Why do some return migrants reintegrate back home better than others? Why do patterns of reintegration vary so much? Which factors shape the ability of some migrants to transfer their skills and social rights after return? Which resources (e.g., human capital, financial capital, networks and social capital) sustain returnees’ reintegration processes; and to what extent? In sum, what do we know about post-return conditions and about returnees’ aspirations, subjectivities, well-being and projects back home?
Among many others, these are the main issues that motivated the organization of comparative field surveys aimed at collecting primary data. The database on return migrants (DReM) is the consolidated version of two large scale field surveys carried out in Algeria, Armenia, Mali, Morocco and Tunisia. Field data were collected in the framework of two research projects I supervised at the European University Institute. The first one, the MIREM project (i.e. Migration de Retour au Maghreb), was generously funded by the European Union (Brussels), from 2005 to 2008. The second project, the CRIS project, was funded by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC, Bern), from 2011 to 2014.
What is the DReM?
The database on return migrants (DReM) is comprehensive, innovative and in open access. It is comprehensive because it puts at your disposal a huge number of data and variables allowing various profiles and reintegration experiences to be compared, analyzed and understood. It is innovative because there exists no comparable database – let alone in open access – focusing on post-return conditions and on the various factors shaping return migrants’ patterns of reintegration.
How to download and use the DReM:
The DReM is compressed (zipped) in a folder containing the formats in SPSS and in American Standard Code for Information Interchange (ASCII) format for STATA. All the variables strictly refer to those contained in the DReM questionnaire that was constantly used during the fieldwork in each country. Before making use of the DReM, please read the methodological framework.
Please click on the icon to download the full database in SPSS:
A bird’s-eye view of the DReM:
The DReM contains more than 2000 face-to-face interviews made with return migrants in the above-mentioned countries. Interviewees were migrants, men and women, who returned to their country of origin, over the last ten years, after having been an international migrant (whether short-term or long-term) in another country (for at least one year), and who, at the time of the survey, returned for more than three months.
In Algeria, the wilayas of Algiers, Bejaia, Setif and Tlemcen were covered.
Wilayas | N | % |
Algiers | 104 | 31,3 |
Setif | 82 | 24,7 |
Bejaia | 75 | 22,6 |
Tlemcen | 71 | 21,4 |
Total | 332 | 100,0 |
In Armenia, more than 40 percent of the interviews were carried out in the provinces of Yerevan, followed by Ararat.
Provinces | N | % |
Yerevan | 142 | 40.7 |
Ararat | 57 | 16.3 |
Kotayk | 42 | 12.0 |
Lori | 29 | 8.3 |
Shirak | 28 | 8.0 |
Gegharkunik | 21 | 6.0 |
Armavir | 8 | 2.3 |
Vayots Dzor | 7 | 2.0 |
Aragatsotn | 5 | 1.4 |
Syunik | 5 | 1.4 |
Tavush | 5 | 1.4 |
Total | 349 | 100 |
In Mali, the main regions covered by the survey were those of Bamako (more than 40 percent), Sikasso and Kayes.
Regions | N | % |
Bamako | 142 | 40.6 |
Sikasso | 102 | 29.1 |
Kayes | 53 | 15.1 |
Koulikoro | 53 | 15.1 |
Total | 350 | 100 |
In Morocco, the region of Tadla-Azilal and the coastal regions of Casablanca, Chaouia-Ourdigha and Rabat-Salé-Zemmour-Zaër were privileged.
Regions | N | % |
Tadla-Azilal | 111 | 33,6 |
Casablanca | 99 | 30,0 |
Chaouia-Ourdigha | 57 | 17,3 |
Rabat-Salé-Zemmour-Zaër | 50 | 15,2 |
Other regions | 13 | 3,9 |
Total | 330 | 100,0 |
In Tunisia, more than 60 percent of the interviews were carried out in the Grand Tunis.
Governorates | MIREM survey (N) | CRIS survey (N) | Total (N) | Total (%) |
Grand Tunis | 177 | 292 | 469 | 64.6 |
Gabès | 0 | 51 | 51 | 7.0 |
Sousse | 40 | 1 | 41 | 5.6 |
Sfax | 40 | 0 | 40 | 5.5 |
Nabeul | 28 | 6 | 34 | 4.7 |
Kairouan | 0 | 27 | 27 | 3.7 |
Médenine | 25 | 1 | 26 | 3.6 |
Mahdia | 20 | 0 | 20 | 2.8 |
Jendouba | 0 | 11 | 11 | 1.5 |
Bizerte | 0 | 7 | 7 | 1.0 |
Total | 330 | 396 | 726 | 100 |
See also:
- Methodology including the structure of the questionnaire;
- Select publications based on the DReM:
- Jean-Pierre Cassarino (2016), “Return Migration and Development: The Significance of Migration Cycles”, in Anna Triandafyllidou (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Immigration and Refugee Studies. New York: Routledge, pp. 216-222.
- Jean-Pierre Cassarino (2015), “Relire le lien entre migration de retour et entrepreneuriat, à la lumière de l’exemple tunisien“, Revue Méditerranée 124: 67-72.
- Jean-Pierre Cassarino (2015), “Le retour et la réinsertion des migrants à travers le prisme des cycles migratoires”, Mondi Migranti 3/2015: 105-121.
- Jean-Pierre Cassarino (2014), (ed.), Reintegration and Development. Florence: RSCAS, European University Institute.
- Jean-Pierre Cassarino (2008), (ed.), Return Migrants to the Maghreb Countries: Reintegration and development challenges. Florence: RSCAS, European University Institute.