THE REMITTANCE SENDING PRACTICES OF IMMIGRANTS

SURVEY DESIGN AND MEASUREMENT ISSUES

Alan Simmons,York University, Toronto

Map of This Presentation

1. Background to an Experimental Survey

2. Sample Design Issues

3. Measurement Issues re Volume of Remittances Sent Explanatory Variables

4. Conclusions

1. Background to the Survey

Origin of the Survey Canada’s commitment to the G-8 Sea Island Plan of

Action in 2004 Focus: Jamaicans (Toronto) & Haitians (Montreal)

Approach Phase 1. Qualitative survey Phase 2. Quantitative household survey (N=288)

1.1. G-8 Sea Island Plan of Action (2004)

“…..encourage…effective private sector led development to help alleviate poverty [and] to achieve the Millennium [Goals]….[by]:

Facilitating remittances to help families and small business

Improving the climate for entrepreneurs and investors Providing housing and clean water by supporting the

development of local financial markets Expanding access to microfinance for entrepreneurs

1.2. Numbers of Jamaicans and Haitiians entering Canada as Immigrants by year

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

Jamaicans

Haitians

1.3. Illustrative Findings Jamaican households in Toronto and Haitian households in Montreal:

Remit about $200.00 CDN on each occasion that they transfer funds.

Remit several times a year, with the result that each household transfers about $1,000 to $1,400 per year.

Rely overwhelmingly on money transfer agencies. These agencies typically charge between 9% and 13% for their service.

Feel that transfer fees are “high” and constitute a disincentive to transfer money with the frequency they would like.

Transfer goods as well as money. They also contribute to collective transfers organized by community organizations, alumnae associations, and churches.

Are in close (frequent and intimate) contact with remittance receivers and play a strong role jointly setting what the funds are to be used for.

2. Sample Design Issues

Universe: Individuals or households? Sampling: Representative or criterion? Sample Size: Smaller or larger?

3. Variable Measurement Issues

3.1. Household Remittances How much is sent? Over what time period? How to quantify in-kind remittances? Contributions to collective transfers?

3.2. Explanatory Variables Financial resources of sending households Financial obligations of sending households Obligations to family abroad Transnational family connections The motives and perceptions of senders

4. ConclusionsFuture research & policy analysis will benefit from:1. Greater information on remittance senders2. The use of a mix of larger/general and

smaller/focused surveys3. Attention to the measurement of transnational

connections and the perceptions/goals of remittance senders in shaping the amounts remitted and what they are used for.

4. Re G-8 goals, policy analysis of ways of increasing the beneficial impacts of remittances.

AcknowledgementsThe pilot study was carried out with financial support from

the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA).

It was carried out by Alan Simmons (York University, Toronto), Dwaine Plaza (Oregon State University, Corvallis), and Victor Piché (University of Montreal).

We are indebted to the Jamaican and Haitian households, interviewers and community organizations that participated in the study.

END

For more information on the pilot study, see:http://www.yorku.ca/cerlac/abstracts.htm#remittances

To contact the author of this paper, write:asimmons@yorku.ca