Why should we collect data on circular migration?
International organizations, national governments and researchers have pointed to circular migration as a “triple-win situation” that is beneficial not only to migrants themselves but also to countries of origin and countries of destination. Circular migration can be a driving force for local development by preventing a permanent brain drain from countries of origin and encouraging brain circulation, or the flow of knowledge, skills and resources between labour-receiving and labour-sending countries. In line with this perspective countries have introduced policies encouraging circular migration by making re-admission easier for migrants who returned to their origin country after being temporarily admitted, such as the EU directive for the admission of third-country seasonal workers (Parusel, 2017).
Figure 2:
How can we define circular migration?
However circular migration remains a poorly defined and heavily contested concept. In 2013, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) set up a working group tasked with the objective of defining and measuring circular migration, which they defined in broad terms as “a repetition of legal migration by the same persons between two or more countries” (UNECE, 2016). To differentiate circular migration from return migration, the trajectory must include an element of repetition, i.e., the person must migrate from country A at least twice. Circularity is not limited to one destination country, as long as the person returns to the same origin country more than once. The duration of stay in each country is needed to differentiate circular migrants from visitors, with a minimum stay of three months in each country being the most in line with the 2021 UN Recommendations for temporary mobility or ‘movers’ (Parusel, 2017).