Analysis of the African Union’s Migration Policy Framework for Africa and Plan of Action (2018–2030)

Human mobility has always been a defining feature of Africa’s social, economic, and political landscape. In recognising that migration can be both an engine for development and a source of challenge if mismanaged, the African Union (AU) revised its Migration Policy Framework in 2018 and adopted an ambitious Plan of Action covering the period 2018–2030. This revised framework builds on the 2006 Migration Policy Framework for Africa (MPFA) and has been designed to align with broader continental initiatives such as Agenda 2063 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The Framework sets out guidelines across eight thematic pillars and eleven cross‐cutting issues. This article provides a rigorous analysis of each policy point—including their realistic pros and cons—and evaluates progress in the 2018–2030 period with reference to facts, data, and evidence from both primary AU sources and reputable external research.

Analysis of the Framework’s Thematic Pillars

Each pillar within the Framework is crafted to address specific migration challenges while also maximising potential developmental benefits. Below, we consider the strengths and weaknesses of each thematic area.

Migration Governance

Pros:

            1.         Evidence-Based Approach:

– The Framework emphasises the need for “whole-of-government” approaches and data-driven policies. This has the potential to enhance policy coherence and allow governments to adapt quickly to changing migration trends. For example, aligning with the IOM’s Migration Governance Framework ensures that policies are based on international standards and empirical data.

            2.         Human Rights Focus:

– By upholding international standards and ensuring the protection of migrants’ rights—including access to justice and legal redress—the policy champions human dignity. This focus is vital in an era when many nations have increasingly securitised borders (IOM, 2015).

Cons:

            1.         Implementation Challenges:

– Despite clear guidelines, many AU Member States face capacity constraints. The need for improved data collection and inter-agency coordination means that a “whole-of-government” approach can be difficult to implement uniformly, especially in states with weak institutional structures.

            2.         Resource Mobilisation:

– The Framework intentionally leaves resource mobilisation to individual states and RECs. This absence of central funding mechanisms may hamper coordinated action and slow down the achievement of migration governance goals.

Labour Migration and Education

Pros:

            1.         Economic Development Potential:

– Labour migration is identified as a key driver for economic development. The Framework’s recommendations on skills portability, mutual recognition of qualifications, and the promotion of student and labour mobility are aligned with initiatives such as the Joint Labour Migration Programme (JLMP). Evidence from countries that have benefitted from remittances shows that properly managed labour migration can significantly reduce poverty and boost local economies.

            2.         Addressing the Youth Bulge:

– With Africa’s population expected to reach 2.4 billion by 2050, the focus on technical and vocational education, as well as the harmonisation of educational standards, is timely. Creating pathways for “brain gain” and “brain circulation” can help mitigate the effects of brain drain.

Cons:

            1.         Legal and Structural Gaps:

– Many Member States still struggle with outdated legislation and inadequate labour market structures. Even where policies exist, enforcement remains inconsistent. This can lead to exploitation and irregular working conditions, particularly for vulnerable groups such as domestic workers.

            2.         Fragmentation Across Regions:

– While the Framework calls for regional harmonisation, discrepancies between national laws and regional protocols (such as those governing the free movement of persons) remain a significant barrier. This fragmentation can undermine efforts to create a seamless labour market across the continent.

Diaspora Engagement

Pros:

            1.         Catalyst for Development:

– Engaging the diaspora is seen as critical for transferring skills, technology, and financial remittances. Successful initiatives in countries like Nigeria and Ghana demonstrate that well‐integrated diaspora communities can contribute significantly to development projects and investment in infrastructure.

            2.         Dual Citizenship and Policy Incentives:

– Policies that facilitate dual citizenship and offer investment incentives have the potential to deepen diaspora contributions. Such measures create a sense of belonging and encourage return migration or temporary return programmes that address local skill shortages.

Cons:

            1.         Inconsistent Implementation:

– The Framework recommends establishing national diaspora focal points, yet many Member States have been slow to institutionalise these structures. Political will, administrative capacity, and inconsistent policies across countries can hinder effective diaspora engagement.

            2.         Risk of Overdependence:

– While remittances can boost economies, overdependence on them may discourage domestic investment and lead to vulnerabilities in times of global economic downturns.

