Danzer, Alexander, and Barbara Dietz. "Labour Migration from Eastern Europe and the EU's Quest for Talents". Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol.52, No.2 (2014): 183-199.

Danzer, Alexander, and Barbara Dietz. "Labour Migration from Eastern Europe and the EU's Quest for Talents". Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol.52, No.2 (2014): 183-199.

• Despite attempts since 2009 to promote closer ties between the EU and the Eastern Partnership of Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan, the main economic ties and migration flows of these countries remain concentrated on Russia. This is partially a result of discrimination within the EU against Eastern European migrants perceived as low-skilled (183-184).
• Emmigration from the Eastern Partnership states varies considerably, between Moldova, which has experienced a major population outflow since 2004, to Georgia, which has experienced relatively little emmigration (184). Lower-skilled workers or those with longer terms of unemployment are more likely to migrate to Russia, whereas the EU attracts more educated and skilled immigrants (184-185).
• Emmigration in these states began during the difficult economic and political period of the 1990s, when increased numbers of workers left home. Most of these settled in Russia, which supports large migrant populations from all of these countries. Many of these are temporary workers, supplementing family income through seasonal work (185).
• While both Russia and the EU are geographically close, Russia shares many institutions and a common language, additionally Russia maintains a liberal visa regime with all these states, allowing easy immigration. Migration to the EU, on the other hand, is complex and requires navigating a difficult visa regime which often refuses entry (186).
• The authors examine migration dynamics primarily within the context of wage differentials, combined with analysis of the social and economic benefits it brings to households, and assumptions that migrants will attempt to maximize the value potentially provided by their skills and education. Ease of entry and the pre-existance of networks of friends and family are also considered important factors in determining migration destinations (186-187).
• Based on these theoretical factors, the author predict that the presence of family and friends in Russia, as well as ease of entry into that labour market, makes Russia a more common destination due to lower costs associated with emigration. On the other hand, Russia does not reward more educated workers to the same degree as the EU, the USA, or the Gulf, prompting more educated or skilled workers to prefer these destinations (187).
• Immigration from Eastern Partnership states is roughly equal in terms of gender, although women are slightly less likely to emmigrate. Most immigrants are between the ages of 20 and 35, although there is a significant minority of older migrants, particularly men in their 40s; these older men find themselves out-competed in labour markets which do not value Soviet skills or techniques. University graduates are less likely to emigrate, whereas those will vocational education are significantly more likely to emigrate, likely reflecting work opportunities at home versus abroad (189).
• The decision of men to emmigrant is significantly determined by levels of education and age, whereas the decision of women to migrate depends much more on household economic conditions. The likelihood of women to migrate does not depend on level of education, but increases significantly if many members of her household are unemployed. Foreign language ability is more important for women, likely because they are more likely to take positions in social services, whereas men are more likely to move into the construction sector, where language is not a priority (191).
• There is a large skill divide among migrants regarding destination country. The most highly skilled are likely to choose the EU or overseas destinations, whereas Russia is disproportionately the destination for low-skilled migrants. Among the EU destinations, there is a diversity in migration patterns, however Southern Europe is the most common area. Knowledge of foreign languages besides Russian greatly increases the likelihood of moving to the EU or overseas (191-192).
• The ease of immigrating to Russia, both in terms of visa arrangements and finding work, made Russia the most common destination for those with low skills, who overwhelmingly selected Russia as a destination (193).
• Highly educated migrants generally tend to choose overseas destinations, particularly the United States, or the EU, with only 10% migrating to Russia. However, university-educated migrants still only compose 1/3 of all migrants from the region to the USA and only 1/4 of total migrants to the EU (193).
• Many migrants from the Eastern Partnership attempt to increase their skill level before migration, particularly attempting to increase language proficiency. This is not true for migrants to Russia, as most already are proficient in the Russian language. Other kinds of training or education before migration are not common (195).
• Migrants from the Eastern Partnership are generally better educated than native populations in both Russia and the West, but generally face a decline in social position following immigration, especially immigration to the West. This decline exists in all countries, with the exception of skilled workers moving to Russia, where they are generally valued (194-196).
• "While the better education go to EU and oversease destinations, individuals with low skills or the unemployed move to Russia. The rewards in Russia are potentially lower than in the EU, but the institutional similarities between EaP countries and Russia reduce migration costs and allow even the less educated to move" (196).
• Fears of 'brain-drains' common in countries, like Moldova, experiencing heavy emmigration are largely unfounded, as the majority of university educated persons are likely to remain in their home country. Instead, most migrants move because employment is unavailable domestically, meaning migrantion limits the problems of domestic unemployment (197).