Review of Global Evidence John Page and Sonia Plaza The World Bank



Download 0.62 Mb.
Page10/11
Date conversion21.02.2016
Size0.62 Mb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11

Table 3.2: Largest Recipients of Remittance in Developing Countries

Countries

US$ Billions

Countries

% of GDP

India

6.91

Lesotho

39.5

Mexico

6.37

Tonga

24.4

Philippines

4.9

Lebanon

23.9

Egypt

3.72

Samoa

21.4

Turkey

3.26

Jordan

19.9

Morocco

2.28

Bosnia & Herzegovina

18.6

Lebanon

2.13

Kiribati

17.9

Russia

2.08

Cape Verde

16.8

Brazil

1.92

Albania

16.5

Pakistan

1.8

West Bank & Gaza

15.0

Bangladesh

1.59

Yemen, Rep. of

13.3

Jordan

1.46

El Salvador

13.0

Thailand

1.34

Moldova

11.7

Serbia & Montenegro

1.27

Grenada

10.9

China

1.25

Jamaica

10.6

Colombia

1.22

Serbia & Montenegro

10.3

El Salvador

1.22

Vanuatu

8.7

Yemen, Rep. of

1.18

Haiti

8.5

Iran

1.16

Georgia

8.4

Dominican Rep.

1.12

St. Kitts & Nevis

7.9

Source: World Economic Outlook: Globalization and External Imbalances. IMF 2005
Table 3.3: Workers' Remittances US$ per capita




1990

1995

2000

2001

2002

2003

World

13.12

18.00

21.28

23.26

26.05

29.70

Low & middle income

4.03

7.49

9.30

9.93

11.41

12.94

Upper middle income

20.15

28.35

40.71

51.62

57.10

73.55

Low income

4.56

6.72

9.92

10.68

13.70

15.87

Latin America & Caribbean

13.34

28.29

39.57

46.72

53.49

64.57

South Asia

5.00

8.10

11.82

11.61

15.84

18.81

East Asia & Pacific

2.07

5.68

9.25

11.03

14.79

17.74

Middle East and North Africa

49.34

48.69

45.85

50.67

50.68

53.91

Europe & Central Asia

6.86

17.13

23.16

24.03

24.37

27.32

Sub-Saharan Africa

3.72

5.51

7.45

7.27

7.55

8.52

Source: Global Development Finance and World Development Indicators 2005
Table 3.4: Regression to Predict Total Remittances

(Official and Unofficial) as Share-Country GDP


Variable

Regression Coefficient

t-ratio

Migrants as share of country population

0.224

2.55 **

Black market exchange rate premium (black market rate/official exchange rate

– 1 * 100)



-0.005

-2.82**

Share of country population over age 25 with secondary education

0.213

2.04**

MIG1 dummy variable (1 if migrants as share of country population/official remittances as share of country GDP less than 2, zero otherwise)

1.441

1.42

East Asia

-1.815

-0.89

Europe, Central Asia

-0.752

-0.31

Latin America

-0.075

-0.05

Middle East, North Africa

7.372

3.65**

South Asia

1.228

0.73

Constant

-1.546

-0.92

Adj R2 = 0.472







F- statistic = 7.56







Notes: Regression is based on 67 observations which have positive values for migration, remittances and education. The parameters are used to predict total remittances (official and unofficial) as share of country GDP for 76 observations which have either of the following: (a) migrants as share of country population/official remittances as share of country GDP more than 2; or (b) migration but no records official remittances.

** Significant at 0.05 level




Table 3.5: Share of Unofficial Remittances in Total Remittances by Region

East Asia and Pacific

0.57

Europe and Central Asia

0.45

Latin America and Caribbean

0.49

Middle East and North Africa

0.27

South Asia

0.00

Sub-Saharan Africa

0.73



Table 3.6: Workers’ Remittances to Developing Countries, including Unofficial Remittances




2004

Unofficial Remittances

Total

East Asia and Pacific

37.1

21.28

58.38

Europe and Central Asia

14.9

6.77

21.67

Latin America and Caribbean

39.1

20.33

59.43

Middle East and North Africa

16.9

4.60

21.50

South Asia

29.7

0.00

29.70

Sub-Saharan Africa

6.6

4.55

11.15




144.3

57.53

201.83

Source: World Bank Staff Estimates based on IMF BoP Yearbook 2004 and country desks. Unofficial remittances are calculated using the index of unofficial remittances from Adams and Page paper.

Table 3.7: Models for explaining migrants’ desire to remit

Motives

Individual motives

Familial arrangements

Expl. Variables

Altruism

Exchange

Inheritance

Strategic motive

Insurance

Investment

Migrant’s Income

+

+

+

+

nde

+

Migrant’s education

nde

-

nde

+

nde

+

Time since arrival

- or =0

nde

nde

- or= 0

nde

nde

Distance from family

- or= 0

nde

-

nde

nde

+

Number of migrants/heirs

-

Nde

Inverse U-shape effect

nde

nde

nde

Recipient’s long run income

-

+ or -

nde

-

nde

= or -

Adverse short run shocks in recipients’ income

+

+ or -

Nde

+

+

+

Recipient’s assess (land, cattle, etc)

nde

nde

+

nde

nde

nde

Source: Taken from Rapoport and Docquier (2005)

Nde: Not determined


Table 3.8: Latin American Remitters’ Profile

Profile

Immigrants Living in the USA

Immigrants living in Japan

Age

Senders are 35 years old or younger

Senders are 35 years old or younger

Level of Education

17 % of Latin American adults have more than a high school diploma

85% of Latin American adults have more than a high school diploma

Average Income

About US$ 25,000

About US$ 50,000

Primary channel

“cash-to-cash”

“account-to-account”

Source: Authors’ own elaboration from papers presented at the IDB Annual Meetings 2005

Table 3.9: Fees (GBL) fro transferring money through transfer operators




Ghana

Kenya

Nigeria

Bangladesh

China

India

Transfer amount

100

500

100

500

100

500

100

500

100

500

100

500

Chequepoint

3

15

6

21

5

25

n/a

n/a

7

11

n/a

n/a

First Remit

5

21

n/a

n/a

5

21

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

5

21

Money Gram

12

36

12

36

7

25

12

20

12

22

12

20

Travelex MT

7.5

24

n/a

n/a

7.5

24

n/a

n/a

7.5

15

n/a

n/a

Western Union

12

32

14

37

12

32

12

25

12

25

4

4

Source: Sending money home: A Survey of Remittance Products and Services in the United Kingdom

Note: Fees may be lower for electronic transfer, where available. n/a = No service. Each provider will usually offer differing exchange rates.



Table 4.1: Economic activity of the 15-65 year old immigrant population with country of birth known EU 15




EU West (2)

EU South (3)

CEEC

(4)


Turkey (others)

Africa, Middle East

USA, Canada,

Australia



Latin America, Caribbean

Asia

Total

EU 15

Employed

67.1

67.3

63.2

50.0

51.4

76.3

62.7

58.6

61.3

64.2

Unemployed

4.7

4.2

7.8

9.2

9.8

3.5

8.3

5.2

6.6

5.4

Inactive

28.1

28.4

29.0

40.8

38.7

20.2

29.0

36.2

32.1

30.4

Total (%)

100.0

100.

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.

Active

71.8

71.5

71.0

59.2

61.2

79.8

71.0

63.8

67.9

69.6

Unemployed Rate (%)

6.5

5.9

11.0

15.5

16.0

4.4

11.7

8.2

9.7

7.8

Source: Labor Force Survey 2002 (Europe), data for Germany and Italy not available; (2) EU 15 (except Italy, Greece, Portugal, Spain), Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland; (3) Italy, Greece, Portugal, Spain; (4) new EU member states, accession countries, other countries in Central/Eastern Europe and the Balkans, Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Caucasus, Central Asia. Taken from Munz, Ranier (2004): “Migrants, labor markets and integration in Europe: a comparative analysis”, pp 30.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11


The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2016
send message

    Main page