Estimates for UK immigration, emigration and net migration, year ending June 2012 to year ending December 2024. These are official statistics in development. To access the most up-to-date data for each time period, please use the most recently published dataset.

This Zenodo repository contains all migration flow estimates associated with the paper "Deep learning four decades of human migration." Evaluation code, training data, trained neural networks, and smaller flow datasets are available in the main GitHub repository, which also provides detailed instructions on data sourcing. Due to file size limits, the larger datasets are archived here.

Data is available in both NetCDF (.nc) and CSV (.csv) formats. The NetCDF format is more compact and pre-indexed, making it suitable for large files. In Python, datasets can be opened as xarray.Dataset objects, enabling coordinate-based data selection.

Each dataset uses the following coordinate conventions:

• Year: 1990–2023
• Birth ISO: Country of birth (UN ISO3)
• Origin ISO: Country of origin (UN ISO3)
• Destination ISO: Destination country (UN ISO3)
• Country ISO: Used for net migration data (UN ISO3)

The following data files are provided:

• T.nc: Full table of flows disaggregated by country of birth. Dimensions: Year, Birth ISO, Origin ISO, Destination ISO
• flows.nc: Total origin-destination flows (equivalent to T summed over Birth ISO). Dimensions: Year, Origin ISO, Destination ISO
• net_migration.nc: Net migration data by country. Dimensions: Year, Country ISO
• stocks.nc: Stock estimates for each country pair. Dimensions: Year, Origin ISO (corresponding to Birth ISO), Destination ISO
• test_flows.nc: Flow estimates on a randomly selected set of test edges, used for model validation

Additionally, two CSV files are provided for convenience:

• mig_unilateral.csv: Unilateral migration estimates per country, comprising:
  • imm: Total immigration flows
  • emi: Total emigration flows
  • net: Net migration
  • imm_pop: Total immigrant population (non-native-born)
  • emi_pop: Total emigrant population (living abroad)
• mig_bilateral.csv: Bilateral flow data, comprising:
  • mig_prev: Total origin-destination flows
  • mig_brth: Total birth-destination flows, where Origin ISO reflects place of birth

Each dataset includes a mean variable (mean estimate) and a std variable (standard deviation of the estimate).

An ISO3 conversion table is also provided.

The study of the patterns and evolution of international migration often requires high-frequency data on migration flows on a global scale. However, the presently existing databases force a researcher to choose between the frequency of the data and its geographical scale. Yearly data exist but only for a small subset of countries, while most others are only covered every 5 to 10 years. To fill in the gaps in the coverage, the vast majority of databases use some imputation method. Gaps in the stock of migrants are often filled by combining information on migrants based on their country of birth with data based on nationality or using ‘model’ countries and propensity methods. Gaps in the data on the flow of migrants, on the other hand, are often filled by taking the difference in the stock, which the ’demographic accounting’ methods then adjust for demographic evolutions.

This database aims to fill this gap by providing a global, yearly, bilateral database on the stock of migrants according to their country of birth. This database contains close to 2.9 million observations on over 56,000 country pairs from 1960 to 2022, a tenfold increase relative to the second-largest database. In addition, it also produces an estimate of the net flow of migrants. For a subset of countries –over 8,000 country pairs and half a million observations– we also have lower-bound estimates of the gross in- and outflow.

This database was constructed using a novel approach to estimating the most likely values of missing migration stocks and flows. Specifically, we use a Bayesian state-space model to combine the information from multiple datasets on both stocks and flows into a single estimate. Like the demographic accounting technique, the state-space model is built on the demographic relationship between migrant stocks, flows, births and deaths. The most crucial difference is that the state-space model combines the information from multiple databases, including those covering migrant stocks, net flows, and gross flows.

More details on the construction can currently be found in the UNU-CRIS working paper: Standaert, Samuel and Rayp, Glenn (2022) "Where Did They Come From, Where Did They Go? Bridging the Gaps in Migration Data" UNU-CRIS working paper 22.04. Bruges.

https://cris.unu.edu/where-did-they-come-where-did-they-go-bridging-gaps-migration-data

Abstract

The Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) carried out the Migration and Remittances Survey in South Africa for the World Bank in collaboration with the African Development Bank. The primary mandate of the HSRC in this project was to come up with a migration database that includes both immigrants and emigrants. The specific activities included: · A household survey with a view of producing a detailed demographic/economic database of immigrants, emigrants and non migrants · The collation and preparation of a data set based on the survey · The production of basic primary statistics for the analysis of migration and remittance behaviour in South Africa.

