How Remittances Improve GDP Growth in Recipient Countries

Money sent home by migrant workers has become the financial backbone of developing economies worldwide. In 2024, remittances to low- and middle-income countries reached $685 billion — a 5.8% jump from the previous year — dwarfing both foreign direct investment and official development assistance combined.

• Remittances grew 57% over the past decade, while FDI declined 41%
• Flows exceeded FDI by more than $250billion in 2023
• Tajikistan's remittances equal 45% of GDP
• India received $129 billion in 2024

Unlike volatile capital flows that flee during crises, these transfers flow directly into household accounts — providing immediate purchasing power to people who need it most. Therefore, remittances are projected to continue their growth trajectory, driven by widening income gaps and climate-related displacement.

In this report, we’ll explore how remittances improve gross domestic product growth in the countries where the recipients reside.

What makes remittances the largest external finance source?

The transformation accelerated dramatically since 2020. While economists predicted a collapse during COVID-19, flows dropped by just 1% in 2020, when global GDP contracted by 3% — then rebounded to record levels in 2021-2022. Migrants tightened their own belts to keep money flowing home.

Record-breaking growth

South Asia posted the strongest performance with 11.8% growth in 2024, fueled by Indian diaspora workers in the United States and Gulf countries. However, Sub-Saharan Africa's $56 billion grew just 2.4%, constrained by the world's highest transfer costs, averaging 7.9%. The top recipients were:

• China: $48 billion
• Mexico: $68 billion
• Pakistan: $33 billion
• Philippines: $40 billion

Nevertheless, relative to economic size, smaller nations show the greatest dependence. Tonga (38% of GDP), Nicaragua and Lebanon (27% each), and Samoa (26%) demonstrate that remittances are existential.

Stability vs volatility

The structural advantage becomes clear during shocks. Remittances proved resilient during the 2008-09 financial crisis (falling only modestly before recovering quickly) and remained remarkably stable through the pandemic.

A bilateral study found that every 1% fall in origin-country income triggers a 60% increase in remittances. Consequently, this countercyclical nature provides critical insurance. For example, in Somalia (in 2006), flows reached 70% of local GDP during the conflict. Similarly, in Mexico, remittances show a stronger impact during recessions.

How do remittances actually boost GDP?

The transmission mechanisms operate through interconnected channels spanning immediate consumption effects and long-term productivity improvements. Unlike FDI, which funds large projects, remittances directly increase household purchasing power.

Consumption stimulus

Research using 2018 Philippine data found that remittance-financed consumption and investment totaled ₱742.2 billion ($14.1 billion), accounting for 3.5% of total output and 3.4% of GDP. The spending supports local businesses whose income rises as recipients purchase goods and services.

Moreover, the multiplier effect quantifies this impact. Oxford Economics estimated an average multiplier of 0.4 — every dollar sent generates 40 cents of additional output through secondary spending. Applied to 2019's $548 billion in developing-country remittances, that's $219 billion in direct GDP impact.

Investment channels

While consumption dominates (surveys show 46-84% funds are spent on daily expenses), the remaining portion flows into productive activities:

• Families start micro-enterprises
• Households expand existing shops
• Recipients invest in business inventory
• Farmers buy better equipment and seeds

Therefore, research on African households shows that 18-50% of remittances fund business investment, with approximately $75 billion annually saved or invested globally.

Human capital development

This represents the most powerful long-term growth channel. Research from El Salvador found remittance income lowers the hazard that a child will drop out of elementary school by 54% in urban areas. Similar patterns emerge globally:

A study of 21 Sub-Saharan African countries provides robust evidence that remittances significantly promote human capital development. However, good governance enhances the impact, while public spending showed negative effects — likely due to corruption and poor policy alignment.

Foreign exchange stability

At the macroeconomic level, remittances provide essential balance-of-payments support. Countries record these flows as foreign currency inflows, helping finance imports and repay debt. An Egyptian study found that increased inflows reduce GDP growth volatility, helping dampen economic cycles through countercyclical dynamics.

What does country evidence show?

Empirical studies consistently demonstrate positive long-run relationships between remittances and growth. The magnitude ranges from 0.16% to 0.4% GDP growth increase for each percentage-point rise in remittances as a share of national income.

Large recipient economies

India's position as largest recipient with $129 billion provides immense foreign exchange liquidity. The Philippines demonstrates one of the clearest positive relationships — the input-output analysis found remittances created nearly 150,000 jobs through real estate and construction demand.

High-dependency nations

Tajikistan represents the extreme case with 45% of GDP from remittances. The country achieved 8.4% GDP growth and reduced poverty substantially since 2009. Nevertheless, 86% funds are used for basic consumption rather than productive investment, creating severe dependence on Russia.

Nepal exemplifies poverty reduction success. The World Bank documents that remittances reduced poverty by over 30% between 2011 and 2023. Without these flows, 2.6 million additional Nepalis would live in poverty. However, the challenge is that fully 82% of workers remain in informal employment.

Bangladesh shows a positive long-term relationship according to a Vector Error Correction Model study (1980-2022). Interestingly, while remittances showed positive effects, migration itself exhibits a negative long-run correlation — suggesting human capital loss can offset some benefits.

Multi-country analyses

A comprehensive analysis of 103 countries (1990-2019) found that a one-percentage-point increase in remittances correlates with a 0.16% increase in growth.

Research on 82 developing economies found that interaction with financial development creates complementarity, accelerating growth

How do remittances build human capital?

Investment in education and healthcare enabled by remittances generates returns that compound over decades. Unlike short-term consumption, human capital improvements create lasting improvements in workforce quality that persist across generations.

Educational improvements

School retention represents the most direct impact. The El Salvador study found that remittances lower the dropout hazard by 54% in urban areas. Philippine research found that a 10% increase leads to a 1.7% increase in school attendance and a 0.35-hour decline in weekly child labor.

The mechanisms work through income and time allocation:

• Parents fund higher education options
• Children stay in school rather than work
• Families afford books, uniforms, transportation, and fees
• Households invest in skill development

Healthcare access

Remittances link to improved health outcomes across multiple dimensions. A Mexican study found remittances positively affect infant survival, suggesting additional income enables better prenatal care, nutrition, and medical services. Beyond infants, remittances enable:

• Year-round adequate nutrition
• Quality healthcare facility access
• Preventive care and routine checkups
• Sanitation improvements like clean water
• Necessary medications for chronic conditions

Governance as amplifier

Institutional quality dramatically shapes effectiveness. The Sub-Saharan Africa research revealed that good governance enhances impact on human capital development.

However, public spending showed negative effects — corruption, lack of transparency, and poor policy alignment mean remittances actually outperform public investment in weak governance environments.

A study of 89 developing countries found financial inclusion is significantly mediated by governance quality. Good governance transforms remittances into a powerful tool while weak governance enhances financial exclusion by increasing mistrust.

Can remittances transform financial systems?

The persistent, high-volume nature of remittance flows acts as a catalyst for financial sector reform. Demand for affordable transfers has driven banks and non-bank entities to develop digital services for previously excluded populations.

Entry point to formal finance

According to the Bank for International Settlements, remittances are typically the first financial service used by migrants and families. This provides contact with the financial sector that can be leveraged for additional services. Once individuals have transaction accounts, institutions can offer:

• Insurance options
• Savings products with interest
• Credit scoring and loan access
• Investment products

Therefore, higher percentages of remittance users with accounts significantly increase the likelihood that funds flow through formal channels. Regular receipt signals creditworthiness to lenders where traditional collateral is scarce.

System-wide development

Research on 82 countries found that interaction with financial development through efficiency creates complementarity, accelerating growth. In Nigeria, studies reveal remittances positively influence financial development, particularly augmenting liquid liabilities.

A study using bilateral remittances from Italian provinces found recipient-country financial development is negatively associated with remittances — suggesting they help alleviate credit constraints. Research by Giuliano and Ruiz-Arranz showed remittances are more effective in promoting growth in less financially developed countries.

Digital infrastructure acceleration

Mobile money has revolutionized African financial inclusion. GSMA's 2025 report documents 2.1 billion accounts globally, with Africa commanding 53% (1.1 billion). Transaction volume in Africa reached $1.1 trillion in 2024 — a 15% increase.

