Textbook
economics suggests immigration should lift productivity. After all, new
immigrants open up trade opportunities; they diversify the engines of economic
growth; they offer new and different perspectives on business; and they
inherently take risks in hope of greater gains - a key ingredient of
innovation.
Yet
the results have been quite different. A recent study by the Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) found immigration has no impact on
overall productivity. In Canada, it appears immigration is, in fact, working to
reduce productivity given the chronic underemployment of immigrants in the
country. According to some estimates, 20% of the increase in the U.S.-Canada
productivity gap over the past decade can be attributed to immigration.
A
male immigrant who arrived in Canada in the 1970s made about 80¢ on the dollar
relative to a Canadian-born worker, and he was able to narrow the gap at a rate
of roughly 1¢ per year. Today, despite the fact two-thirds of newcomers have
post-secondary education, their earnings have dropped to close to 60¢ on the
dollar and the gap is narrowing at a much slower pace. Nearly half of the
individuals who immigrated to Canada between 2001 and 2006 are overqualified
for the jobs they occupy.
This
disparity is not without a price. I estimate that the current employment and
wage gaps between new immigrants and native-born Canadians, cost the economy
slightly more than $20-billion in forgone earnings. And more than 20% of
working-age male immigrants leave the country within a year of arrival.
Addressing
productivity is becoming increasingly crucial for the Canadian economy. An
aging population means that just to stabilize the ratio of working-age to
non-work in gage population would require tripling the annual number of new
arrivals for decades - something not being contemplated. So without a
significant increase in immigration-based productivity, the aging profile of
the Canadian population will work to reduce the standard of living of all
Canadians.
Many
recent changes in Canada are modeled on Australia, which maintains a 50%
smaller earnings gap between its native-born and non-native-born workers than
Canada. The key here is the recent move by the Canadian government toward an
increased use of temporary, employer-driven, lower-skilled workers, while still
making it easier for successful tempor-ary workers to gain permanent status
through the Canadian Experience Class program.
However,
the program should not grow much larger than its current size. Immigration
policy should not be based on short-term job market considerations. Too heavy a
reliance on short-term, unskilled foreign workers might improve job market
flexibility in the near term but will reduce its growth potential in the long
term due to the comparatively limited ability of low-skilled workers to adjust
to changing labour market conditions.
Even
the Federal Skilled Workers program, which is supposed to take a long-term
approach, is not immune to short-term bias.
Out
of the 29 preferred occupations in the FSW program, no less than one-third of
preferred occupations are directly linked to the construction industry. It is
not a stretch to imagine many of these immigrants will find it difficult to
find or maintain employment in a slower housing market.
The
FSW should direct its attention to the job market of tomorrow by developing an
information infrastructure system designed to identify emerging trends in
labour-market activity. That should be supplemented by a much simpler and
efficient credential-recognition process. While difficult to achieve, the ideal
situation would be to establish a single regulator assessing credentials for
each occupation.
The
bar on language proficiency should also be raised.
The
move in Australia toward mandatory pre-immigration English-language testing in
the late 1990s is probably the most important distinguishing factor explaining
the performance advantage of Australian immigrants relative to the Canadian
experience.
In Canada, language skills have also proven critical to success.
Those in the FSW program who are proficient in either national language are 50%
more likely to find a job and earn close to 40% more than FSWs who are
minimally proficient in either language.
Immigration
is critical to Canada's economy but it is clear some inherent barriers exist
that prevent us from reaping the full economic benefits new Canadians have to
offer. We need to address these to continue to improve productivity and sustain
our standard of living.
No comments:
Post a Comment