Spain’s migration regularisation plan through the eyes of an African migrant researcher: Between opportunity and policy trade-offs

Spain’s proposed migration regularisation has been widely described as an ambitious reform aimed at addressing irregularity and labour market needs. However, the policy remains politically and analytically contested. While it may offer pathways to inclusion for undocumented migrants, it also raises important questions about policy design, potential unintended consequences, and broader structural implications.

Lived experience and the meaning of regularisation

From the perspective of an African migrant researcher, regularisation is often understood not as an abstract policy instrument but as a potential turning point in everyday life. Legal status can enable access to formal employment, reduce vulnerability to exploitation, and provide a degree of social stability. These lived realities help explain why such policies generate strong support among migrant communities. At the same time, migrant experiences represent only one dimension of a broader and more complex policy debate.

Contested evidence: Pull factor or structural drivers?

A key area of contention concerns whether regularisation policies may generate so-called “pull factor” effects. Some scholars argue that large-scale regularisations can influence future migration patterns by signalling the possibility of eventual legalisation. Others, however, contend that migration decisions are primarily shaped by structural drivers such as labour demand, economic inequality, and transnational social networks rather than by policy signals alone. The evidence remains mixed, suggesting that this is an unsettled empirical question rather than a resolved one.

Economic contributions and structural constraints

The economic rationale for regularisation is often framed in terms of labour market needs. In Spain, sectors such as agriculture, construction, and domestic work have long relied on migrant labour, often under conditions of informality. Regularisation could facilitate the transition of workers into the formal economy, potentially increasing tax revenues and improving labour protections. Evidence from previous programmes suggests that such policies can generate positive employment and fiscal outcomes over time (see Kossoudji and Cobb-Clark, 2002; Devillanova, Fasani, and Frattini, 2018).

However, focusing solely on labour market benefits risks overlooking broader structural considerations. One important dimension concerns the capacity of public services. Spain, like many European countries, is currently experiencing pressures in areas such as housing and healthcare. While regularisation may improve migrants’ access to these services, it may also increase demand in already strained systems (see Elguezabal and Martínez-Zarzoso, 2024; Ambrosini, 2016). This highlights the importance of policy coordination, particularly in ensuring that social infrastructure keeps pace with legal and administrative reforms.

Political context and policy contestation

The political context is equally significant. Migration policy in Spain is embedded within a wider sociopolitical environment characterised by competing narratives around economic contribution, social cohesion, and national identity. As argued by Geddes and Scholten, migration policies are shaped not only by economic logic but also by political contestation and institutional dynamics. In this context, presenting regularisation as a straightforward or universally beneficial solution risks overlooking the divisions and debates that surround it, particularly within the current legislative cycle.

Balancing Migrant Perspectives and Policy Analysis

An alternative analytical approach is to foreground migrant experiences while maintaining a clear distinction between lived realities and policy evaluation. Migrants’ narratives reveal the human consequences of irregular status, including precarity, exclusion, and limited access to rights. At the same time, these accounts should not be taken as comprehensive evidence of policy effectiveness. As Ruhs notes, migration policies often involve trade-offs between economic, social, and political objectives, making it necessary to assess them across multiple dimensions.

Conclusion: A Policy of Trade-offs

Spain’s regularisation proposal can be understood as both a response to existing challenges and a source of new questions. It reflects ongoing tensions between inclusion and control, economic demand and social capacity, and humanitarian considerations and political constraints. Rather than viewing the policy as inherently transformative, it may be more accurate to see it as part of a broader and evolving framework of migration governance.

A balanced assessment of the reform requires moving beyond normative characterisations toward a more evidence-based and analytically grounded perspective. This involves recognising both the potential benefits of regularisation for migrants and labour markets, as well as the uncertainties and trade-offs that accompany such policies. By situating migrant experiences within this wider context, it becomes possible to develop a more nuanced understanding of what regularisation can—and cannot—achieve.

Sunday Israel Oyebamiji is an academic and policy-oriented researcher with expertise in migration studies, political economy, and social protection, with a strong focus on race, gender, and inequality in Africa and Europe. He was a Former Erasmus+ Mobility Research Intern at the Migration Policy Centre of the EUI’s Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies.