Innovative Solutions to Manage the Human Migration Crisis

After the threats of an all-out nuclear war and climate change, the third most dangerous man-made (yes, it is man-made, not woman-made) problem confronting humanity in the 21^st century is an explosion in human migration across international borders and within large populous states. Unless humanity as a whole comes together to cooperate and find creative, innovative solutions, many societies will be torn apart by stresses generated by explosive migration.

Already, many ostensibly stable and sensible developed Western societies have been seriously destabilised by the populist reactions to these unchecked migrant flows. This explains how populist leaders like Donald Trump and Boris Johnson were elected in model democracies like the US and the UK. The traditional mainstream liberal politicians lost the trust of their own populations when they were torn between their values (keeping borders open to refugees) and their interests (to get re-elected). As Jean-Claude Juncker, the former president of the European Commission said, “We all know what to do, but we don’t know how to get re-elected once we do it.”

Fortunately, there is an innovative solution to global migration that can get politicians re-elected after carrying it out. Here, this innovative solution is called Free Global Cities, or ‘Global Cities’ for short. Indeed, this idea isn’t new. Paul Romer, the Nobel Laureate, first proposed in a 2009 TED Talk his bold concept of “charter cities”. A charter city would begin

with a charter specifying the rules required to attract people to build the city, including residents, investors to build infrastructure, and firms to create employment. This should be a scalable model that can be repeated in different locations. He gave good rational and moral arguments to support the establishment of such charter cities. However, his good idea never took off. Human history teaches us that rationality and morality are not always enough for difficult solutions to be implemented. We must align these difficult solutions with self-interest. Indeed, we must make these solutions profitable.

Many countries and cities would be better off if they absorbed migrants in a careful and controlled manner. Here are a few obvious examples. Many developed countries now have “ghost” cities, with wonderful modern infrastructure but no human beings to use it. In Japan, the few human beings living in these “ghost” towns are now terrorised by bears which are no longer driven away by the loud noises of vibrant cities. These ghost towns can be turned into Free Global Cities.

The second set of cities requiring talent are the new cities being developed in successful emerging economies, like Indonesia and Saudi Arabia. Many Indonesians are reluctant to move to the new Indonesian capital city, Nusantara, because it is in a “remote” island, Kalimantan, with no rich and dazzling city life. Yet, this new capital, Nusantara, could easily become as dazzling as Dubai, by absorbing thousands of talented foreign professionals fleeing difficult circumstances in their home countries. Similarly, Saudi Arabia could also do the same with the visionary new NEOM City.

‘Advanced’ developed societies, like the US and the EU, could learn some lessons in pragmatism from cities like Dubai and Singapore. Both allow many guest workers to live and work in their societies. They enjoy the full protection of the law in both societies. They earn much higher incomes than they would in their home countries and they happily send home massive remittances, which are important earnings for countries like India (which received $125 billion in remittances in 2023), Mexico ($67 billion), China ($50 billion), the Philippines ($40 billion), and Egypt ($24 billion). For some countries, remittance inflows make up a significant portion of GDP — for instance, they made up 48% of Tajikistan’s GDP in 2023. However, all these guest workers understand that they cannot stay on permanently and become citizens of these countries. While it may seem morally objectionable that guest workers are paid less and have no pathway to citizenship, they and their families would likely have a better life under this two-tier system than if the door was closed to them altogether.

Both the US and the EU countries (and even Anglo-Saxon countries like Australia, Canada and New Zealand) would be better off if they were to copy the examples of Dubai and Singapore and allow guest workers to do the jobs that many of their more affluent citizens don’t want to do. However, they would have to accept a “two-tier” society in which the first tier (the citizens) enjoys more rights and privileges than the second tier (the guest workers).

In short, even though the world is about to face the third most dangerous “man-made” crisis of massive population flows, there are many pragmatic solutions that could help to prevent disasters from occurring. As Simon Anholt, Founder of the Good Country Index writes in his chapter in the soon-to-be released Free Global Cities publication edited by Dr. Christian H. Kälin, new Global Cities must combine moral imperative with pragmatism, in order to “welcome the nomadic peoples of the Earth, both those who are forced to wander and those that choose to wander. We must also ensure that such places do not become the dead end of anybody’s journey, but the start of a new and productive life.” Free Global Cities provides one of the most compelling pragmatic solutions that should be seriously reflected on.