NEW CONCEPTS AND APPROACHES OF MIGRATION

Transcription

1 NEW CONCEPTS AND APPROACHES OF MIGRATION Migle Sarvutyte 1, Dalia Streimikiene 2 1 Vilnius University Kaunas Faculty of Humanities, Lithuania, msarvutyte@gmail.com 2 Vilnius University Kaunas Faculty of Humanities, Lithuania, dalia@mail.lei.lt Abstract The goal of the article is to review literature dealing with migration theories and to summarize fundamental reasons of high emigration rate in Lithuania. Migration process is very complicated and should be analysed taking into account various interrelated micro and macro internal and external factors but simplification is necessary seeking to define the main driving forces of decision to emigrate in Lithuania making our country the leader among EU member states in terms of net migration rate. The paper aims to emphasize institutional, culture, psychological and other factors causing such situation in Lithuania. Keywords: labor migration, theories, factors of emigration, Lithuania. Introduction At present, there is no single, coherent theory of international migration, only a fragmented set of various theories that have developed largely in isolation from one another, sometimes but not always segmented by disciplinary boundaries and not able to provide theoretical background for assessing migration reasons and consequences in Lithuania as well as development policies to mitigation negative effects of migration. Immigration may begin for a variety of reasons a desire for individual income gain, an attempt to diversify risks to household income, a program of recruitment to satisfy employer demands for low-wage workers, an international displacement of peasants by market penetration within peripheral regions, or some combination thereof. The neoclassical economic migration s models highlight that the main reason for migration is changes of labor market and differences of wages. According to this attitude, these reasons are the main important for the emigrants (Kazlauskiene & Rinkevičius, 2006, Daugeliene, 2007). For example segmented labor market approach stresses the demand of immigrants in the secondary sector of the receiving countries labor market (Kazlauskiene& Rinkevičius, 2006). The world theory sees migration as natural consequence of unequal capital flows all over the world. The modern theories in contrast, considers conditions in a variety of markets, not just labor markets. It views migration as a household decision taken to minimize risks to family income or to overcome capital constraints on family production activities (Masseys et al, 1993). Authors Urbonavicienė, Tvaronaivičienė (2008) point out, that, despite economic driving forces are rather significant, they alone can not explain why similarly developed countries demonstrate different propensity to emigrate. Difference between qualified and low-qualified labor markets has been distinguished and new aspects of qualified labor force emigration motives in Lithuania were emphasized. Stark (2006) provides an analytical behavioral explanation for the relationship between income inequality, as measured by the Gini coefficient, and the incentive to migrate. The higher total relative deprivation of a population leads to a stronger incentive to engage in migration for a given level of a population's income; that total relative deprivation is positively related to the Gini coefficient; and that, consequently, the Gini coefficient and migration are positively correlated, holding the population's income constant. In Choice-Behavior model of decision making model for migration was presented by E. Ch. Muller (1982) the main attention is paid to unemployment. The migrant is making choice between alternative sites of employment. One of alternatives is current employment. Some representatives of Behavioral economics stress the impact on animal spirit on emigration and other economic activities in labor market such as involuntary unemployment (Akerlof & Shiller, 2009). Other authors stress such subjective migration factors as individual motives relate with age, education, social status, information about potential countries to emigrate, language skills, the distance to country of destination, the family relations in country of destination and other micro-economic level factors (Choi et al, 2000; Kvainauskaitė, 2005). Lithuania has very high emigration rate, the highest among new EU member states. There are a lot of discussions about the main reasons and consequences of migration in Lithuanian and international scientific literature (Massey et al, 2003; Stark, 2006; Hazans, 2003; Kairienė et al, 2008; Čiarnienė et al, 2009; Čekanavičius & Kasnauskienė, 2009; Glinskienė & Petuškienė, 2009; Rudžinskienė, 2008; Karalevičienė, 2009; Stulgienė & Daunorienė, 2009; Urbonavicienė & Tvaronaivičienė, 2008, Krisciunas & Greblikaite, 2007, Daugeliene & Marcinkeviciene, 2009). The main reasons of migration are listed as: psychological, cultural, economic-social, the developed migration structure representing migration factor by itself, the 226

