WORLD MIGRATION REPORT 2015 Migrants and Cities: New Partnerships to Manage Mobility
167
participate in the broad consultative process and act as the front players in integrative community development and co-development between cities of origin and destinations. A host of partners, including international community actors, can assist effectively in building the knowledge base, capacities and commitments towards change and good policymaking and practice across countries. By 2050, the UN estimates some 66 per cent of the global population, or around 6.3 billion people, will be living in urban areas. The pattern of this urban population growth will vary but almost 90 per cent is expected to occur in Africa and Asia. Human mobility contributes to this global urban transition and the way in which cities and countries manage this transition is critical to their future. Migration and how it is governed is thus at the frontline of urban planning and sustainable development.
5.3 MULTILEVEL GOVERNANCE FOR MIGRANT INCLUSION
There is often incoherence between national and local policies when it comes to managing migration to cities. National policy and admission can regulate entry of migration to particular countries but integration in specific cities or locations is not planned for but is left to cities. This fragmentation results in a mismatch between migrant numbers and characteristics and the needs and capacities in cities in which they arrive. Some cities in high-income countries are proactively developing their own plans for integration to the extent that they have the autonomy to do so. Notably, city administrations in low- and middle-income countries do not have the resources to institute similar measures. A lack of coordination and consistency between national migration policies and local urban needs and capacities is at the heart of challenges in managing migrant integration in urban areas. Overall immigration and residence policies are usually the jurisdiction of central governments, but the impacts of migrant settlement are experienced at ground level in varying ways in different locations. For instance, the United Kingdom policy on migration is set by the national government but, as the majority of migrants settle in London, the additional demands on public services such as education, housing and social services are managed by the local London boroughs. Budget allocations from national government to local authorities do not necessarily take into account the demands arising from population mobility (Travers et al., 2007). Moreover, national policies may not meet the demands of different sectors or localities in terms of migration. For example, admissions policies that favour family reunion may not necessarily bring the skills needed to meet local labour demands (Sumption, 2014), as seen in the current debate in the United States about whether current visa programmes are delivering the global talents needed for the United States economy. Furthermore, skilled migrants, business investors and foreign students tend to be attracted to vibrant metropolises, financial hubs or high-tech clusters, while other regions may struggle to attract and retain native and foreign workers alike. In some countries like Australia and Canada, the federal and state governments jointly select and adjust the flow of migrant workers to the needs of the communities, under state-nominated or provincial visa programmes. Text box 26 shows how migration governance is managed at multiple levels of the political system of the United States.