Unit 5 - Essays - ANY Migration SIMPLE ENGLISH UPDATED Flashcards
‘Source areas are more likely to experience negative impacts from migration than positive impacts from migration.’
Paragraph 1: Economic Impacts – Losing Workers vs. Gaining Money from Migrants
Point 1: Negative Effect – Fewer Workers in Source Areas
When many people leave a place, there are fewer workers, which means fewer people to do important jobs.
In Mexico, more than 11 million people have moved to the USA. Many are young men from rural areas.
Example: Michoacán, a farming area in Mexico, has fewer workers to grow avocados and limes, making farming harder.
In northeastern Brazil, farms and businesses have fewer workers because people move to São Paulo for jobs.
This causes local businesses to close and fewer crops to be grown, making these places poorer.
Point 2: Positive Effect – Money Sent Home (Remittances)
People who move often send money home, which helps their families.
In 2022, Mexico got over $60 billion from migrants in the USA. This is 4% of Mexico’s economy.
Families use this money to buy food, healthcare, and education. Some even start small businesses.
However, not every place benefits equally. Bigger towns see new businesses, but small villages still struggle because too many people leave.
In northeastern Brazil, remittances help some families, but they do not bring enough jobs to stop migration.
Evaluation
In the short term, losing workers hurts the local economy.
In the long term, remittances help, but they do not fully replace the loss of workers.
The effects are different in different places. Some areas improve, but many remain poor.
Paragraph 2: Social Impacts – Family Separation and Population Changes
Point 1: Negative Effect – Families and Communities Change
When young people leave, it breaks families apart and changes the population.
In Zacatecas, Mexico, 60% of men aged 18-35 have moved away. This leaves mostly women, children, and elderly people.
In northeastern Brazil, fewer children mean schools are closing because there are not enough students.
Older people are left behind with no one to take care of them.
Point 2: Positive Effect – Better Education and Healthcare
Families who get remittances spend 15% more on education in Mexico.
In northeastern Brazil, families use the money to pay for better doctors and schools in bigger cities.
This means that, in the future, children may have better jobs and opportunities.
Evaluation
In the short term, migration causes families to separate and villages to shrink.
In the long term, education and healthcare may improve, but only if there are jobs available in the future.
Paragraph 3: Environmental and Infrastructure Impacts
Point 1: Negative Effect – Land and Services Decline
When farmers leave, their land is abandoned, making it harder to grow food in the future.
Example: In Mexico, less farming means the country has to import more food instead of growing its own.
In northeastern Brazil, when people leave, land becomes dry and soil washes away (erosion).
Roads, schools, and hospitals get less money because fewer people live there.
Point 2: Positive Effect – Some Improvements with Remittances
In some places, remittances help build roads and water systems.
In Mexico, some towns have used migrant money to build better roads and water supplies.
However, this does not happen everywhere, and many small villages still struggle.
Evaluation
Migration damages the environment because land is left empty.
Some towns improve their roads and water, but this depends on how much money migrants send home.
Paragraph 4: How the Effects Change Over Time
Point 1: Negative Short-Term Effects
At first, migration causes big problems:
Fewer workers
Schools and hospitals closing
Families separated
In Mexico, many villages became poor in the 1990s and 2000s because too many people left.
In Brazil, migration to São Paulo in the 1960s and 1970s left many rural areas without workers.
Point 2: Positive Long-Term Effects – Recovery in Some Areas
Over time, some migrants return home and bring money with them.
In San Juan de los Lagos, Mexico, return migrants started businesses and improved the local economy.
In Brazil, some rural areas are finding new ways to make money, like tourism and small industries.
Evaluation
In the short term, migration harms source areas.
In the long term, some places recover, but many remain poor and dependent on migration.
Conclusion
Migration mostly harms source areas, especially in the short term.
The biggest problems are losing workers, breaking up families, and abandoned land.
Remittances help, but they do not fix everything. Some areas recover, but many stay poor and dependent on migration.
In most cases, the negative effects are stronger than the positive ones.
