Bridging the Gap Between Migration Science, Policymaking, and Public Understanding
The IPM conducts evidence-based analysis and provides rigorous, independent scientific assessments on migration and displacement to inform policymakers, media, and the public.
The International Panel on Migration (IPM) is an independent, interdisciplinary, and permanent scientific organisation. Drawing on the best available research across the social sciences, it synthesises comprehensive knowledge on migration — and communicates that knowledge to policymakers and the public.
The IPM responds to the growing gap between scientific research and public and political debate on migration. By amplifying a globally diverse and pluralistic scientific voice, it aims to restore the role of evidence in one of today's most contested policy areas — providing the evidence base that policymakers, journalists, and civil society need to engage meaningfully with migration.
"Migration" is used as an umbrella term for diverse movements of people (including migration, displacement, relocation, and evacuations), with immobility as its implicit counterpart. Read more →
This work rests on five core principles:
Carefully evaluating the latest evidence from all social sciences, adopting rigorous criteria that abide by the highest standards of research.
Led by an independent community of distinguished social scientists and scholars, free from personal, political, and institutional influence.
Gathering scientists from all relevant disciplines, acknowledging the range of methods used to study migration.
Emphasizing a global perspective with strong regional balance, prioritizing collaboration with scholars from around the world.
A standing, independent body providing a stable platform for rigorous scientific assessments through sustained engagement.
During its founding phase (2025–2027), the IPM is establishing four thematic Working Groups — the scientific engine of the panel. Each Working Group carries out a rigorous, systematic review of the evidence on a globally significant migration research question.
Assessing the scientific evidence on the environment-migration nexus
Explore →Synthesizing evidence on migration's social dimensions across world regions
Explore →Building the evidence base on forced migration, protection, and durable solutions
Explore →Assessing the demographic dimensions of migration and their long-term implications
Explore →Assessing the scientific evidence on the environment-migration nexus
Environmental and climatic changes are transforming human migration in scope, intensity, and speed. Migration, displacement, planned relocation, and evacuations driven by extreme weather events, slow-onset environmental degradation, sea-level rise, and resource scarcity are now one of the defining challenges of our time. The flipside, immobility in areas of risk, is equally important. However, the evidence base remains fragmented, contested, and poorly communicated to those who need it most.
The Working Group on Environmental Migration conducts a rigorous, systematic assessment of the state of scientific knowledge on the relationship between environmental or climatic changes and migration. Drawing on evidence across disciplines, it synthesizes what is known — and what remains uncertain — about the drivers, patterns, scale, impacts, and governance implications.
The Working Group assesses evidence from all world regions, with particular attention to areas most affected by environmental risk. It actively counteracts the overrepresentation of destination-country perspectives in existing research.
Scientific evidence on climate migration is growing rapidly but remains siloed across disciplines and regions. Gaps between knowledge and policy have real consequences: communities at risk are inadequately protected, adaptation strategies are poorly calibrated, and international governance frameworks lack the evidence base they need. The Working Group bridges these gaps, producing assessments that can inform climate adaptation planning, disaster risk management, loss & damage responses, humanitarian, development and peace actors, as well as migration governance worldwide.
Synthesizing evidence on migration's social dimensions across world regions
Migration transforms societies — and societies shape migration. Yet the evidence on how migration intersects with social cohesion, identity, discrimination, integration, and public attitudes is deeply contested, frequently politicized, and unevenly distributed across world regions and academic traditions. At a moment when migration is central to political debates globally, the gap between what researchers know and what the public and policymakers believe has never been more consequential.
The Working Group on Migration and Society provides a systematic, cross-disciplinary assessment of evidence on the social dimensions of migration. This includes integration and incorporation of migrants in receiving societies; the effects of migration on social institutions and communities; public attitudes toward migration and migrants; discrimination and racism; transnational social ties; and the lived experiences of migrants themselves.
The Working Group integrates sociology, anthropology, political science, psychology, and cultural studies — combining qualitative, ethnographic, and participatory approaches alongside quantitative data. It incorporates perspectives from origin, transit, and destination country contexts, as well as internal migration dynamics across the Global South.
Migration scholarship is disproportionately concentrated in high-income destination countries in Europe and North America. This geographic imbalance shapes which questions are asked, which communities are studied, and which findings reach policy audiences. By assembling a globally representative body of expertise, the Working Group corrects this imbalance and helps policymakers design evidence-based integration and social cohesion strategies.
Building the evidence base on forced migration, protection, and durable solutions
Forced migration — encompassing refugees, asylum seekers, internally displaced persons, and others compelled to move by conflict, persecution, and violence — has reached historic levels, with over 120 million people forcibly displaced. Despite decades of humanitarian and academic engagement, major knowledge gaps persist: about the long-term trajectories of displaced populations, about conditions that enable durable solutions, and about protection gaps faced by those who do not fit neatly into legal categories.
