Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Dr. Elizabeth Thomas-Hope, The James Seivright Moss-Solomon (Snr) Professor of Environmental
Management, University of the West Indies, Kingston, Jamaica. <ethope@uwimona.edu.jm>
1.2.1
1.2.3
Most of the current immigrant stock had migrated prior to 1980 and much even before 1970.
This was usually associated with specific development projects or periods of peak economic
growth based on a particular industry for example oil in Trinidad, tourism in the U.S.Virgin
Islands, the Bahamas and Cayman Islands. In these situations, a specific kind of labour force
was required and immigration of the relevant groups encouraged or facilitated. The intraregional movements have subsequently continued at a steady rate with no recent major peaks
in movement.
Characteristics of the Migrants
Age and Sex. The age and sex distribution among intra-regional migrants reflects the varied
reasons which conditioned their migration in the first place. As the nature of the migration
streams will show, many of the major movements in the region had occurred prior to 1980,
indicating relatively stable and therefore mature migrant population profiles. The distribution
by sex also varies from one country to another, depending on the initial occupational selectivity
of the migrants and there is no major gender imbalance in any of the populations (CCPHC,
1994).
Education. The educational level of immigrants are, on average, higher than both the
population that they leave and that which they enter, reflecting the selective nature of the
migration process. In most cases there are significantly higher proportions of non-nationals
with tertiary education than is the case for nationals. For example, in Antigua 16.5% of the
non-national population have tertiary (pre-university or university) qualifications; only 5.5% of
the nationals do. In the Bahamas, the figure is 19.4% of the non-nationals, 7.9% of nationals; in
Barbados, 54.6% of non-nationals and 8.7% of nationals; the British Virgin Islands 17.4% of
non-nationals and 7.5% of nationals (CCPHC, 1994). The exception, that indicates the
significance of this particular trend, is the U.S.Virgin Islands where the situation is reversed:
18.1% of the non-national population have tertiary level education whereas 27.8% of the
nationals are in this position. The significance lies in the fact that the U.S.Virgin Islands have
relied to lesser extent on the in-migration of a highly qualified workforce (as this is mainly
provided by the national population), and more on a semi-skilled immigrant labour force. This
reflects the higher level of development in those islands relative to the region in general. This
is further indicated by the occupational profiles of the regional migrants.
Occupation. Migrants invariably establish or move into niche occupations in response to the
opportunities afforded by the economic and social structure of the host country. The
distribution and concentrations of immigrants in specific occupational categories thus reflect
the history of the economic growth sectors that encouraged immigration.
In the Bahamas and the British Virgin Islands, most non-nationals are involved in unskilled
work. However, the second most significant category is professionals, followed by craft and
service activities. This is a consequence of the thrust of the developments in tourism in which
the migrants obtain work and indeed, have established a niche. Most of the non-nationals in
Jamaica are in the professional (45.9%), managerial (16.3%) and technical (12.0%) categories.
This is to large extent a replacement population for Jamaicans in these occupations who
migrated to North America.(Table 3).
1.2.4
1.2.5
1.2.6
approximately 3,000 by 1984. Numbers peaked slightly to approximately 6,000 in 1986 and
then fell again in 1987 to approximately 4,000, an annual volume that has been maintained to
the present time (data from the British Migration Census Division, cited in Thomas-Hope
1994).
Although the immigration streams are not currently of great volume, the importance of the
migration trend lies in the fact that the decline in in-migration to Britain has been accompanied
by an out-migration of Caribbean migrants, resulting in a net negative migration balance. Some
of those leaving Britain moved to Canada and the United States but increasingly they went
back to the Caribbean, establishing what has now become a significant movement of return
migrants.
Immigrant Stock
The migrants in the United Kingdom who were born in the Commonwealth Caribbean
numbered approximately 500,000 in 1971; 625,000 in 1980 and 500,000 in 1991 (OPCS
Labour Force Surveys and Census). In 1991, the Caribbean-born population constituted
approximately 8% of the total United Kingdom population.