2 myths related with migration however there are still no answer why Lithuania is exemption in this case comparing with other transition, post-communist economies. The aim of the article is to review literature dealing with migration theories and to systematize the most important factors of emigration from theoretical point of view. The main tasks of the paper is to analyse modern migration approaches and theories and empirical studies of migration reasons in Lithuania seeking to provide the systematic approach of migration causes in Lithuania and to develop policy proposals to mitigate migration. Migration theories and concepts The neoclassical migration theory stresses the main macroeconomic factors of migration: the differences of labor demand and supply and wage differences on international labor markets. The new migration theory emphasizes the individual strategy of person of diversification of income sources and minimization of risks. Therefore the theory also see the main migration reasons though depended on individuals strategy related with economic situation of the country, labor market conditions, i.e. probability of finding a job in region; different wages and unemployment benefits, individual s preference for leisure, and costs of moving. Other theories such as two labor market theory points the existents of two labor markets in the country: for local population with high wages and for emigrants with low wages and high health risks. Labor demand in second labor market attracts immigrants from low income countries. The world system theory (Massey et al, 2003) points on labor force movement from peripheries to the centers or from low income countries to high income countries. The other quite similar theory is migration systems theory. This theory analyses the interaction of micro and macro structures in different countries and provides explanation of international migration process from the point of view of these interactions (Kritz et al, 1992). Migrant networks theory analyses the interpersonal ties that connect migrants, former migrants, and non-migrants in origin and destination areas through ties of friendship, and shared community origin. These links increase the likelihood of international movement because they lower the costs and risks of movement and increase the expected net returns to migration. The main aspects of this theory are: declining costs and declining risks. Luckman s theory of individuality further suggests that networks, which expose people to different social groups, not only transmit strategic information, but also serve as a conduit for new cultural values, identity, and desires (Berger & Luckman, 1967). Behavioral theory developed by G. A. Akerlof describes how human psychology drives the economy and causes several economic problems which can t be effectively solved by markets (Akerlof & Shiller, 2009). One of the main problems of economy is involuntary unemployment having huge impact on labor markets and migration of labor forces. According G. Akelrof and Shiler (2009) the main reason of involuntary unemployment is the specific of labor market which is very different from commodity or stock markets is human demand for fairness. The so called the efficient wage theory explains the labor market failure to reach equilibrium and to clear the wages. The efficiency or effectiveness of labor depends on the wage employees is paid. The transaction between the buyer and the seller of labor only begins when the labor is employed and the wage is agreed upon. The employee must not only appear for the appointed number of hours but also he must be motivated. Because of its effect on morale the employer may want to pay a wage that is higher than the lowest wage the worker would be willing to accept. And for employers these fair wages that they want to pay their will be higher than the wages at which all the workers in the market start to accepting work. In that case the supply of labor is more than the demand for it. Thus there is a gap between the supply of labor and demand for labor. That gap consists of people who cannot find jobs. Therefore in the case of involuntary unemployment there is permanent reason for migration in order to find the job. The various propositions of world systems theory, network theory, institutional theory, and the theory of cumulative causation all suggest that migration flows acquire a measure of stability and structure over space and time, allowing for the identification of stable international migration systems. An international migration system generally includes a core receiving region, which may be a country or group of countries, and a set of specific sending countries linked to it by unusually large flows of immigrants. Although not a separate theory so much as a generalization following from the foregoing theories, a migration processes yield several interesting hypotheses and propositions. It is possible that individuals engage in cost-benefit calculations; that households act to diversify labor allocations; and that the socioeconomic context within which these decisions are made is determined by structural forces operating at the national and international levels. Altogether it is necessary to be skeptical both of atomistic theories that deny the importance of structural constraints on individual decisions, and of structural theories that deny agency to individuals and 227

