countries now, well over 100 countries. The number of borders has greatly increased.

The cost of travel and the risk associated with travel—I don't mean dangerous crossings across the Rio Grande or the Sahara, but air travel, ship travel, and motor vehicles—has gone down dramatically. The world population has increased significantly. Although the share of people migrating hasn't budged over the last hundred years—it's about 3% of the world's population—the absolute numbers have increased because 3% of 8 billion people is clearly a much bigger number than 3% of what it was around 2 billion 100 years ago.

The big change has really been in the way we think about migrants today compared to, for example, the age of mass migration when 20-25% of the U.S. was migrant in the period 1850-1892, before the First World War.

KEEN: But wasn't that also fair to say in the U.S. that there have been cycles of anti-immigrant politics and culture where at points the border was open and then got slammed shut again?

GOLDIN: Yes, very much so, particularly in the post-Second World War period. We have what we might see again now, which is this two-handed approach. On one hand, politicians trying to be very strong on migration and saying things which they feel appeal to voters, and at the same time in practice very different things happening.

We've seen that in many countries where the rhetoric on migration is very strong, where there are attempts to show that one is doing a lot by policing, by deporting, by building walls, etc. But the numbers of migrants actually go up because of the need for migrants. The stronger the economy, the more migrants you need; the older the economy, as the workforce ages, the more migrants you need.

GOLDIN: Migrants are a source of economic dynamism. They are much more likely to create startups. It's no accident that Musk is a migrant, but well over half of Silicon Valley tech entrepreneurs are migrants. It's a characteristic of migrants that they are much more productive, typically. They're much more likely to invest and to start up businesses. So if you want to have a dynamic economy and if you want to look after the elderly and pick your agriculture, you need migrants. I'm sure that even those in the government of the U.S. that are violently anti-immigrant recognize these things. That's where the tension will be played out.

KEEN: You argue today's rich countries owe much of their success to the contributions of migrant workers. Is there any argument against migration? You're clearly on one side of the debate. What's the best argument against allowing migration into your country?

GOLDIN: I'm not utopian in the sense that I do believe we need border controls and need to regulate the number of migrants who can come in. Clearly, we need to keep some people out—criminals and sex traffickers, for instance. But where we get real problems is that migrants can put a lot of pressure in the short term on resources. You see this in housing markets. People are feeling a lack of affordability of homes in dynamic cities—San Francisco, Vancouver, Toronto, New York, London, and many others. And it is true that in part this is because of the number of immigrants in these cities.

Now, the immigrants also contribute and make these places dynamic. So it's a virtuous circle, but one has to address the concerns of citizens who say they cannot afford a home or public transport is too crowded, or that the lines are too long at hospital emergency services. These are real concerns. The challenge we face is that investment in resources, in public services, in housing, in transport and so on hasn't kept pace with population growth in dynamic cities particularly, and people are feeling the pinch.

There's not much truth to the claim that immigrants undermine wages. In fact, there's quite a lot of evidence that they create jobs and lift wages. But there's also a short-term and long-term issue. The costs are often local, so people feel in a particular locality that they're overwhelmed by the number of immigrants, while the benefits are national and long-term. The immigrants build the houses, work in the hospitals, demand goods and services. They're buying things, building things, creating things. But that doesn't all happen at the same place at the same time.

The other important thing is to distinguish between migrants and refugees. A lot of the problems that societies have is because these things are conflated. When I think of migrants, I think of economic migrants, of students, of people coming that are going to benefit themselves and the countries, but have a choice. Refugees are different. Refugees have a legitimate fear for their lives if they do not get refugee status. Governments need very different policies for refugees than they do for migrants.

KEEN: You've mentioned the US, the UK—your book breaks down immigration around the world. You argued that the US is home to the largest absolute numbers of migrants, 51 million. Is the US still symbolically the place where the pro-anti migration argument gets played out? Trump, of course, has been outspoken and arguably it was really the reason why he was elected president again.

GOLDIN: Yes, I think it is the place where it's being played out. It has the most migrants. It's a society we've always thought of historically as being constructed by migrants. It's an immigrant country—of course, it displaced an indigenous people that were living there before. But it is a society now that's basically come from elsewhere. The future dynamism of the US, where the US is going to be in ten, 20, 30 years' time, is going to depend to a large extent on its policies on immigration. If it throttles the source of its lifeblood that created the country that we know as a dynamic world-leading economy, it's going to fall back.