In sharp contrast to the Caribbean immigration stock in the United States and Canada, that in
the United Kingdom is quite advanced in terms of ageing. Because of the early arrival of the
majority and the negligible immigration since the 1960s, the immigration stock will disappear
by the middle of the twenty-first century but a significant British-born, Caribbean ethnic
population will remain.
RETURN MIGRATION
It is common for migrants to return to their Caribbean country of origin for periodic or regular
visits over a prolonged time before remaining indefinitely. Even then, many such persons
continue to go back to the country of former residence for varying periods of time.
The return involves not just the movement of people but also the movement of remittances in
the form of financial capital as well goods of various kinds (Thomas-Hope, 199a). These are
typically transferred back to the Caribbean country through formal and informal channels
either prior to, along with or following the return of the migrants themselves. The period of
remittance transfer invariably continues for many years and is directly or indirectly associated
with the intention to return. Not all returning migrants remit their savings to the Caribbean
country, many preferring other countries perceived by them to be safer for investment.
Professionals returning to work in the home country are able to earn sufficient to maintain
themselves and families without repatriating most, all or even any of their savings, whereas
those persons returning to retire in the Caribbean typically repatriate savings. Besides, they
also continue to be in receipt of pensions and social security payments and other retirement
benefits for the rest of their lives. This means that in many cases, returnees receive pensions
from abroad in excess of twenty years following their return.
The Returnees from the United Kingdom in particular, have formed a number of associations
of returning residents which provides the returnees themselves with a social network of persons
1.2.8
with whom they share a common experience. In some cases, they channel funds and materials
from abroad to assist in various local social welfare projects, activities that serve to indicate
their commitment to development in the local communities to which they return.
In the case of Jamaica, the realization on the part of the government that the returning
population had a potentially major contribution to make, led to the establishment of a
Returning Residents Programme. This was introduced to encourage the return of nationals
from abroad through public information in the countries of major concentrations of Jamaicans,
together with tax concessions on the importation of household goods. A Returning Residents
Facilitation Unit was created within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade, headed
by a Chief Executive Officer at Ambassadorial level (Government of Jamaica, 1998). A further
programme, the Return of Talent Programme, sponsored by the International Organization of
Migration (IOM) in association with the Government of Jamaica, assisted the return of some
50 persons from 1996-98, to work in the public sector where there was a need for qualified
persons (Williams, 1998). This was an attempt to reverse some of the perceived brain drain
that had occurred.
Trends in the Movement
The source of the returnees to Jamaica since statistics were recorded in 1992, was
predominantly the United Kingdom. (Table 7). The second largest number was from the United
States and third, Canada. In contrast, in Antigua as well as St Kitts/Nevis, the largest numbers
of returnees were intra-regional, the British Virgin Islands being the major source (Byron,
1994).
In addition to the voluntary returnees, there are now similar numbers of nationals abroad who
are returned by the authorities at the destination as deportees having been convicted of
criminal offences. In contrast to the mainstream returning residents, this group has a major
negative impact on Jamaican society and places particular strain on the police and security
services.
1.2.9
otherwise and the rest spent in the US, much of it on consumer items that were then taken
home by the workers on conclusion of the contract (McCoy, 1985).
CONCLUSION
Intra-regional and extra-regional migrants are neither the least educated of the society, nor the
poorest and least employable, reinforcing the observation that international migration is a
selection of the fittest (Thomas-Hope, 1992). Migration is highly selective in all its aspects
and at all its locations the places of origin and destination. As a consequence, there is a
tendency for Caribbean countries to lose a disproportionate number of educated and skilled
persons through migration, with a potentially negative impact upon small, developing states.
However, there is a compensatory set of movements, and this intrinsic dynamic of the
migration process must not be underestimated (Maingot,1999; Thomas-Hope, 1999b). The loss
of skilled persons from any Caribbean country results in the need to fill high level occupational
vacancies from other migrants, either from other parts of the region or outside. The pattern that
emerges appears to reflect movement between countries in a developmental hierarchy to be
sure, but this must not be interpreted in a simplistic way to suggest mono-causal explanations
for the pattern of movement. The issue is whether the overall migration process produces a net
loss or net gain for the countries affected.