3 families. The psychological and cultural factors are very important on individuals decision to emigrate taking into account local and external macroeconomic, social, institutional an legal, political, geographical factors influencing this decision (Čiarnienė et al, 2009). The conceptual framework for migration process Based on the main findings from migration theories briefly discussed above the simplified scheme of migration process can be developed (Figure 1). This scheme represents just one side of migration process then the other important side consequences of migration are left aside. It is necessary to stress that both factors and consequences of migration are closely related as from local country or external point of view. Cultural values and national personality Geographical position climate Power Uncertainty avoidance Individualism Masculinity Short-long term orientation Extraversion Neuroticism Psychotism Demography Individual personality Macro-economic situation Institutional and political factors Happiness Emigration Figure 1. The main local or internal factors of emigration The negative impact of migration on country economics generates additional flows of migration therefore these both sides needs to be evaluated very carefully. In our analysis which aims on the identification of the main factors influencing migration however just one side of migration process have been considered. Migration process is very complicated and should be analysed taking into account various interrelated micro and macro internal and external factors but simplification is necessary seeking to define the main driving forces of decision to emigrate in Lithuania making our country the leader among EU member states in terms of net migration rate per thou inhabitants. In our paper we put emphasis on the main economic and other factors causing such situation in Lithuania. As subjective well being and happiness play a central role in our migration process scheme it is necessary to discuss this concept. Happiness is not identical to utility, but it well reflects people's satisfaction with life or with quality of life (Susniene & Jurkauskas, 2009, Akranaviciute & Ruzevicius, 2007). For many purposes, it can be considered a useful approximation to utility. Happiness depends on three sets of factors (Frey & Stutzer, 2002): demographic and personality factors, such as age, gender and family circumstances, as well as nationality, culture values, education and health; economic factors, in particular unemployment, income, and inflation; political and institutional factors such as the extent of possibilities for citizens to participate in politics, the quality of 228

4 institutions etc. Therefore the main factors of happiness are the same as for migration. Lithuanians are being considered as melancholic and unhappy nation therefore it is possible to raise hypothesis that emigration and happiness are also closely related in the case of Lithuanians. As one see from Figure 1 the main internal or country level factors of emigration are closely related. The decision to emigrate or individual emigration strategy depends on the complex of interrelated cultural, geographical, psychological and macro-economic, political, institutional factors. The scheme is simplified seeking to emphasize the main factors causing the highest net migration rates in Lithuania comparing with other EU member states. Some of the factors presented in the scheme can be evaluated and compared between countries in the term of indicators. Some of them such as psychological and cultural identity which are also very important but left in our analysis as poorly descriptive. It is also important to distinguish between main macro-economic factors having direct impact emigration. The main of them is unemployment which is also very important for the happiness. The income level, inflation or income inequality and comparable deprivation are also important in sense of defining individual happiness and decision to emigrate. Growing evidence that an individual's happiness level is largely shaped by genetic factors has aroused widespread interest. Though the evidence of genetic influences on well-being is powerful however it is clear from various research that cultural and historical factors also play powerful roles (Inglerhart & Klingemann, 2000; Clark & Oswald, 1994; Frey & Stutzer, 2002). The 'relative income hypothesis' was formulated and econometrically tested by James Duesenberry (1949). The concept of relative deprivation as cause of emigration is closely related in this sense. The new economic theorists argue, in contrast, that households send workers abroad not only to improve income in absolute terms, but also to increase income relative to other households, and, hence, to reduce their relative deprivation compared with some reference group (Stark, 2006). Stark (2006) also defined the relationship between income inequality, as measured by the Gini coefficient, and the incentive to migrate. In combined time series-cross section studies, it has been shown that a higher