Search

This paper examines notions of re-entry, or return migration, through the experiences of East Asian tertiary international students who had studied in New Zealand. After identifying specific methodological contexts of re-entry for these students, and briefly considering international students' experiences in New Zealand, this article examines various transitions encountered during re-entry. These transitions center on expectations, a longing to belong, identity crisis, and a sense of homelessness and loss, as well as various social responses and other general transitions. The paper then argues that the reintegration of identity and place is crucial in ameliorating some of the reentry difficulties, which also provides a useful conceptual framework to understand re-entry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

South African immigrants in New Zealand have been largely ignored by researchers in comparison with 'visible' migrants from Asia and the South Pacific. This paper examines the initial settlement experiences of a group of skilled South Africans with regard to employment and social engagement. It has two key aims: to show that despite their 'invisibility' South Africans were not immune to initial settlement difficulties; and to identify the cause(s) of such difficulties. The evidence indicates that cultural, social and economic differences between South Africa and New Zealand were the primary causes of the difficulties experienced. Prejudice was also a factor but was usually less overt, more complex and sometimes just a matter of suspicion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In May 2008, a major controversy about the participation of Pacific Islanders and their descendants in the New Zealand economy was initiated by the release of a report claiming they were "a drain on the economy," were becoming an "underclass" and displayed "significant and enduring underachievement." This report received considerable media attention at the same time that the first results of New Zealand's Longitudinal Immigration Survey (LisNZ) were released. The results of the LisNZ received much less attention in the media, even though they contained considerable information about the participation of Pacific migrants in the labor force. This paper reviews some of the findings contained in the May 2008 release of LisNZ data as well as some additional information relating to the larger group of Pacific migrants who entered under all categories of approval spanning skilled migration, business migration, family sponsorship, humanitarian provisions, as well as the special Pacific categories. Three simple indices of labor market participation are used to compare migrants entering under the special Pacific categories with Pacific migrants who gained approval for residence under the other categories. Greater attention is then focussed on the labor market participation of three groups of Pacific migrants - Fiji Indians, Samoans and Tongans. Fiji Indians are included because they are the largest single group of immigrants from a Pacific country in the LisNZ survey database. The evidence generated by the first wave interviews of the LisNZ does not support an argument that Pacific migrants are failing to gain employment in New Zealand and thus becoming a "drain on the economy" or that "Polynesian immigration fuels an underclass." On the three measures of labor force participation there were generally small differences between the Pacific migrant groups, however these were defined, and the rest of the migrants interviewed in the LisNZ. There were some expected differences in occupation distributions, education levels, and ways of obtaining work in New Zealand. But these differences are not indications of "underachievement" or any systemic failure of policies regulating immigration from the Pacific. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focuses on migration between Australia and New Zealand, which has exhibited a strong, but cyclical, net movement towards Australia since the late 1960s. A long-term historical perspective is taken. Trans-Tasman migration is also compared with inter-island migration within New Zealand. It is argued that differential economic development, driven by forces of globalization, agglomeration and technological change, has been primarily responsible for the long-run changes in the distribution of population across the regions of Australasia. Asynchronous business cycles, demographic dynamics, perceptions, return migration and the high international mobility of New Zealanders (of whom one quarter of those aged 40-64 have lived abroad for a year or longer) are responsible for the short-run fluctuations. However, permanent and long-term migration is only a small fraction of total trans-Tasman population movement. Moreover, trans-Tasman migration has not offset New Zealand's ability to recruit population through immigration. Over the last three decades, the outflow of more than half a million New Zealand citizens has been compensated by a net inflow of three-quarter million citizens from elsewhere. The number of New Zealanders in Australia is expected to continue to grow but the migration flows are becoming increasingly diversified. One-third of the New Zealanders in Australia remigrates within four years. Future trends will depend on New Zealand's ability to boost productivity growth, the real cost of air travel, retirement migration and the impacts of climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Australia and New Zealand tend to view development issues in the Pacific, including labor mobility, in different ways. This paper compares the different policies of Australia and New Zealand on the migration of Pacificpeoples. Both countries used to have colonies in the Pacific in the 20th century, but while Australia ceased to continue its special relationship with the island countries on immigration matters, New Zealand did the opposite and has become a major destination for Polynesians. New Zealand's recent move to incorporate a seasonal work program to bring in Pacific workers marks another difference with Australia's approach. The impacts of the seasonal work program for the two countries, the broader canvas of demographic and economic differentials between the Pacific Island states and Australia and New Zealand, and prospects for multilateral cooperation are examined in the article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]