The out-migration of skilled nationals need not be regarded as a net loss to the sending country
if it can create space for the mobility of other people already in the system and an opportunity
to encourage new in-migration. There is much to be gained from the fresh input of immigrants
and the commitment of returning nationals, provided that they enter an environment within
which they can effectively participate and to which they can usefully contribute.
Transnational Mobility
This is a situation whereby Caribbean people maintain a home base in two countries between
which they move with varying frequency. The extent of this phenomenon has risen greatly
since the 1980s with the increased facility for travel and it may well increase further. Such
mobility reflects the importance of the migration linkages not only at the country or national
level but at the level of the household and family as well.
The simultaneous impact of both countries upon the households, wider families and even
communities are continual, and those involved constantly adapt their lives and livelihoods
around the relative opportunities of each place for work, investment, education, social activity
and recreation. In this way the household attempts to collectively minimize risks and maximize
opportunities. Within this framework, there is a constant flow of information and ideas across
national boundaries and the movement in one or other direction of money and material goods
and also ideas, fashions and fads. Families re-unite at one or other location from time to time
and children move back and forth for holidays, socializing in a transnational environment. This
is of major significance in the consolidating of networks and experiences that are transferred
from one generation to another. It has also conditioned the characteristics of the return
migration process. For their contacts and patterns of mobility continue in varying degrees after
the return has taken place, and while providing an insurance or safety valve for any future wish
to re-migrate, they also provide numerous opportunities for enrichment at the personal level.
1.2.11
From the perspective of the wider society, the transnational community creates countless
opportunities for the Caribbean region in the export of culture and local products. Carribbean
populations in North America and Europe provide the main channels and disseminators of
Caribbean culture and markets for its food and other ethnic products. Caribbean groups
launch art, drama and musical shows in the localities of its migrant communities. Carnival in
Toronto and London promotes the market for Caribbean culture, especially music and drama,
painting, sculpture and craft.
It must be emphasised that transnational households and return migration are not new to the
Caribbean process, but they have recently become important trends because of increased
opportunities for such activities in recent decades. So important are these trends that they
require a different paradigm for the conceptualization of migration itself and a new perspective
on the implication for policy than that which has traditionally pertained in the past.
Implications for Policy
On the basis of the trends and patterns of Caribbean in- and out-migration, an important issue
for policy is the recognition of the potential value of the free movement of
people, both to individuals and countries. A contradictory, therefore negative
factor, could be the reinforcement of dependency of Caribbean countries,
especially in relation to countries of the North. From the perspective of culture,
there could be the danger of local traditions being lost as they become
overwhelmed by the dominance of North American or European culture and
tastes of all kinds, not least that for imported fast food instead of local varieties.
Although there are dangers in this, the trends towards increasing globalization at the beginning
of the twenty-first century make integration in global networks an imperative for
development. Without the transnational communities, the alternative could be a
total displacement of local cultures and traditions. The transnational community
actually provides one of the most effective ways of counter-balancing the
direction of cultural importation, by providing critical linkages for the
strengthening of Caribbean culture and the reaping of some of its economic
rewards. Migration has long been a means of extending the opportunities, and
overcoming some of the limitations, of small, developing Caribbean states and,
overall, has enriched the region in a variety of ways.
The trends have shown that Caribbean migration is highly responsive to occupational and
educational opportunities in other countries, yet there is also a strong tendency to return to the
native country later on. Strategies for harnessing the potential human capital at all points of the
migration trajectory, as well as the financial and other material generated by and available
through migration, are necessary so that these potential assets are not wasted.