inflation rate substantially reduces reported happiness (Frey & Stutzer, 2002). Special attention should be paid to geographical, cultural, institutional and political factors of happiness as well having impact on decision to emigrate. The geography approach stresses the direct effect that geographical factors have on the economic development and happiness as well. Geography determines climate, natural resources, agricultural productivity, diseases, transport costs, access to markets and other characteristics, that play a role in determining the economic growth and development (Jankauskas & Šeputienė, 2009). The leading contributor in this field Jeffrey Sachs and his co-authors have argued in a series of papers that measures of geography may directly affect the level of economic development in addition to the undoubted effects of the institutional environment of a country (Rodrik, 2000; Sachs, 2003). In Lithuania geographical conditions, climate and political situation do not contribute to happiness. The advocates of institutions argue that definite institutional environment (measured through property rights, rule of law, corruption, bureaucratic quality and other institutional variables) is the key precondition of economic development. They state, that the impact of geography on economic outcomes is only indirect, due to the impact geography makes on institutions, the main source of economic growth and development. Five indexes were constructed by World Bank to measure the quality of institutional environment: Civil and political freedom index (CPFI), Regulatory and business freedom index (RBFI), Rule of law index (RLI), Corruption index (CI) and Property rights index (PRI). Table 1 lists the indicators used for the construction of indices. Constructed indices capture different dimensions of the institutional environment. To obtain an overall index of the institutional environment for each country we computed the institutional environment index (IAI). IAI is the simple average of five indices (Jankauskas & Šeputienė, 2009). Special attentions should be paid on cultural values of the country. Ethnic culture can be described as the matter that has the expression of behavior and comes from the depth of historical and genetic inheritance. Generational culture is important, but ever-changing. Political classification (left, right, centrist) has many (changeable) hues, too. Writers such as Hofstede have sought dimensions to consider. His 4 dimension model looked at power distance, collectivism v. individualism, femininity v. masculinity and uncertainty avoidance. Later he added long-term v. short-term orientation. T. Hofstede s research provides insights into other cultures and if understood and applied properly, this information can be useful in terms of evaluation of emigration factors as well. As one can see from Figure 1 Hofstede has found five dimensions of culture: power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance and long term orientation (Hofstede, 1991). Lithuania has been included in one cross-cultural study, measuring the differences in personality characteristics of managers in Lithuania, Georgia, the Ukraine and Great Britain (Cook et al, 1998; Baltrimienė, 2005). 229

5 Psychological factors of emigration have impact on happiness and caused by mainly by personality however they are also closely related with relational factors such as national personality, culture values, geography, economic, social, institutional and political situation of the country. The research has also been conducted to ascertain whether there are differences between nations in personality traits and whether these have economic and demographic correlates. Cross-cultural personality research has been much aided by the development of the Eysenck (1983) Personality Questionnaire (EPQ), first standardized in England (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975) and constructed to measure the three major dimensions of E (extraversion vs introversion), N (neuroticism vs emotional stability) and P (psychoticism vs ego control). The EPQ has been standardized in a number of countries and the earlier research has been summarized by Barrett and Eysenck (1984). The primary aims of these cross-cultural studies have been to establish the presence of the major dimensions of E, N and P in other cultures and to provide a valid measuring instrument for use in the country under consideration; and to allow for the comparison of norms on these dimensions between different countries. Although the Eysenckian approach has been dominant in this field, a variety of additional questionnaire studies have examined national differences in personality traits (Lynn & Martin, 1995). The happiness is also very much affected by culture values, national personality as shows what people value the most however these cultural and national personality differences describe averages or tendencies and not characteristics of individuals therefore a country's scores should not be interpreted as deterministic. The empirical results The empirical studies conducted in Lithuania and other countries resulted that EU free movement policy, different