Like many other African countries, South Africa lacks reliable census or other data on migrants (immigrants and emigrants), and on flows of resources that accompanies movement of people. This is so because a large proportion of African immigrants are in the country undocumented. A special effort was therefore made to design a household survey that would cover sufficient numbers and proportions of immigrants, and still conform to the principles of probability sampling. The approach that was followed gives a representative picture of migration in 2 provinces, Limpopo and Gauteng, which should be reflective of migration behaviour and its impacts in South Africa.

Geographic coverage

Two provinces: Gauteng and Limpopo

Limpopo is the main corridor for migration from African countries to the north of South Africa while Gauteng is the main port of entry as it has the largest airport in Africa. Gauteng is a destination for internal and international migrants because it has three large metropolitan cities with a great economic potential and reputation for offering employment, accommodations and access to many different opportunities within a distance of 56 km. These two provinces therefore were expected to accommodate most African migrants in South Africa, co-existing with a large host population.

Analysis unit

• Household
• Individual

Universe

The target group consists of households in all communities. The survey will be conducted among metro and non-metro households. Non-metro households include those in: - small towns, - secondary cities, - peri-urban settlements and - deep rural areas. From each selected household, one adult respondent will be selected to participate in the study.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Migration data for South Africa are available for 2007 only at the level of local governments or municipalities from the 2007 Census; for smaller areas called "sub places" (SPs) only as recently as the 2001 census, and for the desired EAs only back so far as the Census of 1996. In sum, there was no single source that provided recent data on the five types of migrants of principal interest at the level of the Enumeration Area, which was the area for which data were needed to draw the sample since it was going to be necessary to identify migrant and non-migrant households in the sample areas in order to oversample those with migrants for interview.

In an attempt to overcome the data limitations referred to above, it was necessary to adopt a novel approach to the design of the sample for the World Bank's household migration survey in South Africa, to identify EAs with a high probability of finding immigrants and those with a low probability. This required the combined use of the three sources of data described above. The starting point was the CS 2007 survey, which provided data on migration at a local government level, classifying each local government cluster in terms of migration level, taking into account the types of migrants identified. The researchers then spatially zoomed in from these clusters to the so-called sub-places (SPs) from the 2001 Census to classifying SP clusters by migration level. Finally, the 1996 Census data were used to zoom in even further down to the EA level, using the 1996 census data on migration levels of various typed, to identify the final level of clusters for the survey, namely the spatially small EAs (each typically containing about 200 households, and hence amenable to the listing operation in the field).

A higher score or weight was attached to the 2007 Community Survey municipality-level (MN) data than to the Census 2001 sub-place (SP) data, which in turn was given a greater weight than the 1996 enumerator area (EA) data. The latter was derived exclusively from the Census 1996 EA data, but has then been reallocated to the 2001 EAs proportional to geographical size. Although these weights are purely arbitrary since it was composed from different sources, they give an indication of the relevant importance attached to the different migrant categories. These weighted migrant proportions (secondary strata), therefore constituted the second level of clusters for sampling purposes.

In addition, a system of weighting or scoring the different persons by migrant type was applied to ensure that the likelihood of finding migrants would be optimised. As part of this procedure, recent migrants (who had migrated in the preceding five years) received a higher score than lifetime migrants (who had not migrated during the preceding five years). Similarly, a higher score was attached to international immigrants (both recent and lifetime, who had come to SA from abroad) than to internal migrants (who had only moved within SA's borders). A greater weight also applied to inter-provincial (internal) than to intra-provincial migrants (who only moved within the same South African province).

How the three data sources were combined to provide overall scores for EA can be briefly described. First, in each of the two provinces, all local government units were given migration scores according to the numbers or relative proportions of the population classified in the various categories of migrants (with non-migrants given a score of 1.0. Migrants were assigned higher scores according to their priority, with international migrants given higher scores than internal migrants and recent migrants higher scores than lifetime migrants. Then within the local governments, sub-places were assigned scores assigned on the basis of inter vs. intra-provincial migrants using the 2001 census data. Each SP area in a local government was thus assigned a value which was the product of its local government score (the same for all SPs in the local government) and its own SP score. The third and final stage was to develop relative migration scores for all the EAs from the 1996 census by similarly weighting the proportions of migrants (and non-migrants, assigned always 1.0) of each type. The the final migration score for an EA is the product of its own EA score from 1996, the SP score of which it is a part (assigned to all the EAs within the SP), and the local government score from the 2007 survey.