With regard to the movement of human capital, an initiative for filling labour force needs
throughout the Caribbean followed the West Indian Commission Report Time for Action
(1992). The free movement of labour between countries of the Caribbean Community was
proposed, with a view to establishing a single market for human resources, served by a
common pool of workers at all levels of skill. The intention was to begin with opportunities for
1.2.12
freer movement of professional and skilled persons, starting with graduates of the University of
the West Indies, itself a regional institution. It is important that initiatives such as this be fully
implemented and more effectively facilitated than is currently the case. Return migrants have
demonstrated their propensity for leading and becoming involved in developmental projects.
This is input and potential input in which national governments should be proactive, engaging
in dialogue with migrant groups in order that efforts be sustainable in their effects.
In terms of financial capital, there are already strong indications of the potential flows back to
the original source countries associated with the migration process. The transnational
household and return migration are of particular value in the generation and direction of these
flows. The creation and publicizing of incentives for investment are not only an imperative but
must be of such a kind that they are sustainable in their impact. This is especially important
given the uncertainty of the period over which large remittances will be received, for they will
only be sustained for as long as migrants continue to return to their countries of origin.
Specific programmes may be launched to capitalize on the benefits of migration, and these are
important initiatives, but the trends show that there is much spontaneous positive feedback
through the migration process and this too needs to be encouraged. For undoubtedly, in the
long run, the existence of a social, economic and political environment conducive to
productivity and social development is the essential prerequisite for a positive net impact of
immigration and return migration.
REFERENCES
Byron, M. (1994), Post-war Caribbean Migration to Britain: the Unfinished Cycle, Aldershot, U. K.
CCPHC (Caribbean Community Regional Census Office) (1994), Commonwealth Caribbean
Population and Housing Census, 1991, Port of Spain, Trinidad.
ECLAC (Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean) (2000), Demographic
Bulletin: International Migration in Latin America, Santiago, Chile, XXXIII: 65.
Government of Jamaica, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade (1998) The Returning Residents
Programme 1993-1997, Kingston, Jamaica, Ministry Paper No. 12/98.
McCoy, T. L. and Wood, C. H. (1982), Caribbean Workers in the Florida Sugar Cane Industry
Occasional Paper No. 2 Centre for Latin America Studies, University of Florida, Gainesville,
Florida.
McCoy, T. L. (1985), The Impact of US Temporary Worker Programs on Caribbean Development:
Evidence from H-2 Workers in Florida Sugar. In: Robert Pastor, Migration and Development
in the Caribbean: The Unexplored Connection, Boulder, Colorado, 178-206.
Maingot, Anthony P.(1999) Emigration Dynamics in the Caribbean: The Cases of Haiti and the
Dominican Republic. In: Reginald Appleyard, Emigration Dynamics in Developing Countries
Volume III: Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean, Aldershot, U.K., 232-284.
North D. S. and Whitehead, J. (1991), Policy Recommendations for Improving the Utisation of
Emigrant Resources in the Eastern Caribbean Nations. In: A. P. Maingot, Small Country
1.2.13
1.2.14
Table 1
Place of Birth of Nonnationals in Select Caribbean Countries 1990 and 1991
Antigua
Bahamas
Place of Birth
Total Percent
