Global migration crisis (Part 1): How we measure migration trends

In 2014, there were less than 60 million forcibly displaced people in the world. As of October 2024, estimates indicate that over 120 million people have been forcibly displaced from their homes for a variety of reasons, including conflict, persecution, climate disasters, and poverty. While political discourse in Western democracies often focuses on the growing number of refugees and migrants at their borders, a holistic, data-driven understanding of the definitions, trends, and complexities underpinning this global humanitarian crisis is essential.

Refugees or forcibly displaced people

According to the 1951 Refugee Convention, a refugee is a person who “owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of [their] nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail [themself] of the protection of that country”. This definition, and the convention which brought it to life, oblige all countries which signed it to host and protect refugees on their territory and treat them according to other internationally agreed standards.

However, a major problem faced worldwide is that even though refugee definitions are useful, most of the migrants we see now do not meet these narrow criteria. Professor Robin Cohen, Emeritus Professor at the University of Oxford and Former Director of the International Migration Institute, spoke with us regarding this: “Much turns on the definition of forced migration. There is clearly a large group of migrants compelled to move because of political conflict. But beyond that group is another, not clearly economic migrants or refugees, but those struggling to thrive in their countries of origin and prepared to undertake hazardous journeys to find a better life.” So, if refugees is not the word, what is?

Alex Betts calls them “survival migrants”, while others, such as the UNHCR and World Bank, use the term “forcibly displaced people”. Within this wording, the UNHCR accounts for those displaced internally, refugees under the internationally recognised definition, and asylum seekers.

Ana Maria Lara-Salinas, Migration and Health Specialist at the World Bank in Colombia, mentioned to us the logic behind this term in a case like the Venezuelan refugee crisis: “Now, in the bank and other institutions, the current Venezuelan refugee crisis is really difficult to define due to the narrow and possibly outdated definition of refugees. This leads us to resort to terms like externally forced displacement, which escapes the legal constraint of the definition of ‘refugee’, but allows to meet the basis which allows to offer protection and basic assistance.” The term of “forcibly displaced people” is used to measure the migration crisis as a whole, meaning how many forced migrants are there.

Professor Cohen points out that “forms of global citizenship or belonging can be devised that allow temporary access to labour markets alongside of, or as an alternative to, permanent residence and full citizenship”, an idea that shows how definitions and frameworks may actually be part of the ‘solution’ to some of the challenges faced by refugees, migrants and host countries.

Measuring migration and what are we missing

According to the UNHCR’s data, as of 2024 there are over 120m forced migrants in the world. Of these 120 million, over 68 million are internally displaced people, just under 38 million are refugees according to the international definition, a further 8 million are asylum-seekers, and 5.8 million additional people are classified as ‘in need of international protection’. Most of them come from Syria, Afghanistan, Sudan, Venezuela, Ukraine, the State of Palestine, Myanmar, Haiti, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Somalia. On the other end, the countries hosting most forced migrants are Iran, Turkey, Colombia, Germany and Uganda.

However, the UNHCR’s numbers, while relevant, do not fully capture the extent to which migration has increased in the past fifteen years or so, especially in terms of economic migrants. The reason that economic migrants are not well captured by these measurements and classifications is that it is difficult to distinguish between “forced” economic migration and “voluntary” economic migration. Voluntary economic migrants are considered all those with economic means to sustain themselves but still choose to migrate for economic opportunity. Nonetheless, the lines between voluntary and forced are blurry, and in practice this distinction may even be counterproductive.

Developing more robust frameworks for distinguishing between forced and voluntary economic migration, such as using mixed-method approaches combining household surveys and migration histories, could improve policy responses.

Some economic migrants, even if migrating for reasons which can qualify as forcing them to migrate, are not likely to receive the protections tended to refugees and other types of forced migrants. Thus, some “forced” economic migrants may need to use alternative channels to enter a country, especially when there is a lack of official programmes which can sponsor their stay.

Hayden Banks, Senior Public Affairs Advisor at Refugee Council, spoke to us about the impact of these official programs on the numbers around migration, especially considering the apparent rise in illegal migrants encountered at the borders of countries like the UK: “There has been a general decline in the number of safe routes for refugees to come to the UK. Despite the existence of country-specific schemes, such as those had with Afghanistan, Hong Kong and Ukraine, these schemes do not enable nationals of other countries to reach the UK, thus resorting to other methods, such as small boats.”

Alternatively, if migrants in general face many difficulties to reach their destination country, including added costs or a lack of official sponsorship programmes, they may decide or be forced to stay in a “transit country”.

Dr Lucy Hovil, Migration Partner at Expectation State and Senior Research Associate of the Refugee Law Initiative at the University of London, commented on an additional challenge regarding the measurement of migration, which is the extent of misinformation: “We think, ‘How do they swallow this stuff?’ And yet we’re actually all swallowing that kind of stuff the whole time. It’s just being fed to us in a slightly more subtle way. Misinformation skews the debate around migration, and demonstrates the role politics plays in dealing with refugees and migrants.” In her 2019 paper, Dr Hovil addresses the various misunderstandings surrounding migration, and the political framing and narratives which misinformation around migration permits.

Transit migration’s increased prominence

Experts on the topic of refugees and migration all seem to agree on one added complexity of this migratory wave: transit migration. Ana Maria Lara-Salinas spoke to us about how transit migration works, but also on why it is an added complexity: “Transit migrants go to a country, view the opportunities available, and if these are not optimal, or other security issues arise, they move on to another country. This is especially visible in Latin America with the transit towards the US, but also in Europe between EU countries or even the UK. (…) We are starting to see that countries such as Guatemala, Colombia or Mexico are having trouble to provide adequate health and education services, because transit migrants are not accounted for as effectively as other types of migrants who do plan to stay in the country, so their services are not funded well-enough for this increased demand.”

Esther Jimenez Atochero, Independent Researcher and formerly at the Migration Policy Institute, indicated to us another complexity of transit migrants: “Mainly due to the added costs, some migrants are unable to cross all the way to their destination, and the problem is that we do not know the real impact of this on the economy of transit countries, as it is still developing and is difficult to measure. We do not know what they are doing while they transit, such as “are they working”, and “what wages are they receiving for such work”.”  Thus, transit migration can be seen as a challenging aspect for the countries dealing with it, but also for the migrants themselves, who face numerous challenges to reach their destination countries, including delays, discrimination and added costs, which in some cases may force them to stay in transit countries indefinitely.

Ultimately, addressing the complexities of global migration requires coordinated action across governments, multilateral institutions, and private sectors to develop resilient, adaptive policies that balance humanitarian obligations with the economic realities of refugees, migrants and host populations.

illuminem Voices is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of leading Sustainability & Energy writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.