Author
Jasmine Sarryeh-Jemersic
Former Research Fellow, Model International Mobility Convention (MIMC)
Executive Summary
On November 7, 2025, Carnegie Council’s Model International Mobility Convention initiative and international development organization Helvetas hosted a breakfast discussion held under Chatham House Rule at the Consulate General of Switzerland in New York City. The gathering brought together experts from development, diplomacy, research, and the private sector. The purpose was to consider how mobility systems in Europe and the United States are responding to rising pressures and to identify practical areas for cooperation.
The conversation centered on a persistent and widening tension. Normative frameworks describe how mobility should be governed and the rights that should accompany movement. Operational realities shape what governments, employers, cities, and frontline organizations can deliver under political and resource constraints. This divide has grown more pronounced across regions. Participants approached this challenge with candor and a focus on what is workable now.
Overview of MIMC and Helvetas
The Model International Mobility Convention (MIMC) provided a framework for orientation. The convention outlines cumulative rights and responsibilities for all categories of movers. Although full treaty adoption is not expected soon, the convention remains a useful reference point for coherence and incremental progress. Its emphasis on fairness and feasibility helps clarify where improvements can be made even when political space is limited.
Helvetas contributed insights from its extensive experience in labor migration and human mobility, particularly in South Asia and West and North Africa. Its programs work across the migration cycle, from helping prospective migrants make informed decisions and access skills and fair recruitment, to strengthening protection, social inclusion, and opportunities for migrants, their families, and host communities. This work increasingly also addresses forced displacement and climate-linked mobility, with a focus on practical, systems-level approaches that make human mobility safer and more beneficial for everyone involved.
The Act of Migration, Labor, and Non-state Actors
One area of focus during the conversation was pre-migration preparation. Reliable information about risks along migration corridors reduces vulnerability and strengthens individual agency. Short technical trainings increase earning potential and create safer employment opportunities abroad. These interventions show how development work can reduce harm and bolster informed decision making.
Cross-border labor movement was another major theme. The session highlighted the potential of circular migration programs that allow people to work abroad and return home with improved skills and savings, which is one of the important provisions in MIMC. These programs support migrants, employers, and origin communities. Restrictive mobility policies often undermine long-term competitiveness and limit the ability of firms to recruit and retain needed workers. The exchange also drew on recent work describing the emergence of a quality mobility industry, an approach that views labor pathways as arrangements that can be intentionally designed to benefit workers, employers, and origin communities alike.
The growing influence of non-state actors received significant attention as well. Private sector leaders and technology organizations described the role they play in creating training opportunities and improving access to employment for displaced women and other vulnerable groups. The group emphasized that labor mobility is increasingly viewed as essential for innovation and workforce stability. These actors frequently identify skill needs faster than governments. They can help shape more adaptive and inclusive mobility institutions. Their participation now forms an important part of migration governance. The group also noted that technology and information systems increasingly shape mobility outcomes. Tools, such as MIMC’s online Visa Mobility Clearing House, meant to support migrants must reflect real user behavior. They also need to account for ethical risks and long-term sustainability. The group also highlighted the challenge of fragmented information environments. Gaps in resources and communication can heighten vulnerability and complicate access to reliable protection mechanisms.
Insights and Next Steps
A broader structural insight became clear during the session. Migration is not separate from the structures that shape the lives of citizens, workers, and residents. Economic precarity, unequal access to opportunity, environmental pressures, and longstanding global inequities influence why people move. These same forces also affect those who never cross a border. In addition, the discussion stressed that mobility policy must begin with people’s lived realities. Many will move regardless of political debates, which makes it essential to meet individuals where they are and focus on practical, people-centered improvements. It also underscored that mobility involves both the right to move and the right to stay. Many people would prefer to remain in their communities if conditions were safe. This raises questions of responsibility and justice. It also highlights climate pressures that will require coordinated responses.
This perspective is widely visible among students and younger policymakers. They see migration not as a separate issue, but as part of a broader conversation about fairness, opportunity, and institutional trust. This lens reframes migration as part of a wider discussion about how communities build and sustain themselves. It also reflects concerns that restrictive entry and movement policies may weaken economic dynamism and social inclusion. Fair and predictable mobility systems support not only migrants but also the broader health of democratic and economic institutions.
Despite the challenges, the event maintained a grounded sense of possibility. Across sectors, there was agreement that meaningful progress is still achievable through pragmatic ethics. Strengthening information ecosystems along mobility routes, improving local reception capacity, building private-sector partnerships that expand opportunity, protecting educational continuity for youth on the move, and developing corridor-based interventions that recognize the full arc of mobility rather than only its endpoints were all identified as practical areas for progress. These are not sweeping reforms. They are interventions that protect dignity and reduce harm, precisely the type of improvements that the MIMC framework is designed to illuminate.
Concluding Thoughts
The gathering concluded with an appreciation for the value of convening across sectors at a moment when migration debates are often polarized. The purpose was not to reach consensus. It was to articulate constraints honestly, explore realistic options, and maintain a long-term ethical horizon. In this respect, the session reflected the core mission of the Model International Mobility Convention. Humane, coherent governance remains possible even when political conditions are difficult. Gatherings like this sustain that possibility and help chart responsible paths forward.
Many thanks to Ambassador Niculin Jäger and the consulate general of Switzerland in New York for hosting this event, and to Jasmine Sarryeh-Jemersic for the thoughtful summary of the discussion. This event was sponsored by the Model International Mobility Convention and Helvetas. We appreciate the participation of representatives from the Global Centre for Climate Mobility, the Migration Policy Institute, Labor Mobility Partnerships, Sistech, Besage.ai, Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs, Columbia University, the Swiss Investment Fund for Emerging Economies, and Helvetas.
Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs is an independent and nonpartisan nonprofit. The views expressed within this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of Carnegie Council.