Total Percent
Total
13.335
100,0 26754
100
Anguilla
1
0,0
Antigua
N/A
N/A
14
0,1
Bahamas
5
0,0
N/A
N/A
Barbados
216
1,8
245
0,9
Belize
8
0,1
33
0,1
Bermuda
10
0,1
35
0,1
British Virgin Islands
70
0,6
5
0
Dominica
2.580
20,9
37
0,1
Grenada
122
1,0
30
0,1
Guyana
1.753
14,2
438
1,6
Jamaica
408
3,3 2.920
10,9
Montserrat
892
7,2
2
0
St. Kitts and Nevis
495
4,0
14
0,1
St. Lucia
414
3,4
26
0,1
St. Vincent
505
4,1
21
0,1
Trinidad
376
3,0
290
1,1
Turks and Caicos
4
0,0 2.173
8,1
Us. Virgin Islands
451
3,7
5
0
All Others
4.025
32,7 20.466
76,5
British
Virgin Islands
US
Virgin Islands
Total Percent
Total
8.035 100,0 30.407
899
355
4,4 4.398
13
0,2
86
1,1
3
0,0
9
0,1
N/A
N/A 2.665
566
7,0 3.219
290
3,6
770
9,6
249
3,1
99
1,2
623
1.422
17,7 5.828
251
3,1 2.533
957
11,9
189
2,4 1.837
2
0,0
565
7,0
N/A
2.209
27,5 8.405
Source: Based on data from, Caribbean Community Regional Census Office, 1994
N/A - Not Applicable
- Denotes no Migrants or amalgamation in the category ' All Others'
1.2.15
Percent
100,0
3,0
14,5
8,8
10,6
2,0
19,2
8,3
6,0
N/A
27,6
Trinidad
and Tobago
Total Percent
49.820
95,2
2.411
0,0
16.589
33,3
5.140
10,3
1.306
2,6
11.625
23,3
N/A
N/A
12.749
25,5
Table 2
Regional Migration Rates for Select Caribbean Countries 1990 and 1991
Selected Countries
Total
Antigua and Barbuda
Bahamas
Barbados
British Virgin Islands
Dominica
Grenada
Guyana
Jamaica
Montserrat
St. Kitts and Nevis
St. Lucia
St. Vincent
Trinidad and Tobago
U.S Virgin Island
Total
Population
Natives
5.219.302
59.104
233.228
244.817
16.105
69.463
83.838
701.654
2.299.675
10.634
40.612
133.308
106.482
1.118.574
101.809
5.117.708
55.056
210.590
236.322
13.847
67.642
82.155
698.950
2.271.072
9.928
38.886
130.723
104.980
1.105.325
92.232
Migrants
In Out Migrants
Migrants
104.669
8.287
4.047
12.847
5.812
871
2.806
1.003
1.362
1.553
2.996
2.734
37.071
23.280
104.669
5.620
109
4.240
2.949
7.507
18.687
13.453
4.926
1.958
8.309
8.483
18.169
8.735
1.524
Source: Based on data from, Caribbean Community Regional Census Office, 1994
- Denotes that no data were available
1.2.16
Migrant Rates
In Out Migrants
Migrants
15,1
1,9
5,4
42
1,3
3,4
0,1
13,7
4
2,3
2,6
3,4
25,2
10,7
0,1
1,9
26,8
10,1
19,1
1,9
0,2
18,6
18,2
6,2
15,1
0,8
2,2
Table 3
Occupational Status By Nationality in Select Caribbean Countries, 1990
Bahamas
Occupation
Total
Jamaica
Nationals
Nonnationals
Nationals
Nonnationals
Total Percent
Total Percent
Total Percent
Total
Percent
89.744
Total Percent
Total Percent
100,0
1.202
100,0
3.330
100,0
5.319
100,0
5,1
1.062
6,8
33.028
4,9
196
16,3
399
12,0
422
7,9
0,0
0,0
Professional
6.054
6,7
2.202
14,0
36.460
5,4
552
45,9
223
6,7
365
6,9
8.043
9,0
906
5,8
33.478
5,0
144
12,0
439
13,2
445
8,4
Clerk
15.041
16,8
980
6,2
56.557
8,4
112
9,3
596
17,9
409
7,7
20.705
23,1
1.211
7,7
89.501
13,3
44
3,7
431
12,9
1.133
21,3
3.245
3,6
1.765
11,2 121.761
18,1
33
2,7
142
4,3
135
2,5
13.790
15,4
2.060
13,1 115.916
17,2
48
4,0
493
14,8
1.280
24,1
49.941
7,4
17
1,4
219
6,6
224
4,2
32,8 136.365
20,3
56
4,7
387
11,6
10
17,0
Hospitality
4.573
5,1
381
13.750
15,3
5.148
100,0 673.007
Nonnationals
4.543
Legislator/Manager
100,0 15.715
Nationals
2,4
1.2.18
Source: Based on data from, Caribbean Community Regional Census Office, 1994
- Denotes that no data were available
Nonnationals
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
13.485
100,0
20.580
100,0
Executive Managerial
1.530
11,3
1.691
8,2
Professional speciality
1.330
9,9
1.374
6,7
4.753
35,2
5.668
27,5
2.361
17,5
4.829
23,5
235
1,7
364
1,8
1.513
11,2
3.602
17,5
1.763
13,1
3.052
14,8
Source: Based on data from, Caribbean Community Regional Census Office, 1994
Table 4
Immigrants Admitted to the United States By Country of Birth Fiscal Years 1987 1997
Country of Birth
1.2.18
Anguilla
Antigua
Aruba
Bahamas
Barbados
Bermuda
British Virgin Is.