Based on all the above principles the set of weights or scores was developed.

In sum, we multiplied the proportion of populations of each migrant type, or their incidence, by the appropriate final corresponding EA scores for persons of each type in the EA (based on multiplying the three weights together), to obtain the overall score for each EA. This takes into account the distribution of persons in the EA according to migration status in 1996, the SP score of the EA in 2001, and the local government score (in which the EA is located) from 2007. Finally, all EAs in each province were then classified into quartiles, prior to sampling from the quartiles.

From the EAs so classified, the sampling took the form of selecting EAs, i.e., primary sampling units (PSUs, which in this case are also Ultimate Sampling Units, since this is a single stage sample), according to their classification into quartiles. The proportions selected from each quartile are based on the range of EA-level scores which are assumed to reflect weighted probabilities of finding desired migrants in each EA. To enhance the likelihood of finding migrants, much higher proportions of EAs were selected into the sample from the quartiles with the higher scores compared to the lower scores (disproportionate sampling). The decision on the most appropriate categorisations was informed by the observed migration levels in the two provinces of the study area during 2007, 2001 and 1996, analysed at the lowest spatial level for which migration data was available in each case.

Because of the differences in their characteristics it was decided that the provinces of Gauteng and Limpopo should each be regarded as an explicit stratum for sampling purposes. These two provinces therefore represented the primary explicit strata. It was decided to select an equal number of EAs from these two primary strata.

The migration-level categories referred to above were treated as secondary explicit strata to ensure optimal coverage of each in the sample. The distribution of migration levels was then used to draw EAs in such a way that greater preference could be given to areas with higher proportions of migrants in general, but especially immigrants (note the relative scores assigned to each type of person above). The proportion of EAs selected into the sample from the quartiles draws upon the relative mean weighted migrant scores (referred to as proportions) found below the table, but this is a coincidence and not necessary, as any disproportionate sampling of EAs from the quartiles could be done, since it would be rectified in the weighting at the end for the analysis.

The resultant proportions of migrants then led to the following proportional allocation of sampled EAs (Quartile 1: 5 per cent (instead of 25% as in an equal distribution), Quartile 2: 15 per cent (instead

This dataset captures the global migration of students pursuing higher education from 2019 to 2023, including their countries of origin, destinations, universities, courses, placement outcomes, and more.

It covers 10 major destination countries with realistic mappings of top universities and cities, reflecting trends and choices students have made over the last five years.
This dataset can help analyze: - Popular destination countries - In-demand fields and courses - Scholarship and visa trends - Placement success rates and expected salaries - Patterns of global student migration

The data is synthetic but realistic, generated for educational, research, and analytical purposes.

RESPOND project produced a high level of empirical material in 11 countries (Sweden, the UK, Germany, Italy, Poland, Austria, Greece, Bulgaria, Turkey, Iraq, and Lebanon) where the research is conducted between the period 2017-2020. The country teams gathered macro (policies), meso (implementation/stakeholders) and micro (individuals/asylum seekers and refuges) level data related to the thematic fields formulated in four work packages: borders, protection regimes, reception, and integration. An important contribution of this research has been its micro/individual focus which enabled the research teams to capture and understand the migration experiences of asylum seekers and refugees and their responses to the policies and obstacles that they have encountered.

Country teams conducted in total 539 interviews with refugees and asylum seekers, and more than 210 interviews with stakeholders (state and non-state actors) working in the field of migration. Additionally, the project has conducted a survey study in Sweden and Turkey (n=700 in each country), covering similar topics.

This dataset is only about the micro part of the Respond research, and reflects data derived out of 539 interviews conducted with asylum seekers and refugees in 11 countries and here presented in a quantitative form. The whole dataset is structured along the work package topics: Border, Protection, Reception and Integration.

This dataset is prepared as part of Work Package D4.4 (Dataset on Reception) the Horizon 2020 RESPOND project as a joint effort of the below listed project partners.

• • Uppsala University (dataset entries from Sweden)
• • Göttingen University (dataset entries from Germany)
• • Glasgow Caledonian University (dataset entries from the UK and Hungary)
• • Istanbul Bilgi University (dataset entries from Turkey)
• • University of Cambridge (dataset entries from the UK, Sweden and Germany)
• • Swedish Research Institute Istanbul (dataset entries from Turkey)
• • University of Florence (dataset entries from Italy)
• • Özyegin University (dataset entries from Turkey)
• • University of Aegean (dataset entries from Greece)
• • University of Warsaw (dataset entries from Poland)
• • Hammurabi Human Rights Organization (dataset entries from Iraq)
• • Lebanon Support (dataset entries from Lebanon)
• • Austrian Academy of Sciences (dataset entries from Austria)

Analysis of ‘New Zealand Migration’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://www.kaggle.com/timoboz/migration-nz on 21 November 2021.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

Context

**This dataset shows the migration to and from New Zealand by country and citizenship from 1979 to 2016. **

Content

The columns in this dataset are:

• Measure: The signal type given in this row, one of: "Arrivals", "Departures", "Net"
• Country: Country from where people arrived into to New Zealand (for Measure = "Arrivals") or to where they left (for Measure = "Departures"). Contains special values "Not Stated" and "All countries" (grand total)
• Citizenship: Citizenship of the migrants, one of: "New Zealand Citizen", "Australian Citizen", "Total All Citizenships"
• Year: Year of the measurement
• Value: Number of migrants

Permanent and long-term arrivals include overseas migrants who arrive in New Zealand intending to stay for a period of 12 months or more (or permanently), plus New Zealand residents returning after an absence of 12 months or more. Permanent and long-term departures include New Zealand residents departing for an intended period of 12 months or more (or permanently), plus overseas visitors departing New Zealand after a stay of 12 months or more. For arrival series, the country of residence is the country where a person arriving in New Zealand last lived for 12 months or more (country of last permanent residence). For departure series, the country of residence is the country where a person departing New Zealand intends to live for the next 12 months or more (country of next permanent residence).

Acknowledgements

Curated data by figure.nz, original data from Stats NZ. Dataset licensed under Creative Commons 4.0 - CC BY 4.0.

Inspiration

A good challenge would be to explain New Zealand migration flows as a function of the economic performance of New Zealand or other countries (combine with other datasets). The data could be possibly linked up with other data sources to predict general migration to/from countries based on external factors.

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

The data presented in this data project were collected in the context of two H2020 research projects: ‘Enhanced migration measures from a multidimensional perspective’(HumMingBird) and ‘Crises as opportunities: Towards a level telling field on migration and a new narrative of successful integration’(OPPORTUNITIES). The current survey was fielded to investigate the dynamic interplay between media representations of different migrant groups and the governmental and societal (re)actions to immigration. With these data, we provide more insight into these societal reactions by investigating attitudes rooted in values and worldviews. Through an online survey, we collected quantitative data on attitudes towards: Immigrants, Refugees, Muslims, Hispanics, Venezuelans News Media Consumption Trust in News Media and Societal Institutions Frequency and Valence of Intergroup Contact Realistic and Symbolic Intergroup Threat Right-wing Authoritarianism Social Dominance Orientation Political Efficacy Personality Characteristics Perceived COVID-threat, and Socio-demographic Characteristics For the adult population aged 25 to 65 in seven European countries: Austria Belgium Germany Hungary Italy Spain Sweden And for ages ranged from 18 to 65 for: United States of America Colombia The survey in the United States and Colombia was identical to the one in the European countries, although a few extra questions regarding COVID-19 and some region-specific migrant groups (e.g. Venezuelans) were added. We collected the data in cooperation with Bilendi, a Belgian polling agency, and selected the methodology for its cost-effectiveness in cross-country research. Respondents received an e-mail asking them to participate in a survey without specifying the subject matter, which was essential to avoid priming. Three weeks of fieldwork in May and June of 2021 resulted in a dataset of 13,645 respondents (a little over 1500 per country). Sample weights are included in the dataset and can be applied to ensure that the sample is representative for gender and age in each country. The cooperation rate ranged between 12% and 31%, in line with similar online data collections.

This table contains 25 series, with data for years 1955 - 2013 (not all combinations necessarily have data for all years). This table contains data described by the following dimensions (Not all combinations are available): Geography (1 items: Canada ...) Last permanent residence (25 items: Total immigrants; France; Great Britain; Total Europe ...).

The DEMIG-QuantMig Migration Policy Database tracks more than 7'600 migration policy changes enacted by 31 European (EU and non-EU) countries for the period 1990 to 2020. This database extendeds and updates the DEMIG POLICY database (https://www.migrationinstitute.org/data/demig-data/demig-policy) and follows the same methodology. The policy measures are coded according to the policy area and migrant group targeted, as well as the change in restrictiveness they introduce in the existing legal system. The database allows for both quantitative and qualitative research on the long-term evolution and effectiveness of migration policies.

