Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McCormick, B.
Right arrow Articles by Wahba, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow F22 - International Migration
Right arrow J61 - Geographic Labor Mobility; Immigrant Workers
Right arrow M13 - New Firms; Startups
Right arrow O15 - Human Resources; Human Development; Income Distribution; Migration
Right arrow O18 - Regional, Urban, and Rural Analyses
Right arrow R23 - Regional Migration; Regional Labor Markets; Population
Right arrow R32 - Other Production and Pricing Analysis
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of African Economies, Volume 12, Number 4, 500-532
Journal of African Economies 12(4), © Centre for the Study of African Economies 2003; all rights reserved

Return International Migration and Geographical Inequality: The Case of Egypt

Barry McCormick and Jackline Wahba

University of Southampton

This paper explores entrepreneurship amongst return migrants, how their business locations and characteristics differ from other businesses, and the implications for rural–urban inequality. First, we examine, amongst returnees, the determinants of investment in a project/enterprise. Secondly, we study the impact of return migration on the characteristics and nature of non-farm small enterprises using a sample of return migrants and non-migrant owners of enterprises. Our data indicate that although the share of return migrants originating in urban areas is almost equal to those from rural areas, and that migrants tend to return to their origin region, urban areas benefit more than rural areas from international savings. The empirical evidence suggests that overseas savings, and the duration of stay overseas, have positive separate effects on the probability of investing in a project/enterprise amongst returnees. Furthermore, returnees of urban origin are more likely than rural ones to invest in a non-farm enterprise. The findings also indicate that there is a regional bias in the location of firms and jobs created by returnees compared with non-migrants, in favour of the capital city. Thus, overall, the results support a positive impact of return migration on enterprise investment in urban areas driven by the preference of returnees to invest in urban areas.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.