KEEN: Musk is, as always, a little bit more complicated than he seems on immigration. On the one hand, he's obviously opposed to mass immigration. On the other hand, as a tech billionaire, he's sympathetic to qualified people coming into the country. And there seems to be a division within the Republicans between Musk and people like Steve Bannon, who seem to be opposed to all forms of immigration. Is this an important debate that you think will be played out on the American right?

GOLDIN: Yes, I think it's extremely important. Both Musk and Steve Bannon have said pretty harsh things about the other side of this debate. Musk gets that the US needs tech workers. The tech industry is dependent on Indian and many other programmers. He's aware that the leaders of many firms, including Microsoft and Google, are immigrants, as is he. He's been focusing on the need for high-skilled immigrants. Steve Bannon is taking the fundamentalist MAGA line, claiming immigrants will take jobs—of course, they don't take jobs, they create jobs.

My own guess is that Musk is going to win this particular debate, both because he's right at the center of power and because the businesses around him also get it. For agriculture, it's absolutely essential to have immigrants across the economy. Business will be crying out. And interestingly enough, as I highlighted in my Project Syndicate piece, a lot of Republican governors have been asking for immigration.

KEEN: You mentioned you and Musk were born in the same South African town. You worked for Mandela. How do you place the colonial experience in your history of migration—where the white Europeans who showed up and conquered Africa, were they migrants, or something different?

GOLDIN: They were migrants—migrant armies, migrant businesspeople, migrants, settlers. Some of them, particularly in Australia, were convicts shipped out. They often were underdogs doing it out of desperation. My grandparents migrated to South Africa because they were in that state. My grandfather on my father's side was from Lithuania, in Russia, where those who remained were all killed. Those of my mother's side who stayed in Austria and Germany were all killed. These were migrant refugees.

The impact of colonialism was devastating. This goes back to the first settlers in the Americas—600 Spaniards who landed probably led to the death of over 20 million Native Americans through guns, germs, and steel, but mainly through germs. And before the colonial period, there was slavery, which is a terrible stain on humanity. Over 20 million people were forced into this absolutely inhumane system across the Atlantic. Slavery wasn't new—it had existed from before the first millennia. But the industrialization of it, the scale and horror of it, and the number of people who died in transit, that was new.

I emphasize in the book that not all migration is good, and that migration is often a very unhappy experience, a brutal experience. But we need to try and understand this historical context. Certainly with immigration today, we need to make it more humane, better, and recognize that often what migrants do, they're doing to support their families, to create better opportunities for themselves and future generations. And the recipient countries need it too. The question is, can we better manage it?

KEEN: Should the two histories be seen side by side—the images of North Africans and sub-Saharan Africans coming to Europe, children dying on beaches—should we be thinking about this as a counter-migration, a consequence of the European colonization of Africa?

GOLDIN: There are clearly some links, but Africa is where it is today as a result not only of its colonial history and slavery, which often was driven by African slave kings before Africa was colonized. There are much more recent explanations as well—massive mismanagement of resources in Africa, the despotic actions of governments. The refugees coming to Europe are often in fear for their lives, whether it's being called up into the Eritrean army or what's happening in Somalia and Sudan. These people are escaping to protect their lives and to sustain people left behind through remittances.

KEEN: Your book is very personal. You dedicate it to your grandparents. You write with the sensibility of a relative of migrants and a man who's migrated himself. You seem to be a citizen of the world. This is a labor of love, isn't it?

GOLDIN: It is. I wrote another book on migration in 2012, "Exceptional People: How Migration Shaped Our World and Will Define Our Future." When the publishers came to me with this series, I leaped at it. I learned an enormous amount doing it. It's difficult to compress the whole history of migration, which is everything about humanity really, into 250 pages. But the main aim was to raise a sensibility that we're all migrants and that we need to better understand the role of migrants in our own personal histories and our countries' histories. These migrants are not "other people"—they are where we come from. I believe fundamentally that migration is what makes humans an exceptional species. It's the reason we've thrived. If we hadn't migrated, we would have died out.

