Skip to main content

Migration and Resilience in the Eastern European Neighbourhood: Remittances as a Mechanism for Boosting Recovery After Shocks

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Resilience and the EU’s Eastern Neighbourhood Countries

Abstract

In the particular case of the Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries, migration plays an important role for their development, especially through the remittance channel, as they account for high shares in their gross domestic product (GDP). The geopolitical position of the EaP countries, in between the European Union (EU) and Russia, makes them more susceptible to shocks. Under this framework, this chapter aims at analysing how remittances can build on their resilience, thus acting as a bulwark against natural and political shocks that these countries might face. Running a fixed effects threshold panel data analysis, results indicate that the effect of natural disasters disappears for remittance ratios above 10% of GDP. While remittances also mitigate the impact of political conflicts, their impact is stronger in countries with less freedom. Policymakers should design friendlier remittance policies in order to help population cope with shocks and boost recovery. Nevertheless, as remittances may also cause macroeconomic destabilizing effects, reliance on remittances can be reduced by a shift towards more sustainable sources of growth through an increasing pace in political and economic reforms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Central Asia countries refer to Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan.

  2. 2.

    Central and Eastern European (CEE) group includes the European Union (EU) members in Central and Eastern Europe: Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia.

  3. 3.

    As evidenced by the transition index computed by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) for measuring the structural reform level (see Table 16.7 in Annex).

  4. 4.

    The Visa Liberalisation Dialogues resulted in an exemption from EU visa requirement for Moldovan citizens in 2016. The same also applied for Georgian and Ukrainian citizens in 2017.

  5. 5.

    In 2017 Russia was also the destination for over two-thirds of the emigration stock from CA countries.

  6. 6.

    Data on emigration stock is also including Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh which reaches about 15% of total Armenian diaspora in 2017. However, Russia is the main destination by far, hosting over half of Armenian immigrants in 2017.

  7. 7.

    Russia is the main destination, hosting about a third of Moldavian diaspora (2017). Due to historic and cultural links, as well as proximity, Romania is also an important destination for about 16% of Moldavian emigration stock. The increasing flow towards Romania was also the result of the simplified procedures law citizenship in 2009 (Barbulescu 2013).

  8. 8.

    Kirgiz Republic and Tajikistan are also placed in top position. With remittance inflows that amount to 35% and 31% of their GDP, this places them on first and third position worldwide (Ratha et al. 2018).

  9. 9.

    The political tensions relating to the Nagorno-Karabakh region in Azerbaijan resumed in numerous conflicts: 1991–1995, 1997–1998, 2005, 2008, 2012 and 2014–2017.

  10. 10.

    Given the data limitation, our sample includes the following transition countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova (Eastern Partnership), Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan (Central Asia), Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine (EU members in Central and Eastern Europe) and Russia.

  11. 11.

    On average, Belarus faced the higher inflation rates. On average, incomes in Belarus have depreciated with 52% over the 1997–2014 period (with the highest inflation level in 1999, 251%). Moldova and Ukraine were also facing average inflation rates over 10% over the same period.

  12. 12.

    This decision derives from the joint significance test, as we could not reject the null hypothesis that these variables are jointly not different from zero.

  13. 13.

    Given that the threshold regression of Hansen (1999) requires a balanced panel, we had to drop Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan from our sample in order to maximize our time span.

  14. 14.

    We have also computed additional simulations in order to check for nonlinearities in the impact of remittances on growth. Our results did not find evidence for the existence of one or two thresholds that makes the impact of remittances on growth to be different.

  15. 15.

    More simulations were carried out to check for some possible transmission channels of the effects of remittances, like investments, human capital or transition index, but the threshold effect was only confirmed for a reduced number of variables including inflation and size of government.

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cristian Incaltarau .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Annexes

Annexes

Table 16.2 Two-way fixed effects panel estimation of the impact of remittances, natural disasters and conflicts on real GDP per capita growth in transition countries (CA, CEE, EaP and Russia), 1997–2014
Table 16.3 Two-way fixed effects panel estimation of the impact of remittances, natural disasters and conflicts on real GDP per capita growth in transition countries (CA, CEE, EaP and Russia), 1997–2014
Table 16.4 Two-way fixed effects panel estimation of the impact of remittances, natural disasters and conflicts on real GDP per capita growth in transition countries (CA, CEE, EaP and Russia), 1997–2014
Table 16.5 The values of thresholds and the confidence interval
Table 16.6 Results of threshold effect test
Table 16.7 Variable description
Table 16.8 Summary statistics for the real GDP per capita growth drivers in transition countries (CA, CEE, EaP and Russia), 1997–2014

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Incaltarau, C., Pascariu, G.C. (2019). Migration and Resilience in the Eastern European Neighbourhood: Remittances as a Mechanism for Boosting Recovery After Shocks. In: Rouet, G., Pascariu, G.C. (eds) Resilience and the EU’s Eastern Neighbourhood Countries. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25606-7_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25606-7_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-25605-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-25606-7

  • eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics