African Champions lead the way on Global Compact for Migration
Seventeen African countries are leading global migration management, but will others follow?
Above 80% Most people who migrate to Africa remain on the continent, often putting pressure on neighboring countries. Yet migration also drives economic growth, development and regional integration.
Migration continues to be controversial globally as it peaks Tension At the South Africa show.
The 2018 Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) was adopted to promote international cooperation, protect migrant rights, and manage complex migration flows. For Africa, it provides a structured, cooperative framework to address irregular migration while maximizing the benefits of human mobility.
The GCM enables countries to transform migration from a risk-taking challenge to a development path, in line with the African Union (AU) Migration Policy Framework for Africa and Agenda 2063.
Yet, as Member States prepare for the GCM's second International Migration Review Forum (IMRF) in New York this month, progress in implementing the GCM worldwide has been slow. Africa's experience may change this.
Since 2020, countries have volunteered to serve as GCM Champions to help advance its objectives and meet the targets. In April 2026, 17 African GCM Champions evaluated themselves Progress and prepared a joint contribution to IMRF. These were Chad, Egypt, Ethiopia, Eswatini, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Mali, Morocco, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone and Zimbabwe.
|
Global Compact to Champion Migration Countries
|
They reaffirmed Africa's role in implementing GCMs, demonstrating the practical application of the Global Compact and providing a case study for Member States at IMRF 2026. Examples include skills partnerships linked to national transformation agendas, such as ghana Has adopted technical and vocational training and national labor migration policies in efforts to link them to regional free movement arrangements in West, East and Southern Africa.
Five key issues should shape the New York debate.
First, better migration governance requires accurate data. Strengthening the evidence base by consolidating national migration data systems and agreeing on a smaller, shared set of indicators would improve accountability under both the GCM and AU frameworks.
objective 1 The GCM calls on states to collect and use accurate and disaggregated data as the basis for evidence-based policies. Migration debates are often driven by perceptions of crisis, while evidence on who is moving, under what conditions, and with what consequences, can be partial or conflicting.
To address this, African countries are investing in national migration profiles, data hubs and frameworks. Some people are studying on migration, climate change etc. gender To inform policy. Yet, informal crossings, internal mobility and displacement are poorly captured, migration information is scattered, and gaps exist between data production and policy making.
At IMRF 2026, African states should advocate for greater support for strengthening national migration data systems rather than new initiatives, and develop a small African 'core indicator' set for GCMs and AU reporting.
Second, there is a need for regular routes and increased labor mobility. African countries are testing circular migration programmes, skills partnerships linked to national development and closer alignment between labor migration policies and regional free movement regimes in West, East and Southern Africa.
Yet these schemes cover only a few thousand workers annually, while millions of young people enter or wish to enter the African labor market each year.
experience in West And East Africa suggests that labor mobility schemes are more sustainable when they are built on a regional free movement framework, co-designed and co-owned by origin and destination governments, and explicitly linked to skills development and inclusive growth. This points to the value of moving beyond scattered, short-term pilots towards fewer, larger and better-designed mobility partnerships with clear safeguards and monitoring.
Third, security, dignified returns and sustainable reintegration remain systemically weak. In some countries, such as gardenerNational reintegration guidelines link individual support to vocational training and local development.
Regional efforts show that safe evacuation and temporary protection for vulnerable migrants is only possible when responsibilities are shared between countries, including through platforms such as the Pan-African Forum on Migration. Many states are strengthening asylum and internal displacement frameworks and testing alternatives to immigration detention.
However, African states are grappling with the challenge of 'launching' complex, long-term actions. Financing for return and sustainable reintegration often remains short-term and project-based. When projects end, the system may struggle to maintain profits, and migrants and communities may lose existing support.
Sustainable reintegration and alternatives to detention are most effective when they are incorporated into comprehensive governance and development plans with multi-year resources and measurable outcomes at both the individual and community levels. IMRF 2026 provides an opportunity for Member States and partners to signal support for return and sustainable reintegration, not based on fragmented projects.
Fourth, migration and climate are two important, underutilized levers. world bank Estimate Remittances to Africa amount to approximately US$100 billion per year, but diaspora involvement often focuses on symbolic events or small-scale initiatives.
African countries are beginning to institutionalize diaspora representation, promote tourism and skills transfer, and explore the African-based diaspora investment Machine. These initiatives require careful design, including realistic expectations for migrant communities and adaptive financial products.
Climate-related mobility is another area where Africa has started to act, but gaps remain. Mobility can be both a risk and an adaptation strategy, depending on how it is controlled. National strategies should reflect climate dynamics and align migration governance with disaster risk reduction and adaptation frameworks.
develop tools for climate sensitive Labor routes, planned relocation and social protection are important in affected areas. These issues can be prioritized in discussions on GCM implementation.
Finally, Africa's experience in implementing GCMs shows that migration governance is inherently political and involves balancing different policy objectives. Decisions on regular pathways, skills development, migrant integration and permanent reintegration all affect labor markets, public finances and social cohesion.
There is no perfect solution to the challenges in the migration governance area. Nevertheless, within the IMRF and beyond, honest discussion about risks and trade-offs and the formulation of practical solutions are essential for the credibility of GCMs.
African countries are leading. The rest of the world should take note and ensure that the next phase of GCMs is firmly established in practice.
The opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinions of IOM, ISS, its trustees, advisory council members, or donors. Authors contribute to ISS publications in their individual capacity.
Please ask for permission to republish ISS Today articles email We. In South Africa, news24 ISS Today reserves the right to republish articles. in nigeria, Premium Times ISS Today reserves the right to republish articles.