KEEN: So you don't buy the argument that the world is divided into the "somewheres" and the "everywheres"—the thesis that some people are locked into a place for generations, and others like yourself move around all the time?

GOLDIN: I've debated that with David Goodhart. I think what he's picked up on, which I empathize with, is that people have an identity based on place. It's important not to deny that identity. But what his argument completely fails to pick up on is that firstly, that can be threatened. My mother's parents thought they were absolute Viennese—my grandfather was on the Viennese Opera Committee. It didn't help him when they decided to kill all the Jews in Vienna. My grandparents on my father's side were upright members of the Lithuanian community running a small business—that didn't help them.

There's no evidence that having immigrants in your society makes you weaker or threatens your community. Indeed, if you want your community to thrive, you're going to need immigrants—not only to do the work that your community doesn't want to do, whether it's picking fruit or cleaning hospital floors, but to keep the place dynamic. That's what these governors in the US who are calling for more immigrants have recognized about their dying towns in the Midwest. They need immigrants to keep their communities alive.

Dynamic cities are great examples of places which thrive on being melting pots. The magnetism of them is quite phenomenal. Look at Dubai, which I was in last week—90% immigrant.

KEEN: Let's cast our eyes forward. What might the future hold for migration? Are there conceptual differences as the 21st century evolves? By 2050, will the debate be the same? Could technology change it? Musk is trying to settle on Mars—might that be the difference in 25 years' time?

GOLDIN: It would be easier to settle at the North or South Pole than on Mars. I think there will be major differences by 2050. One of the major drivers is going to be demographic change. We're seeing a very rapid reduction in birth rates in well over half the countries of the world. We're going to see big labor contractions in labor markets in North America, Europe, and across Asia. As societies age and people live longer lives, we're going to see great shortages of labor.

I think the fragility of different places is also going to be played out. Extreme climate and weather will lead to very different migration patterns. Oceans are going to rise, there'll be flood plains, intense weather, extreme droughts, lack of water by 2050. A place like Miami is going to be very threatened.

AI will likely take over repetitive jobs, manufacturing, call centers. But the jobs that people will want in our wealthier societies—hospitality, elderly care, massages—these are what economists call non-tradable services. We'll need more of these, and they cannot be done remotely. They are unlikely to be done by machines by 2050. We're not going to want machines giving us massages or meals.

So I think we're likely to see Europe, North America, and many parts of Asia turn the current debates on their head—from keeping people out to how we get more people into our societies. Population will start declining very rapidly, and workforces will decline before populations decline.

KEEN: Finally, Ian, you write about the history of passports. You say they began in the early 20th century. With our increasingly sophisticated technology of data, how will that play out in your future history of migration?

GOLDIN: I think it's going to play out differently in different places. The big question is how much we trust those who have the information. How we feel about it in Europe will be different from how people feel about it in China. One of the amazing experiments of the late 20th century is that within 27 countries in Europe, there are no passport controls. It's proved to be a remarkable, successful experiment.

I hope increased surveillance becomes part of a bigger bargain in which we accept more people into our societies, treat them more fairly, protect them, and give them rights. But we also say we don't want some people to come, and we are able to control this. It gives people confidence that they don't feel out of control. So I do see a silver lining if it's used in a humane and effective way. The risk is that it's not, and people are continually forced into dangerous passages across the Mediterranean or the Rio Grande. That's what we need to work against.

KEEN: There you have it. Amidst all this controversy about migration, some wisdom from Ian Goldin. Thank you so much.

GOLDIN: Thank you so much for having me and all the best to you and to all your listeners.

Ian Goldin is the Oxford University Professor of Globalization and Development and founding director of the Oxford Martin School, the world’s leading center for interdisciplinary research into critical global challenges, where he has established forty-five research programs. Previously, he was vice president of the World Bank and its Head of Policy, responsible for its collaboration with the United Nations and key partners. He served as adviser to President Nelson Mandela, has been knighted by the French government, and is the author of three BBC series. Ian has been an advisor to numerous businesses, governments, and foundations and is a founding trustee of the International Center for Future Generations and Chair of the CORE Econ initiative to transform economics. He is the author of twenty-five books, including Age of the City, which was selected by the Financial Times as one of its best books of 2023.

Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting the daily KEEN ON show, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy interview series. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.

Keen On is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe