The Analysis Of Intra-ASEAN Migration
Being one of the most dynamic regional associations in the world, ASEAN has witnessed an increasing integration among its members over the past five decades, facilitating the flow of people to move freely within this area. Intra-regional migration in South East Asia is characterized by a huge number of low-skilled labors and a smaller portion of high-skilled workers and family, student and forced migrants (Hugo, 2014; Hatsukano, 2015). This flow of labor force has been posing both advantages and disadvantages on immigrants themselves as well as sending and receiving countries.
Given lower barriers between ASEAN members, the flow of people from one country to others has emerged as a growing phenomenon. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2015a) estimated that intra-regional migration in South East Asia involves 6.9 million people a search for new jobs, lives and opportunities. However, this number may not accurately reflect the bigger picture of undocumented workers given the inconsistent definitions and counting systems. Among 10 countries, Thailand, Singapore and Malaysia appear as attractive destinations for migrants while Cambodia, Lao, Vietnam, Myanmar, Indonesia and Philippines serve as sending sources (McGregor et al., 2018). According to Um & Gaspa (2016), the movements of migrants generally emerge from previous connection between sending and receiving nations in the context of colonialism, political, economic and cultural exchanges or influence.
On one hand, intra-ASEAN migrants bring back a wide range of benefits to themselves, their communities and the countries they migrate to. With a fundamental economic behavior, the majority of migrants seek stronger earning power given the lack of opportunities in their own countries. To illustrate, many Cambodians migrating to Thailand fantasize about getting unskilled jobs with high wages and the same success with relatively well-off returnees. In fact, Cambodian construction workers can earn from $2.50 to $7.50 per day in 2006 which is highly desirable compared to small-scale rice farmers’ back home (Um & Gaspa, 2016). Consequently, working abroad allows them to send back remittance, an important social capital. In 2008, ILO (2010) estimated that remittance from Cambodian migrants working in Thailand reached $45 million, a considerable amount of money to support their families’ livelihood in areas of poverty.
Furthermore, these migrants serve as an essential labor source contributing to the economies of receiving countries, especially those facing aging population and shortage of workers to fill undesirable job vacancies. More advanced economies have noted a drastic decline in fertility rate and marriage rate with a significantly longer life expectancy, urging them to outsource low-skilled jobs to people from less developed countries (McGregor et al., 2018). For example, having been moving towards an aging society since 2005, Thailand cannot deny the contribution of intra-regional migrants who account for 10% of its total labor force to the socio-economic achievement (HRW, 2010a). While a small portion of them fills in professional fields, the majority goes to sectors of 3D (dirty, dangerous, demeaning) or 3L (low pay, low skill, long hours) which as undesirable to Thai nationals (Rigg, 2016).
On the other hand, intra-regional migration movements within also pose various challenges on migrants, destinations and original countries. Migrant labor, especially illegal workers encounter many difficulties such as low wage, severe working conditions, police misconduct, abuse, and threats to their children’s rights. For instance, though Cambodian construction workers in Thailand seem to earn more than their counterparts back home, Rigg (2004) revealed that as of May 2000, their daily wage ($1.60) was less than half of Thai’s ($3.70) given the same construction jobs. Cambodian workers are not provided with any safety equipment, holidays or other welfare. In fact, they work ten hours per day with one-hour break and live in slums near construction sites. Their children, without access to education and medical have to join their parents in construction work to generate additional income. Moreover, these migrants are often harassed by both Cambodian and Thai police, especially when they wish to cross the border. If arrested without legal documents, they are deported instantly, putting a huge pressure on the original country to absorb its own workers back. However, it is uncommon to mention that these migrants in slums, under influence of alcohol often resort to violence to solve conflicts and carry out domestic abuse, which threatens social stability of the receiving country (Um & Gaspa, 2016).
In conclusion, intra-ASEAN migration is a dynamic labor force which brings back both pros and cons to migrants, export and import countries. Although they contribute to both countries of origin and destination, many are working and living abroad without legal protection and management from any of institutes. Since it is mutual interests of both sending and receiving nations, monitoring, integrating and protecting intra-regional migrants will be a difficult yet important challenge to South East Asian countries.
