The Real Migration Crisis Is Governance

A landmark moment in an increasingly restrictive migration landscape

In May 2026, states will gather for the second International Migration Review Forum (IMRF) to assess progress on the UN Global Compact for Migration, a landmark commitment to safe, orderly, and regular migration. The forum takes place against a challenging backdrop: rising xenophobia, unprecedented cuts to humanitarian aid, growing use of detention and border externalization, and an escalating climate crisis displacing communities faster than governance frameworks can respond. Yet a significant gap remains between states’ commitments and current policy realities. The Spotlight Report on Global Migration 2026, published by the Women in Migration Network with the support of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, examines this moment and the choices it demands.

Migration systems prioritize labor over people

Migration governance today is largely built around one logic: extracting labor while limiting belonging. Regular pathways exist, but they are narrow, employer-tied, and rarely lead anywhere permanent. Migrants are recruited to fill gaps in care, agriculture, and construction sectors that wealthy economies depend on, then denied the rights, family unity, and civic participation that would make their presence sustainable. Temporary schemes cycle people through precarity rather than offering stability. And when legal routes are inaccessible or prohibitively expensive, people move through informal and deadly channels, which governments then use to justify further enforcement.

This dynamic is particularly visible in the care economy. There are 75 million domestic workers worldwide, the majority of them migrant women, keeping households functioning, caring for children and the elderly, and enabling others to participate in formal labor markets. Yet in many countries, they are excluded from labor legislation altogether. Employer-tied visa systems, including the kafala system across several Arab states, place workers under their employers' direct control, with no freedom to change jobs or seek redress. The International Labour Organization (ILO) projects that 300 million new care jobs will be needed by 2035, and demand will only grow as populations age. However, rights for the workers who fill them remain an afterthought.

The border that never ends

Surveillance technologies, funded largely by Global North governments, have created what the Spotlight Report describes as an "everywhere border": a digital infrastructure extending well beyond any physical crossing point. Before departure, algorithmic risk-scoring systems can deny visa applications based on nationality, age, and economic status, and are processed by opaque systems with little transparency or a right of appeal. At the border, migrants may be required to surrender mobile phones for full data extraction including call logs, location history, and even deleted content. And finally, after arrival, GPS ankle bracelets track the movements of those released from detention, while gig economy platforms use algorithmic management to monitor productivity and control access to work. These tools deepen existing inequalities, for example by cutting off access to reproductive health information, psychological support, and the informal networks that women on the move depend on, with little oversight and few legal safeguards.

Implementing human rights-based alternatives works 

Evidence from multiple countries shows that rights-based approaches to migration are both effective and practical. Colombia regularized nearly three million Venezuelan migrants, granting access to healthcare, education, and employment, driven partly by pragmatism, recognizing that criminalization was costly and ineffective. Portugal, Spain, and Thailand have implemented similar programs that have improved labor market integration and social stability. Ecuador and Uruguay have closed immigration detention centers and shifted to community-based case management with better outcomes and lower costs.

In the Pacific, small island nations facing existential climate displacement are developing regional mobility frameworks that center human rights and community consultation, which demonstrates that even in extreme circumstances, dignified and coordinated responses are possible. The Australia-Tuvalu Falepili Union, despite its limitations, marks the first bilateral treaty to offer permanent visas explicitly in the context of climate change.

Taken together, the cases presented in the Report show that migration works best when approached as a governance issue requiring investment, coordination, and political commitment, rather than as a security problem.

What the IMRF 2026 must deliver

Three areas stand out as priorities for the 2026 review. First, states should expand regular pathways that offer genuine routes to permanent residence, not only for so-called high-skilled workers but for those in caregiving, agriculture, and other sectors where demand is highest and protections are weakest. Recruitment fees should be prohibited and workers should be able to change employers without risking their status.

Second, detention should give way to community-based alternatives that evidence shows are more effective and less costly. The criminalization of humanitarian assistance including sea rescue, requires urgent reversal. Border enforcement outsourced to third countries with limited accountability undermines the international legal obligations states have formally committed to uphold.

Third, the use of surveillance technologies in migration contexts requires clear legal frameworks, human rights impact assessments before deployment, and meaningful data rights for migrants including the right to know what is collected, to correct it, and to have it erased.

The IMRF is a moment for honest assessment that looks beyond formal commitments to actual implementation. The GCM represents a genuine achievement in international cooperation. Whether it translates into meaningful change for people on the move depends on the willingness of states to close the gap between commitment and practice.