The Multi-aspect Integrated Migration Indicators (MIMI) dataset is the result of the process of gathering, embedding and combining traditional migration datasets, mostly from sources like Eurostat and UNSD Demographic Statistics Database, and alternative types of data, which consists in multidisciplinary features and measures not typically employed in migration studies, such as the Facebook Social Connectedness Index (SCI). Its purpose is to exploit these novel types of data for: nowcasting migration flows and stocks, studying integration of multiple sources and knowledge, and investigating migration drivers.

The MIMI dataset is designed to have a unique pair of countries for each row. Each record contains country-to-country information about: migrations flows and stock their share, their strength of Facebook connectedness and other features, such as corresponding populations, GDP, coordinates, NET migration, and many others.

Methodology.

After having collected bilateral flows records about international human mobility by citizenship, residence and country of birth (available for both sexes and, in some cases, for different age groups), they have been merged together in order to obtain a unique dataset in which each ordered couple (country-of-origin, country-of-destination) appears once. To avoid duplicate couples, flow records have been selected by following this priority: first migration by citizenship, then migration by residence and lastly by country of birth.

The integration process started by choosing, collecting and meaningfully including many other indicators that could be helpful for the dataset final purpose mentioned above.

• International migration stocks (having a five-year range of measurement) for each couple of countries.
• Geographical features for each country: ISO3166 name and official name, ISO3166-1 alpha-2 and alpha-3 codes, continent code and name of belonging, latitude and longitude of the centroid, list of bordering countries, country area in square kilometres. Also, the following features have been included for each pair of countries: geodesic distance (in kilometres) computed between their respective centroids.

• Non-bidirectional migration measures for each country: total number of immigrants and emigrants for each year, NET migration and NET migration rate in a five-year range.

• Other multidisciplinary indicators (cultural, social, anthropological, demographical, historical features) related to each country: religion (single one or list), yearly GDP at PPP, spoken language (or list of languages), yearly population stocks (and population densities if available), number of Facebook users, percentage of Facebook users, cultural indicators (PDI, IDV, MAS, UAI, LTO). Also the following feature have been included for each pair of countries: Facebook Social Connectedness Index.

Once traditional and non-traditional knowledge is gathered and integrated, we move to the pre-processing phase where we manage the data cleaning, preparation and transformation. Here our dataset was subjected to various computational standard processes and additionally reshaped in the final structure established by our design choices.

The data quality assessment phase was one of the longest and most delicate, since many values were missing and this could have had a negative impact on the quality of the desired resulting knowledge. They have been integrated from additional sources such as The World Bank, World Population Review, Statista, DataHub, Wikipedia and in some cases extracted from Python libraries such as PyPopulation, CountryInfo and PyCountry.

The final dataset has the structure of a huge matrix having countries couples as index (uniquely identified by coupling their ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 codes): it comprises 28725 entries and 485 columns.

This Public Database on Irregular Migration Flow Estimates and Indicators, in short MIrreM D5.2, is a MIrreM project deliverable under work package 5. This database provides an inventory and critical appraisal of available estimates and indicators related to irregular migration flows. More specifically, the database contains the country-level data collected by MIrreM’s national rapporteurs, as well as EU-level data from sources other than Eurostat. The datasets include meta-level information on sources and methodology and a quality assessment based on MIrreM’s criteria.

Users of this database are advised to consult the following companion document (henceforth, MIrreM Working Paper No. 9/2024) for a full discussion of the context, the underlying concepts, and the methodology used:

Siruno, L., Leerkes, A., Hendow, M. & Brunovská, E. 2024. Working Paper on Irregular Migration Flows. MIrreM Working Paper No. 9. Krems: University for Continuing Education Krems (Danube University Krems). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo. 10702228.

The MIrreM project is a follow-up to CLANDESTINO, which covered the period 2000-2007. MIrreM extends this to the subsequent period 2008-2023. The data covered in this database reflect what is available within this period. Most of the data was collected between June and October 2023, and thus in some cases, the data are only until 2022 pending complete reports for 2023.

Annual number of international migrants by 5-year age groups and gender for Canada, provinces and territories.

Abstract

The Migration Cost Surveys (MCS) project is a joint initiative of the Global Knowledge Partnership on Migration and Development (KNOMAD) and the International Labor Organization (ILO). The project was initiated to support methodological work on developing a new Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicator (10.7.1) on worker-paid recruitment costs. The surveys of migrant workers conducted in multiple bilateral corridors between 2015 and 2017 provide new systematic evidence of financial and some non-financial costs incurred by workers to obtain jobs abroad. The compiled dataset is divided into two waves (2015 and 2016) based on the questionnaire version used in the surveys. This document describes surveys conducted using the 2016 version of the MCS questionnaire.