unemployment levels, different wages, different unemployment benefit levels and different moving costs lead to increase of migration from new member states to old member states. As was already mentioned Lithuania has very high net migration rates and though these rates have been declining since 2000 the economic crisis had negative impact and since 2008 emigration started to increase again.the main factors having impact on emigration (Figure 1) expressed in indicators are presented for Lithuania, Poland, Ireland and UK in Table 1. The data for these countries were selected for comparison as Lithuania and Poland have the highest emigration flows to United Kingdom and Ireland. As one can see from data provided in Table 1 the Lithuania and Poland have similar economic, social and institutional indicators as well as Ireland and United Kingdom do. Lithuania and Poland have low GDP/capita, high unemployment and almost 10 times lower wages then in UK and Ireland. The economic and social data for Lithuania and Poland are quite similar. Gini index and poverty level are higher in Lithuania and Poland then in UK and Ireland however the difference is not such huge like in the case of economic indicators. Though social-economic data are quite comparable for Poland and Lithuania however there are some differences in cultural and national personality values between these countries. There is a medium power distance in Lithuania (score 45). Just Ireland has the lower score (28). The low score reflects culture which believes how institutional and organizational power should be distributed equally and that the decision of the power holders should be challenged. UK has very high score and this indicates the hierarchy in the society, company and family. Lithuania's ranking on the Individualism is about average for this dimension and has the lowest score (50) comparing with other countries in the Table 1. In collectivistic cultures there is larger psychological distance between in-group and out-group. In-group members are expected to have more loyalty to the group. UK and Ireland have quite high individualism rating. Poland s rank is also higher that Lithuanian s therefore Lithuanian s culture is not individualistic and more close to eastern cultures. Lithuania's ranking on the Masculinity dimension is on the high position (score 67). Especial high score has Poland (95). This means that culture believe development in achievement and ambitions. They give high importance to the job, carrier and to guarantee better life for they families. Both Lithuanian men and women largely support traditional norms of hegemonic masculinity. This masculinity is based on heterosexuality, economic autonomy, being able to provide for one's family, being rational, being successful, keeping one's emotions in check and not doing anything considered feminine. The dominant form of masculinity in Lithuania is constructed not only in relation to femininities but also in relation to subordinated and marginalized masculinities, particularly homosexual masculinities. However the dominance of a single model of masculinity at the expense of multiple masculinities makes men more vulnerable to acts of violence against themselves and their families. The masculinity cultures are more keen to emigrate taking responsibility for the wealth of the family and seeking for better carrier, business and job perspectives, better salary. Ireland and UK has very low score (35). Uncertainty avoidance refers to the extent to which a culture feels threatened by ambiguous, uncertain situations and tries to avoid them. High 230

6 uncertainty avoidance means these cultures have low tolerance for ambiguity and taking risks and trying new things. Lithuania scores quite high on the Uncertainty Avoidance dimension (67). UK and Ireland have low in this dimension. Poland has very high score. The high emigration rate in Lithuania can be also related with this culture value as people trying to avoid uncertainty in the country are leaving for better life with lower risk. Therefore Lithuania's ranking on the Individualism and Power Distance is relatively low. Culture of Lithuania is rather "masculine" then "feminine", like in Poland. Lithuania and Poland scores quite high on the Uncertainty Avoidance dimension. These two last cultural dimensions have obvious impact on decision to emigrate seeking to guarantee better life and reduce risk. However though Poland has higher scores in these dimensions emigration rate is higher in Lithuania. Therefore other factors needs to be compared. National personality factors for countries were developed taking prevalence rates and consumption figures of a range of national demographic and epidemiological phenomena which are correlates of anxiety or neuroticism among individuals, it was shown that there is a sizeable general factor in the intercorrelation of these variables, which is interpretable as the anxiety curve of the population. The twelve demographic variables were used to assess neurotism and extraversion. Eight factors such as national rates of suicide, alcoholism, accidents, chronic psychosis, coronary heart disease, and the per capita consumption of