Cayman Is
Cuba
Dominica
Dominican Republic
Grenada
Guadeloupe
Haiti
Jamaica
Martinique
Montserrat
Netherlands Antilles
St. Kitts and Nevis
St. Lucia
St. Vincent & The Grenadines
Trinidad and Tobago
Turks and Caicos Is.
Unknown
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
21
874
75
556
1.665
154
296
25
28.916
740
24.858
1.098
37
14.819
23.148
34
104
81
589
496
746
3.543
21
3
36
837
47
1.283
1.455
166
395
26
17.558
611
27.189
842
54
34.806
20.966
25
104
62
660
606
634
3.947
47
1
43
979
73
861
1.616
182
258
48
10.046
748
26.723
1.046
38
13.658
24.523
30
124
65
795
709
892
5.394
78
3
41
1.319
83
1.378
1.745
203
105
53
10.645
963
42.195
1.294
54
20.324
25.013
32
172
80
896
833
973
6.740
206
4
56
944
56
1.062
1.460
146
137
23
10.349
982
41.405
979
34
47.527
23.828
25
143
40
830
766
808
8.407
121
11
46
619
62
641
1.091
153
174
40
11.791
809
41.969
848
50
11.002
18.915
25
104
37
626
654
687
7.008
59
3
23
554
36
686
1.184
156
166
16
13.666
683
45.420
827
49
10.094
17.241
17
102
65
544
634
657
6.577
39
2
31
438
24
589
897
118
137
30
14.727
507
51.189
595
41
13.333
14.349
20
69
48
370
449
524
6.292
26
1
26
374
27
585
734
111
98
26
17.937
591
38.512
583
48
14.021
16.398
11
83
58
360
403
349
5.424
27
2
36
406
28
768
1.043
103
87
24
26.466
797
39.604
787
52
18.386
19.089
23
99
76
357
582
606
7.344
35
3
19
393
26
641
829
75
93
35
33.587
746
27.053
755
52
15.057
17.840
20
99
43
377
531
581
6.409
37
1
Source: US Immigration and Naturalization Services Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1997
Table 5
Immigrants Admitted to the United States By Major Occupation Group, 1997
Occupation
Country of Birth
Total
Caribbean
Cuba
Dominican Republic
Haiti
Jamaica
Trinidad and Tobago
Other Caribbean
105.299
33.587
27.053
15.057
17.840
6.409
5.353
Professional
Executive
specialty and administrative
Technical
and managerial
4.565
1.198
1.271
494
895
383
324
1.360
347
401
150
200
137
125
Sales
Administrative
support
2.403
1.156
387
387
255
110
108
2.575
673
672
218
775
261
158
Precision
Operator,
Farming Service No occupation
Production,
fabricator,
forestry
or no reported1
craft and repair and labour and fishing
4.911
2.243
1.099
795
310
257
207
14.409
8.272
3.227
1.288
936
361
325
1.2.18
Source: US Immigration and Naturalization Services Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1997
1
Includes homemakers, students, unemployed or retired persons, and others not reporting or with an unknown occupation
1.296
165
462
370
251
10
38
10.587
2.696
1.326
835
3.831
860
1.039
63.011
16.837
18.208
10.520
10.387
4.030
3.029
Table 6
Country of Last Permanent Residence by Year of Landing for Canada, 1990-1996
Country of Birth
1.2.18
Total
Anguilla
Antigua
Aruba
Bahamas
Barbados
Bermuda
Cayman Is
Cuba
Dominica
Dominican Republic
Grenada
Guadeloupe
Haiti
Jamaica
Martinique
Montserrat
Netherlands Antilles
Puerto Rico
St. Kitts and Nevis
St. Lucia
St. Vincent and The Grenadines
Trinidad and Tobago
Turks and Caicos Is.
