Posted Friday, 21 Aug 2026 by Jørgen Carling
The flow of people across the border of Ceuta earlier this summer jolted many Europeans. After the immediate crisis passed, there’s been a steady flow of analytical commentary, much of it focused on Spanish policy.
In a recent op-ed in the Norwegian daily Aftenposten, Erik Sandersen, CEO of the Norwegian investment fund for developing countries (Norfund) argues that “only the hope of a job can stop migration pressure”. Creating jobs is part of Norfund’s mission, and the fund has helped establish thousands of jobs in developing countries while reaping an average return of nearly 8% on the investments.
“We must soon recognize that there is one long-term solution”, Sandersen writes, with reference to the Ceuta crisis. That solution is “giving young people hope of a decent job where they live — without risking their lives in the Mediterranean”.
But an objective of curbing migration pressure is a poor guide for development policy.
I led the largest European research project on migration pressure in the aftermath of the crisis ten years ago, in which we examined how living conditions, employment, security, and other factors in 25 local communities in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia affect young people's desire to emigrate. We found, as have other researchers, that poverty reduction can just as easily strengthen migration pressure as reduce it. When development cooperation is aimed at stopping migration, there is a risk that we get less development for the money while migration pressure persists.
But because the desire to build a future elsewhere is usually stopped brutally — whether at the visa office or at the border fence — we have all the greater responsibility to even out global inequalities. We should therefore continue to increase investment through Norfund where business development succeeds, while also contributing to poverty reduction where the return doesn't come in the form of money.