calories, caffeine and cigarettes were primarily measures of neuroticism. The remaining four variables were primarily measures of extraversion (national rates of crime, murder, illegitimacy and divorce) (Lynn & Martin, 1995). National personality factors obtained for Lithuania shows that Extraversion score is lower (17.4) comparing with other countries (18). However Lithuania score on Neurotism and Psychotism are the highest one among countries analysed. The high Lithuania s scores in Neurotism and Psychotism are based on demographical and epidemiological data and indicates bad features of personality which especially have negative impact on subjective well-being and happiness. Table 1. The main factors of emigration expressed in indicators in 2008 Lithuania Poland Ireland UK Net migration rate, per thou inhabitants Economic-social Unemployment, % GDP/capita at PPP Minimal wages, EUR/month Inflation, % Gini index Poverty level, % Subjective well-being Happiness Life satisfaction Institutional Civil and political freedom Business freedom index Rule of law index Corruption index Property rights index Cultural Power distance Individualism vs colectivism Masculinity vs Uncertainty avoidance Long-term orientation 25 National differences in personality Extraversion vs introversion Neurotism vs emotional stability Psychoticism vs ego control Regarding subjective well being and happiness Lithuanian has the lowest index of subjective wellbeing and Ireland has the highest one (Inglehart & Klingermann, 2000). The subjective well being is assessed by surveys and consists from mean of two indicators (happiness and life satisfaction). These 231

7 indicators have been assed by percentages of happy and satisfied people in the country (Inglehart & Klingermann, 2000). In addition it is necessary to mention that empirical studies showed that postcommunist countries have very low scores of subjective well being and happiness however Latvia and Estonia are ranked above all post-soviet republics. At the same time Lithuania has very low score (just 57% of population consider themselves as happy and 40% of population are satisfied with they life. The similar figures are obtained just for Russia, Bulgaria, Armenia. Inglehart and Klingermann (2000) makes suggestion that protestant countries tend to show higher levels of subjective well-being than other countries having the similar past and current experience therefore happiness levels vary cross-culturally. These findings in no way refute the evidence that genetic factors play an important role in subjective well-being but these findings do indicate that genetic factors are only part of the story. Genes may play a crucial role, but religion, beliefs and cultural values also are very important. Conclusions 1. The current trend in economic literature is more emphasis on psychology and its role in economy. Behavioral economy and other multi-subject studies provides new approaches to such economic phenomena as economic cycles, unemployment, migration etc. However in Lithuania the classical approaches are dominating in scientific economic literature including broad literature dealing with migration aspects. 2. Lithuania has very high emigration rate, the highest among new EU member states. There are a lot of analysis and debate about the main reasons of such situation however there is no clear answer as the main research done in this field is based on macro-economic and social factors having impact on migration trends in Lithuania analysis. However other new EU member states have similar macro economic data but significantly lower emigration rates therefore other factors such as institutional level, culture values, national personality and subjective well-being and happiness needs also to be analysed. 3. Lithuania distinguishes from other countries with very low subjective well-being score. Most of Lithuanian s consider themselves as unhappy and not satisfied with life. In addition cultural values of Lithuania s people based on Hofstede model indicate, that culture of Lithuania is rather "masculine" then "feminine", and country has high score on the Uncertainty Avoidance dimension. These two cultural dimensions have obvious impact on decision to emigrate seeking to take responsibility of the family, guarantee better life and reduce risk of poverty. 4. National personality factors obtained for Lithuania show that though Extraversion score is quite low however Lithuania score on Neurotism and Psychotism are among the highest one. The high Lithuania s scores in Neurotism and Psychotism are based on demographical and epidemiological data and indicates bad features of personality which especially have negative impact on subjective well-being and happiness and also on emigration trends. References 1. Akerlof G. A., & Shiller R. J. (2009). Animal spirit. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. 2. Akranaviciute, D., & Ruzevicius, J. (2007). Quality of Life and its Components' Measurement. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics(2), Baltrimienė, R. (2005). Cultural Dimensions of Lithuania and its Relative Position in the Context with Other European Countries. Tarptautinės mokslinės praktinės konferencijos pranešimų medžiaga. Karjeros konsultantas tarpkultūrinėje Europos erdvėje, Barrett, P., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1984). The assessment of personality factors across 25 countries. Personal& and individual differences, 5, Berger P. L., & Luckman T. (1967). The Social Construction of Reality. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday Anchor. 6. Čekanavičius L., & Kasnauskaitė G. (2009). Too high or just right? Cost-benefit approach to emigration questions. Engineering Economics, 1(6), Čiarnienė R., & Kumpikaitė V., & Tarškevičius A. (2009). Makroekonominių veiksnių poveikis žmonių migracijos procesmas: teoriniai ir praktiniai aspektai. Ekonomika ir vadyba, 14, Clark, A.E., & Oswald, A.J. (1994) Unhappiness and Unemployment. Economic Journal, 104 (424), Cook, M. (1998). Personality Profiles of Managers in Former Soviet Countries: problem and Remedy. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 13(8),

8 10. Daugeliene, R. (2007). The Peculiarities of Knowledge Workers Migration in Europe and the World. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics(3), Daugeliene, R., & Marcinkeviciene, R. (2009). Brain Circulation: Theoretical Considerations. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics(3), Easterlin, Richard A. (2001). Income and Happiness: Towards a Unified Theory. Economic Journal, 111(473), Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1975). Manual of Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. London: Hodder & Stoughton. 14. Eysenck, S. B. G. (1983). One approach to cross-cultural studies of personality. Australian Journal of Psychology, 35, Frey B. S., & Stutzer A. (2002). The economics of happiness. World Economics, 3(1), Glinskienė R., & Petškienė E. (2009). Pasaulinės ekonominės krizės poveiksi lietuvių reemigracijos ir protų nutekėjimo procesams. Ekonomika ir vadyba, 14, Hazans M. (2003). Determinants of inter-regional migration in the Baltic countries, Center of European Integration Studies. Working paper B Hofstede, Geer. (1991) Cultures And Organizations - Software of the Mind. Maidenhead: McGraw Hill. 19. Inglehart, R., & Klingemann, H. D. Genes, culture, democracy and happiness. In Diner, E. and Suh, E M. (2000). Culture and Subjective well-being, Cambridge MA, MIT Press. 20. Jankauskas V., & Šeputienė J. (2009). The impact of the institutional environment on the economic development. Ekonomika, 87, Kairienė S., & Jakštienė S., & Narbutas V. (2008). The influence of emigration assumptions for human resource development. Social research, 4 (14), Karalevičienė J., & Matuzienė K. (2009). Tarptautinė emigracijos ekonominių priežasčių analizė Lietuvos pavyzdžiu. Ekonomika ir vadyba: aktualijos ir persoektyvos, 1(14), Kazlauskiene A., & Rinkevicius L. (2006). Lithuanian Brain Drain Causes: Push and Pull Factors. Engineering Economics, 1 (46), Kazlauskiene A., & Rinkevicius R. (2006). The Role of social Capital in the Highlty - Skilled Migration from Lithuania. Engeneering Economics, 4 (49), Krisciunas, K., & Greblikaite, J. (2007). Entrepreneurship in Sustainable Development: SMEs Innovativeness in Lithuania. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics(4), Kritz MM., & Lim LL., & Zlotnik H, eds. (1992). International Migration System: A Global Approach. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 27. Kvainauskaitė, V. (2005) Tarptautinių ekonominių santykių pagrindai. Kaunas: Technologija. 28. Lewis Richard D. (2002). Kultūrų sandūra. Vilnius: Alma littera. 29. Lynn R., & Martin T. (1995). National differences for thirty-seven nations in extraversion, neurotsim, psychoticism and economic, demographic and other correlated. Personal & individual differences, 19(3), Massey D.S., & Arango J., & Hugo G., & Kouaouci A., & Pellegrino A., & Taylor J.E. (1993). Theories of international migration: A review and appraisal. Population and development review, 19(3), Muller Charls E. (1982). The economics of labor migration: a behavioral analysis New York: Academic Press. 32. Rodrik, D. (2000). Institutions for High Quality Growth: What they are and How to Acquire Them?. Studies in International Comparative Development, 35 (3), Rudžinskienė R. (2008). Pagrindinės Lietuvos kaimo gyventojų emigracijso priežastys. Ekonomika ir vadyba: aktualijos ir perspektyvos, 2 (11), Sachs, J. (2003). Institutions Don t Rule: Direct Effects of Geography on Per Capita Income. NBER Working Paper, No. w Smith James P. & Edmonston B. (Eds) (1998). The Immigration Debate. Studies on the Economic, Demographic, and Fiscal Effects of Immigration. The National Academies Press. 36. Stark O. (2006). Inequality and migration: A behavioral link, Economic letters, 91(1), Stulgienė A., & Daunorienė A. (2009). Migracijos poveikis darbo rinkos pusiausvyrai. Ekonomika ir vadyba: aktualijos ir persoektyvos, 1(14), Susniene, D., & Jurkauskas, A. (2009). The Concepts of Quality of Life and Happiness - Correlation and Differences. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics(3), Urbonavičienė, M., &Tvaronavičienė M. (2008). Propensity to Emigrate: Driving Forces' Search. Verslas: teorija ir praktika, 4,