Virgin Islands, British
Virgin Islands U.S.A
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
13.865
25
1
27
335
47
16
146
73
361
166
18
2.355
4.887
10
16
15
3
38
100
175
2.851
22
2
20.001
2
69
32
396
39
19
165
128
517
273
14
2.793
4.997
35
9
9
6
33
130
270
2.969
1
15
1
20.063
2
67
4
23
350
34
3
237
121
556
434
6
2.365
5.921
15
12
11
7
56
124
290
4.304
1
6
3
15.751
58
2
21
410
34
10
385
105
643
493
9
3.629
5.990
15
6
13
3
35
152
367
4.171
1
8
3
9.737
25
32
27
9
372
52
425
231
6
2.085
3.882
5
6
8
17
75
186
2.347
2
8
2
8.027
32
1
28
216
22
10
443
73
276
359
10
2.007
3.599
3
4
9
1
22
97
231
2.607
1
4
1
9.246
4
23
32
180
21
6
512
59
307
359
4
1.935
3.275
7
6
7
5
16
118
244
2.199
1
2
-
Table 7
Select Countries: Percentage Distribution of Return Migrants by Country Last Lived, 1990
Country from which
migrants returned
1.2.18
Antigua /Barbuda
Barbados
St. Lucia
Trinidad
St. Croix
St. Thomas
Aruba
Martinique
Canada
United Kingdom
USA
Venezuela
US Virgin Islands
Not Stated
Other Countries
Antigua
BVI
Grenada
St. Lucia
St. Vincent
Barbados
St.
Kitts/Nevis
Jamaica
---2,27
1,04
3,07
15,09
11,41
6,47
0,07
6,54
10,70
27,15
0,04
---0,69
21,63
2,89
2,83
0,40
1,21
2,36
44,89
0,20
---1,01
3,16
27,32
---------13,73
0,34
2,82
1,08
38,25
0,25
0,25
3,47
0,03
6,79
22,08
11,64
3,35
---1,82
7,84
1,62
12,98
---2,59
7,51
1,11
0,43
12,91
4,70
18,86
13,30
0,56
---0,14
20,23
1,14
12,88
2,01
35,60
0,96
0,10
2,90
0,17
6,87
14,73
8,99
0,23
---0,10
13,32
------------------------13,00
60,00
27,00
-------------
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
8,00
34,00
20,00
0,00
38,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
11,30
43,80
38,10
0,00
0,00
0,00
6,80
Source: Based on data from Caribbean Community Regional Census Office, 1994
Table 8
Age of Returnees in Selected Caribbean Islands
Country
Grenada
St. Lucia
Antigua
Age Range
> 30
30 - > 50
50 +
> 30
30 - > 50
50 +
> 30
30 - > 50
50 +
> 30
30 - > 50
50 +
> 30
TOTAL
21,90
36,80
41,20
9,00
46,30
44,70
24,10
39,80
36,10
28,40
40,60
31,00
34,90
1.2.18
Table 9
Major Sectors of the Jamaican Economy: Revenue as a Percentage of Gross Domestic Product
Year
Remittances as a percentage of GDP
1991
4,1
1992
7,8
1993
8,1
1994
11,5
1995
11,7
1996
10,7
1997
9,8
3,1
2,8
2,2
1,8
1,5
1,4
1,2
14,7
14,8
14,8
13,9
13,6
11
10,5
2,4
2,6
2,6
1,8
2,1
1,6
Source: Based on data from the Bank of Jamaica, Planning Institue of Jamaica, Economic and Social Survey, 1996 and 1997