Border Governance

Pros:

            1.         Enhanced Security and Trade Facilitation:

– Effective border governance supports both security and economic integration. Initiatives such as cooperative border management (CBM) can help streamline cross-border trade, as seen in regional projects under the Continental Free Trade Area (CFTA).

            2.         Securitisation with Human Rights Considerations:

– The Framework’s guidelines underscore the need to avoid excessive securitisation that might impede human rights. This balanced approach is critical in ensuring that border security measures do not hinder legitimate mobility.

Cons:

            1.         Over-Securitisation Risks:

– In practice, many African countries have intensified border controls in response to irregular migration and transnational crime. This can inadvertently create barriers for legal migration and restrict economic opportunities.

            2.         Resource Limitations:

– The effective management of borders requires significant investment in infrastructure and technology. Many countries lack the necessary funding and technical expertise, thereby reducing the efficacy of border management measures.

Irregular Migration

Pros:

            1.         Focus on Prevention and Protection:

– By recommending the expansion of legal migration pathways and the strengthening of international cooperation, the Framework aims to reduce reliance on smugglers and traffickers. This is crucial given that irregular migration routes have been linked to thousands of deaths annually in the Mediterranean and other corridors.

            2.         Legal Alignment:

– The Framework calls for the alignment of national laws with international conventions on human trafficking and migrant smuggling. This can improve both prosecution rates and protection for victims.

Cons:

            1.         Complex Transnational Dynamics:

– Irregular migration is deeply interwoven with criminal networks and organised crime. While policy recommendations are sound in theory, their enforcement is challenged by corruption, limited cross-border intelligence sharing, and geopolitical factors.

            2.         Implementation Gaps:

– Many Member States have struggled to operationalise measures such as safe return and reintegration programmes, largely due to resource constraints and political sensitivities around border management.

Forced Displacement

Pros:

            1.         Comprehensive Protection Mechanisms:

– The Framework provides for specific strategies to address the needs of refugees, asylum seekers, internally displaced persons (IDPs), and stateless persons. Such measures include crisis prevention, conflict resolution, and durable solutions that align with humanitarian law.

            2.         Regional Instruments:

– Instruments such as the Kampala Convention have already provided legal frameworks to protect IDPs. The Framework builds on these instruments and seeks to ensure consistency in addressing displacement across the continent.

Cons:

            1.         Persistent Crisis Conditions:

– Despite these initiatives, ongoing conflicts (e.g. in the DRC, Sahel and Horn of Africa) and environmental pressures continue to fuel forced displacement. This underscores the challenge of addressing displacement while also dealing with its root causes.

            2.         Fragmented Response Mechanisms:

– Coordination between national governments, regional bodies, and international agencies remains uneven. In some cases, responses have been ad hoc rather than systematically integrated into national development plans.

Internal Migration

Pros:

            1.         Harnessing Urbanisation:

– Internal migration, particularly rural-to-urban movements, offers significant developmental potential. Proper management can lead to improved service delivery and spur urban economic growth if local authorities are empowered with adequate resources.

            2.         Policy Synergies:

– Integrating migration policies into local development planning can help cities adapt to rapid population growth while minimising risks such as housing shortages and increased pressure on public services.

Cons:

            1.         Infrastructural Challenges:

– Rapid urbanisation without commensurate investment in infrastructure can lead to overcrowding, environmental degradation, and social tensions. These challenges are acute in many African cities where migration is predominantly internal.

            2.         Data Deficiencies:

– A major hurdle in managing internal migration effectively is the lack of disaggregated and reliable data. Without robust statistics, policy responses may be misdirected or insufficient.

Migration and Trade

Pros:

            1.         Economic Integration:

– Facilitating the free movement of people is expected to boost intra-African trade and investment. The integration efforts under the AU Free Movement of Persons Protocol and the African Passport initiative are key to realising these benefits.

            2.         Entrepreneurial Opportunities:

– Migration for trade—often short-term and informal—creates opportunities for entrepreneurship and small business development, contributing to poverty alleviation and local economic dynamism.

Cons:

            1.         Visa Barriers and Protectionism:

– Many African countries still maintain stringent visa regimes that restrict the free flow of traders and skilled labour. These barriers can hinder the realisation of trade and economic integration objectives.

