Between ‘Labour Migration’ and ‘New European Mobilities’: Motivations for Migration of Southern and Eastern Europeans in the EU

Abstract

This article investigates in comparative perspective different accounts of the motivations for migration offered by Bulgarian, Romanian, Italian and Spanish nationals living in another EU country, or planning to move. In-depth interviews yield a range of accounts for the decision to leave the home-country, from narrowly defined economic motivations, professional and ‘qualitative’ labour market considerations, to desires for cultural/lifestyle exploration. Both individual and country-level factors are mobilised in motivational accounts, which are also set against the backdrop of major external shocks, such as the 2007 enlargement of the European Union and the 2008 global financial crisis. Findings highlight the need to consider the interplay between macro and individual-level factors—that is, perceptions of cultural, economic, political and societal structures as well as individual characteristics—in studying migratory behaviour. Moreover, the findings to a certain extent support the distinction between the ‘classic’ labour migration behaviour of Bulgarian and Romanian respondents and the ‘new European mobilities’ of Italian and Spanish participants, who emphasise more the overlapping professional, affective, cultural and quality of life considerations that shape the decision to move. However, convergence across groups may be expected in the future as East-West movers become more socialised into ‘new’ cultures of European mobility and as South–North migration patterns increasingly reinforce some of the ‘periphery-core’ dynamics of contemporary intra-EU mobility.

Migration Intentions of Romanian Engineering Students

“…Both Figure 6 and Figure 2 indicate that the main reasons for emigration are related to wages and income (total sample average, 4.51). These results resonate with findings in other studies on migration intentions from new EU states [4,8,37,39]. Furthermore, studies looking into similar issues comment that family reasons (identified in our research with a total sample average of 2.72) rank low for young adults [26].…”

“…The questionnaire constructed for this research investigated engineering students' perceptions of the migration phenomenon among peers, as well as their self-assessment of the topic with respect to motivations, destinations, and personal factors influencing the decision concerning their post-graduation strategies. Consistent with other studies on migration drivers, we included in the questionnaire factors pertaining to personal motivations (individual perceptions, desires), relational motivations (family ties), and contextual conditions (technological, educational, health, political systems) [37].…”

“…• Research objective 1 (RO 1 ): To identify the motivations behind the intention of Romanian engineering students to migrate, as seen by the polled students. Based on the findings of the consulted literature on the migration of high skilled youth [28][29][30]37] and on the comments published in popular media, we have formulated the following research hypotheses: Hypothesis 1 (H1). Economic factors (wages) are the main motive for migration for Romanian engineering students, in comparison to other motives (social, family, cultural).…”

The Lived Experiences of Migration: An Introduction

“…Given the uncertain future of European integration, it is important to highlight the link between early experiences of international mobility and the formation of supra-national identifications. Our Southern European interviewees frequently had enriching academic experiences abroad as young adults prior to the observed migration moment in the interviews, and that made them appreciative of their European identity-a trend that was less visible among the Eastern European interviewees (see Coletto & Fullin, 2019;Fischer-Souan, 2019;Quassoli & Dimitriadis, 2019).…”

“…As it is the case for other types of labels, such as those that concern gender or ethnicity, they are used to implicitly generate a distinction between those who have the power to impose such labels and those who have to deal with them (Gallissot, Rivera, & Kilani, 1997). Several contributions in this thematic issue, in particular Quassoli and Dimitriadis (2019) comment on the malleability of labels and on the political aspects of mobility noted in other studies as well (Conradson & Latham, 2005;Parutis, 2011). Fischer-Souan (2019, comparing mobility trajectories of Southern European and Eastern European interviewees, discussed an often drawn distinction between economic and lifestyle migrants.…”