Demography and social economy, 2019, 2(36):81-95
doi: https://doi.org/10.15407/dse2019.02.081
UDC: 314.74(477)
JEL CLASSIFICATION: J61, O15

I.P. Maidanik
PhD (Sociology), senior research fellow
Ptoukha Institute for Demography and Social Studies of
National Academy of Science of Ukraine
01032, Ukraine, Kyiv, Taras Shevchenko Blvd., 60
Е-mail: Sulamif@online.ua
ORCID 0000-0003-0422-1364

CONTEXTUAL PARAMETERS OF RETURN LABOR MIGRATION TO UKRAINE
Section: DEMOGRAPHIC PROCESSES
Language: Ukrainian
Abstract: The article is devoted to the study of such important parameters of return labor migration in Ukraine as motivational structure, the role of family in making a return decision and re-emigration strategies. The publication is based on the empirical data collected during the sample survey among the return migrants (739 respondents) and persons without migration experience (509 respondents), which was carried out during December 2017 – July 2018 in Lviv, Ternopil, Ivano-Frankivsk and Chernivtsi regions. The survey was a part of the project entitled “Temporary versus permanent migration” (TEMPER) which was supported by the European Commission under the Seventh Framework Program European Union (FP7). The article, based on empirical data, reveals that the reasons to go to work abroad are mainly of a labor character, while family factors stimulate returne to Ukraine. Reasons for return migration, with minor variations, are almost identical for different groups of returnees, regardless of age, sex, type of settlement and other characteristics. It was found that at the time of arrival only a quarter of returnees were intended to stay at homeland for good, while the vast majority of return migrants do not have a clear predisposition to permanent stay and full self-realization in Ukraine; they are in an indefinite position regarding the choice of the most favorable place for living. This situation poses challenges for the demographic and socio-economic security of the state and requires adequate response from the authorities responsible for the development and implementation of migration policy. The article confirms the new economy of labor migration in its belief that the decision of both migration and returning is mostly a joint decision of the whole household. According to the results of the TEMPER survey, 40.2% of the respondents noted that the decision to return to Ukraine was taken by them with the participation of other persons. However, more than half of respondents have decided to return on their own. A small share (4.1%) of respondents has informed that the decision to return was made entirely by other persons; such respondents were forced to return due to family obligations, financial or administrative difficulties or were deported.
Key words: migration, labor migration, return migration, circular migration, migrant, return migrant
References:
1. Sandu, D. (2016). Remittances as Home Orientation Rooted in the Lifeworlds of Immigrants. Central and Eastern European Migration Review, 1-19. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305719238_Remittances_as_Home_Orientation_Rooted_in_the_Lifeworlds_of_Immigrants
2. Anwar, M. (1979). The Myth of Return: Pakistanis in Britain. London: Heinemann Educational Books.
3. Zetter, R. (1999). Reconceptualizing the Myth of Return: Continuity and Transition Amongst the Greek-Cypriot Refugees of 1974. Journal of Refugee Studies, 12 (1), 1-22. Retrieved from https://academic. oup.com/jrs/article-abstract/12/1/1/1599932
4. Cassarino, J.-P. (2004). Theorising return migration: The conceptual approach to return migrants revisited. International Journal on Multicultural Societies (IJMS), UNESCO 2004, 6 (2), 253-279. Retrieved from: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01237439/document
5. Maidanik, I.P. (2018). Suchasni rysy vysokokvalifikovanoi mihratsii v Ukraini ta sviti: osnovni tendentsii ta struktura [Contemporary features of highly skilled migration in Ukraine and in the world: main trends and structure]. Ukraina: aspekty pratsi - Ukraine: labor aspects, 2, 43-49 [in Ukrainian].
6. Malynovs’ka, O.A. (2019). Emihratsiia vs Immihratsiia: napriamy ta mekhanizmy polityky repatriatsii [Emigration vs Immigration: directions and mechanisms of repatriation policy]. Demohrafiia ta sotsial’na ekonomika - Demography and social economy, 1 (35), 69-81. - https://doi.org/10.15407/dse2019.01.069 [in Ukrainian].
7. Pozniak, O.V. (2019). Zvorotnia mihratsiia do Ukrainy: obsiah i kharakterystyky povernentsiv [Return migration to Ukraine: scales and characteristics of returnees]. Demohrafiia ta sotsial’na ekonomika - Demography and social economy, 1 (35), 82-96. - https://doi.org/10.15407/dse2019.01.082 [in Ukrainian].

» pdf