This study makes several important contributions
to research on international migration
and legal noncompliance. First, this is the
first study of its kind to empirically test the
neoclassical model as a subjective, microlevel
model in the context of unauthorized
migration. In the process, this study identified
specific components of the cost-benefit analysis
that are significant determinants of individuals’
decisions to migrate illegally. This
finding represents an important advance in
understanding would-be migrants’ decisionmaking
processes. It is easy to set up an
overly simplified version of the neoclassical
model as a straw man and to knock it down on
the basis that it lacks realism. Here, however,
I took seriously the foundational premises of
the neoclassical model on its own terms and
tested them empirically with data collected
specifically for this purpose. The results are
surprising in that only a couple of the costbenefit
calculations expected to matter proved
to be significant. Remarkably, neither perceived
risks of apprehension nor severity of
sanctions were significantly related to people’s
intent to migrate illegally.