            2.         Limited Formalisation:

– Much of migration for trade occurs in the informal sector, which means that its potential developmental benefits are not fully captured in national economic statistics. This also leaves traders vulnerable to exploitation and inconsistent policy application.

Progress and Challenges (2018–2030)

Analyzing the time frame from 2018 to 2030, the Framework was designed not only as a set of policy guidelines but also as an actionable plan to transform Africa’s migration landscape. Here are some key observations:

Accomplishments:

            1.         Policy Revisions and Harmonisation:

– The revision of the 2006 MPFA was itself a significant step. In 2016, following evaluations and consultations in Zanzibar, AU Member States and Regional Economic Communities endorsed the need for an updated framework. The 2018 document reflects these broad consultations and has provided a clear, structured roadmap for reform.

            2.         Institutional Innovations:

– Flagship projects such as the AU Free Movement of Persons Protocol and the launch of the African Passport (unveiled in Kigali in 2016) have begun to foster regional integration. These initiatives have been instrumental in creating legal channels that facilitate mobility and support economic exchange.

            3.         Diaspora and Labour Initiatives:

– There has been progress in establishing diaspora engagement mechanisms and in promoting the Joint Labour Migration Programme. These programmes, supported by evidence from countries like Kenya and Ghana, have improved the recognition of skills and facilitated remittance transfers, which are critical for development.

Areas Needing Further Action:

            1.         Implementation Disparities:

– Although the Framework sets out ambitious targets, many Member States still struggle with implementation due to limited financial, administrative, and technical capacities. For example, while border management protocols have been drafted, their uniform application across the continent remains a work in progress.

            2.         Data and Monitoring Deficits:

– Effective monitoring and evaluation mechanisms are still lacking. The absence of reliable, disaggregated data on migration trends hampers policy refinement and the timely redress of emerging challenges.

            3.         Resource Mobilisation and Coordination:

– The Framework intentionally leaves resource mobilisation to individual states. However, without coordinated funding mechanisms or centralised technical support, many recommended initiatives risk being underfunded or inconsistently applied.

            4.         Addressing Root Causes:

– Long-term challenges such as political instability, conflict, environmental degradation, and structural inequalities continue to drive migration. While the Framework emphasises crisis prevention and conflict resolution, tangible improvements in these areas remain uneven.

Conclusion and Call to Action

In summary, the African Union’s Migration Policy Framework for Africa and Plan of Action (2018–2030) represents a bold and comprehensive attempt to harness the benefits of migration while mitigating its risks. Each thematic pillar—from governance and labour migration to diaspora engagement and border management—presents both substantial opportunities and real challenges. The Framework’s strength lies in its evidence-based, human-rights centred approach and its alignment with continental and global agendas such as Agenda 2063 and the SDGs. Yet, significant obstacles remain, particularly in the realms of implementation, resource mobilisation, and data management.

For the Framework to realise its full potential, it is imperative that AU Member States enhance their institutional capacities, invest in robust data collection and monitoring systems, and prioritise inter-state cooperation. Moreover, sustained political will and the mobilisation of both domestic and international resources are essential to transform the vision of safe, orderly, and dignified migration into reality.

This period (2018–2030) is critical—not only for reforming migration management but also for laying the groundwork for a more integrated, prosperous, and peaceful Africa. In recognising the human stories behind migration statistics—stories of hope, resilience, and aspiration—the AU’s Framework should inspire policymakers, civil society, and international partners to work together. The challenge is formidable, but the potential for transformative change is immense. By addressing the structural gaps, fostering regional solidarity, and ensuring that the rights and welfare of all migrants are safeguarded, Africa can turn migration into a true engine of sustainable development.

The call to action is clear: there must be a concerted effort to implement, review, and adjust the Framework in light of real-world challenges. Only then can Africa fully harness its demographic dividend and chart a course towards greater integration, economic prosperity, and social justice.

Final Thoughts

In an era of rapid global change, migration remains one of the most pressing issues for Africa. The ambitious goals set forth in the 2018–2030 Plan of Action are a testament to the continent’s resolve to transform migration challenges into opportunities. As policymakers continue to grapple with these complexities, a collaborative, evidence-based approach that honours the rights and dignity of all people will be essential for building a truly integrated and prosperous Africa.

Aric Jabari is the Editorial Director at the Sixteenth Council