The Working Group on Forced Migration undertakes a comprehensive, evidence-based assessment of the scientific knowledge on forced migration. It examines the causes, patterns, and scale of forced movement; legal and normative frameworks governing protection; the conditions and experiences of forcibly displaced populations over time; and the policies and interventions that shape outcomes for affected people and host communities.
The Working Group spans law, political science, sociology, geography, public health, and economics, integrating evidence from contexts where forced migration is most acute, including the Middle East, Sub-Saharan Africa, South and Southeast Asia, and the Americas. It brings together researchers from both academic and practitioner traditions, reflecting IPM's commitment to combining scientific rigor with real-world relevance.
Responses to forced migration are too often reactive rather than evidence-informed. The knowledge base is fragmented across legal, humanitarian, and academic silos, and inadequately communicated to decision-makers. The Working Group produces authoritative, independent assessments that can strengthen protection frameworks, improve humanitarian programming, and support more effective, rights-based approaches to forced migration globally.
Assessing the demographic dimensions of migration and their long-term implications
Migration is one of the most powerful forces shaping demographic change in the 21st century — influencing population size, age structure, labor markets, urbanization, and the long-term sustainability of social systems worldwide. Yet demographic evidence on migration is frequently oversimplified in public and policy discourse, poorly integrated across origin and destination perspectives, and inadequately linked to the structural forces — aging populations, fertility decline, urbanization, labor demand — that drive and are shaped by mobility.
The Working Group on Demography and Migration conducts a systematic, cross-national assessment of the demographic dimensions of human mobility. It examines migration flows and their measurement; the demographic characteristics and trajectories of migrant populations; effects of migration on population dynamics in sending and receiving countries; labor migration and economic integration; the relationship between migration and urbanization; and long-term demographic scenarios associated with different migration trends and policies.
The Working Group integrates demography, economics, sociology, statistics, and public policy, combining quantitative rigor with contextual analysis. It draws on data and evidence from all world regions, with explicit attention to the underrepresentation of Global South perspectives in demographic migration research.
Demographic evidence on migration is essential for sound long-term planning — for pension systems, labor markets, urban infrastructure, and social services. Yet demographic projections are rarely communicated accessibly, and their policy implications are frequently contested along political rather than scientific lines. The Working Group provides authoritative, independent assessments that anchor evidence-based demographic planning and challenge distortions in public debate.
The IPM applies an expertise threshold followed by a multi-dimensional diversity composition matrix. This process is documented to ensure accountability and transparency.
Scored highly across citation metrics, policy-relevant outputs, and leadership roles. Excellence is assessed relative to career stage and field — quantitative metrics inform but do not determine selection.
Each Working Group of 10–15 members should represent at least 6 disciplines, with a minimum of 30% qualitative and 30% quantitative researchers, and at least 20% mixed-methods or other approaches.
All major world regions must be represented. Minimum 40% of members from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). At least one expert each from origin, transit, and destination country contexts.
Parity target of 50% ±5% across Working Group membership and leadership positions. Blind initial scoring for expertise is applied, with gender balancing during final composition stage.
Composition rule: 40–60% senior scholars (20+ years post-degree), 20–40% mid-career (8–20 years), and 20–40% early career (0–7 years). This enhances innovation and prevents entrenchment of dominant paradigms.
IPM explicitly recruits beyond English-dominant publication networks. Primary publication language, inclusion of non-English scholarship, and experience in non-Western knowledge contexts are all tracked.
Contribute your expertise to global migration research assessments and policy engagement. We're building a worldwide network of scholars committed to evidence-based migration discourse.
Express Your InterestThe IPM evolves incrementally into a fully constituted international scientific panel. The current phase (2025-2027) establishes the institutional architecture while laying the foundation for inclusive and decentralized participation.
← scroll to explore →
Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity, Göttingen, Germany
MPI Europe; Independent Consultant
University of Ghana, Centre for Migration Studies
CNRS (French National Centre for Scientific Research); Sciences Po Paris
Waseda University, Graduate School of Asia-Pacific Studies, Tokyo, Japan
El Colegio de México (COLMEX)
International Institute for Migration and Development (IIMAD), India
European University Institute (EUI), Florence, Italy
Erasmus University Rotterdam; Leiden University
Migration Policy Institute (MPI)
The New School for Social Research; Zolberg Institute on Migration and Mobility
UNITAR (United Nations Institute for Training and Research)
Toronto Metropolitan University (TMU), Canada
National University of Singapore (NUS), Department of Geography
President — Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity
Vice-President (Africa) — University of Ghana, Centre for Migration Studies
Vice-President (Americas) — El Colegio de México (COLMEX)
Vice-President (Asia) — National University of Singapore
Executive Director of the Secretariat
Strategy Officer
Data Officer
Community Engagement and Design Officer
Leadership body of 12–16 members. Sets the agenda, approves the work plan, and serves as ambassadors of the IPM.
Members →President, three regional Vice-Presidents, and the Executive Director. Implements Steering Committee decisions.
Explore →Based at the Zolberg Institute, The New School. Handles communications, engagement, fundraising, and coordination.
Team →Four thematic groups anchored in regional hubs addressing migration research questions of global relevance.
Explore →10–20 observers from international organizations plus a global coalition of scientists as the author pool.
Explore →The IPM was founded on a shared conviction: that migration policy is so consequential it must be grounded in rigorous evidence. From an open letter signed in 2018 to an emerging global institution, ours is a story of scientific community in action.
"We ask for a radical change of paradigm in dealing with migration and asylum, based on a rational, realistic, scientifically informed and humanist approach..."
— Open letter, 2018Each dot represents one signatory.
"Never before has the chasm been so vast between the outcomes of rigorous scientific research on migration and the assumptions underpinning how members of the public — and many policymakers — think about migration."
— Steven Vertovec, President IPM, 2026In response to the politicised framing of migration in Europe in 2015–16, researchers launched an initiative to bridge the gap between scientific knowledge and migration policy. Frustrated by the lack of policy impact, they called in a 2018 open letter for a more rational, research-based, and humane approach, simultaneously published in The Guardian and Le Monde.
Hosted under the Institut Convergences Migrations, LIEPP (Sciences Po), and the Collège de France, this first gathering united researchers around a shared diagnosis: the growing gap between scientific expertise and migration policy was troubling. Inspired by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the group resolved to build a similar collective scientific voice for migration.
At the invitation of the Max-Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity, the group mapped out implementation steps and identified key interlocutors. It reaffirmed its commitment to scientific independence, rigorous peer-based methods, and a global reach.
The Covid-19 pandemic interrupted momentum. But it also created space for essential arguments. The same debates that drive the need for the IPM — about objectivity, whose knowledge counts, and the gap between evidence and policy — also shaped how it was designed.
With support from the Robert Bosch Foundation and the Fondation Maison des Sciences de l'Homme, a feasibility study confirmed that the IPM is timely and relevant, and, with further sharpening, could fill a key gap. An accompanying mapping report identified possible synergies with institutions and potential partners.
The New School for Social Research (New York) formally joined the initiative and began hosting the IPM's secretariat at the Zolberg Institute. A Steering Committee with leading experts is established.
The IPM will officially launch during the Second International Migration Review Forum (IMRF) in New York at the United Nations. In a side event, IPM will convene leaders to discuss how impartial research synthesis can rebuild trust and inform public discourse and policy-making.
The IPM is actively structuring its first assessment reports and finalising its governance and funding framework. The first reports are expected in late 2026 or early 2027.
"The IPM will be an independent, interdisciplinary, international, and permanent scientific institution — or it will not be. These four characteristics are the guarantors of its legitimacy and autonomy."
— Guiraudon, Schmoll & Thiollet, Plein Droit, June 2025"We have never been more solicited — and nothing changed. The analyses were simply not taken into account by the institutions that commissioned them."
— Camille Schmoll, on the heightened politicization of migration 2015-16, Libération, July 2025The circular chord diagram at the heart of the IPM logo is inspired by the pioneering work of Guy Abel on bilateral international migration flow estimates. Abel's visualisations map the full complexity of global migration as an interconnected web of flows — between origins, transit points, and destinations — rather than as a simple one-directional movement.
We chose this image deliberately. Migration is not linear. It involves sending and receiving zones, transit and origin areas, and circular movement. It reflects the diversity of people, reasons, and routes. The chord diagram captures all of this at once — the very complexity that the IPM exists to study, understand, and communicate.
The IPM uses "migration" as an umbrella term covering the full spectrum of human movement — and its opposite "immobility". Here is what that means in practice.
"Migration" covers voluntary and forced movements of people, across diverse temporal and spatial scales, within and across borders, irrespective of legal status. The flipside — immobility — is implicitly included.
Migration changes one's usual place of residence. It spans short-term and seasonal moves (except temporary travel or commuting) as well as long-term settlement, within and across national borders.
The term encompasses all types of movements, ranging from clearly forced displacement to clearly voluntary migration — regardless of legal status, documentation, or formal recognition. Forms of movements
All factors shaping the initiation and perpetuation of movement are considered, spanning economic, educational, environmental (including disasters), political (conflict, persecution, coercion, governance), health-related, development-induced, and social, personal, or household factors such as family reunification, marriage, lifestyle, or retirement.
The IPM covers different forms of human movement, including those coined as migration, displacement, relocation, and evacuations in specific contexts. The inability or choice not to move — whether involuntary, acquiescent, or voluntary — is equally central to understanding migration dynamics.
Email: secretariat@migrationpanel.org
Website: www.migrationpanel.org
For press inquiries and media requests, please contact our communications team at secretariat@migrationpanel.org