Geographic coverage

Multinational coverage - India - Philippines - Nepal - Uzbekistan - Kyrgyz Republic - Tajikistan - Countries in Western Africa

Analysis unit

KNOMAD-ILO Migration Costs Surveys (KNOMAD-ILO MCS) have the following unit of analysis: individuals

Universe

Surveys of migrants from the following corridors are included: • India-Saudi Arabia • Philippines to Saudi Arabia • Nepal to Malaysia, Qatar and Saudi Arabia • Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan to Russia • West African countries to Italy

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

All surveys conducted for this project used either convenience or snowball sampling. Sample enrollment was restricted to migrants primarily employed in low-skilled positions. There is variation in terms of when migrants were interviewed in their migration life-cycle. Two surveys of recruited workers - that is workers who are recruited in their home countries for jobs abroad - namely Filipinos and Indians to Saudi Arabia, were conducted with migrants returning to their origin countries (for visits or permanently). The surveys of non-recruited migrants - Central Asian migrants to Russia and West African migrants to Italy - were administered in the destination countries, which permitted multiple bilateral migration channels to be documented (at cost of smaller sample sizes in some corridors, particularly with Italy as destination). The survey instruments for non-recruited migrants were worded in present tense for various aspect of stay in the destination country. The content of the variables remains analogous to the surveys of returnees. Finally, the survey of Nepalese migrants was conducted with migrants who were departing to their destination countries within a two-week period. Please refer to Annex Table 1 of the 2016 KNOMAD_ILO MCS Guide for a summary description of the samples included in the 2016 KNOMAD-ILO MCS dataset.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

The 2016 KNOMAD-ILO Migration Costs Surveys consists of 7 survey modules: A. Respondent information B. Information on costs for current job C. Borrowing money for the foreign job D. Job search efforts and opportunity costs E. Work in foreign country F. Job environment G. Current status and contact information

Sampling error estimates

n/a

Data appraisal

n/a

General purpose multi-country survey project collecting data on push and pull factors of international migration in selected origin and destination countries. Project was funded by the European Commission, executed by Eurostat and implemented by NIDI in collaboration and consultation with country teams in Ghana, Morocco, Senegal, Egypt, Turkey, Italy, Spain. Both households with and without emigrated or returned households members were sampled and interviewed between 1996-1998 in these countries. In origin countries households were sampled. In destination countries individual respondents were sampled.Before using the data, read the methodology section and technical appendix of the Comparative Research Report. Analyze the data using country-specific questionnaires, and consult country-specific research reports about design, implementation, and analytical results regarding push and pull factors of migration. Country reports and the comparative report follow the same structure.Consult the enumerator-instruction manual to familiarize with concepts and -definitions that are specific to this international migration survey project. For each country, there are always two main data-files available: one household-level file and one so-called join-match file. The former file only comprises characteristics of the household, the latter comprises individual-respondent characteristics as well as all characteristics of the household to which a respondent belongs. Data file variable names correspond with questionnaire numbers. Data file variable and value labels correspond with numbers and answer categories in the questionnaires. Code 9,99,999, etc. is missing value, 8,98,998 is don't know, 7, 97,997 is refuse to answer question. SPSS system missing code (.) is used in case a question is not applicable to respondent. Standardized weights are included in files.Additional files have been added comprising specific information about particular country-data files. The reports and questionnaires pertaining to Morocco and Senegal are in French, all others are in English.Some of the variables are not explained, or not fully explained. This includes the derivative values. The meaning of variables directly related to the surveys should become clear by comparing them to the to the questions in the questionnaires.For more information about this research please contact Drs. George Groenewold via groenewold@nidi.nl.

Series Name: Proportion of countries with migration policies to facilitate orderly safe regular and responsible migration and mobility of people by policy domain (percent)Series Code: SG_CPA_MIGRPRelease Version: 2020.Q2.G.03 This dataset is the part of the Global SDG Indicator Database compiled through the UN System in preparation for the Secretary-General's annual report on Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals.Indicator 10.7.2: Number of countries with migration policies that facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of peopleTarget 10.7: Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policiesGoal 10: Reduce inequality within and among countriesFor more information on the compilation methodology of this dataset, see https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/