The digital remittance market grew to $24.5-25.3 billion in 2024 and is projected to reach $60 billion by 2030 (15-17% compound annual growth).

Which economic sectors benefit most from remittances?

Remittances influence sectoral composition through demand-side effects (what households purchase) and supply-side effects (how labor and capital reallocate). The distributional impact varies dramatically across industries and export orientations.

Agricultural productivity

Research from Bangladesh indicates that remittances positively impact agricultural productivity by increasing access to resources. In Nigeria, studies found that remittances positively affect farm efficiency, with migrant households exhibiting higher technical efficiency.

Pakistan research found remittances lead to increased output because they alleviate capital constraints. The study revealed 7.2% of remittances were spent on agricultural land and 0.4% on non-machinery investments. Moreover, remittances provide funding for credit-constrained households to purchase seeds, fertilizers, and insecticides.

Manufacturing and services

A comprehensive IMF study found remittances have differential effects across sectors. They increase employment in construction and real estate but reduce manufacturing employment — a pattern with important growth implications since manufacturing typically offers higher productivity.

The sectoral reallocation shows the influence of remittances on aggregate demand. When households receive transfers, they increase spending on non-tradable goods, such as local services and construction. Higher demand raises prices in these sectors, incentivizing labor and capital to flow toward them and away from tradable manufacturing.

Input-output linkages

Research on Sub-Saharan countries demonstrates that effects increase with the degree of sectoral linkages. The financial intermediation sector shows especially prominent network effects — countries with intricate industrial linkages benefit more from remittance-led demand.

The analysis quantifies how changes in demand propagate through input-output linkages, creating cascading effects. A sector receiving increased demand then purchases more inputs from suppliers, who purchase from their suppliers, and so on. The Philippine study captured both first-degree and second-degree impacts, demonstrating how remittances ripple through interconnected sectors.

Do remittances fuel entrepreneurship in recipient countries?

Capital-constraint relief enables business formation where traditional credit is scarce. Recipients use funds from overseas family to engage in entrepreneurial activities — from small retail to service ventures — generating income and creating jobs.

Business formation

In developing nations where credit access is challenging, remittances give locals the ability to launch businesses. As these grow, they generate income for owners and contribute to job creation. Remittances serve as a significant source of capital for startups worldwide. These funds enable entrepreneurs to:

• Generate employment opportunities
• Maintain operations during cash flow gaps
• Purchase inventory, equipment, or premises
• Establish businesses without commercial loans

Through remittances, recipients gain access to formal financial services. Joining the banking system allows effective financial management — providing a foundation for small business activities.

Necessity vs opportunity entrepreneurship

A study of 30 countries (2001-2009) revealed important distinctions. Remittances have a positive impact on necessity-based entrepreneurship (pursued due to lack of other options) while showing a negative association with opportunity-based entrepreneurship (pursuing opportunities when other options exist).

The pattern emerges because necessity entrepreneurship entails lower risk and doesn't demand high human and financial capital.

Street vending, small retail, food preparation, and basic services can start with modest capital. Conversely, opportunity entrepreneurship demands longer payoff horizons and requires strong local support systems.

Pakistan evidence shows external remittances increase likelihood of self-employment versus wage employment. Internal remittances are associated with increased farming participation, demonstrating how different sources channel recipients into distinct activities.

Market expansion effects

With increased capital, businesses can expand into new markets, introduce new products, and grow their customer base.

Market expansion enhances competitiveness and ensures long-term sustainability. The ability to invest in marketing, open additional locations, or diversify product lines accelerates development beyond relying solely on retained earnings.

While microfinance institutions charge high interest rates (often 20-40% annually), remittances come with zero repayment obligations. The risk profile differs completely: a failed business funded by remittances disappoints the family but doesn't trigger asset seizure or legal action.

How do remittances affect labor markets in recipient countries?

The income effect of remittances — increased household wealth reducing the need to work — creates complex labor market dynamics that vary by gender, employment type, and economic context. However, the full picture requires examining why labor supply falls and what recipients do instead.

Participation declines

Extensive evidence demonstrates that remittances significantly reduce labor force participation. An IMF study found effects are highly significant and greater than those of FDI or ODA. Remittances reduce participation and increase informality while also reducing unemployment.

Pakistan research using 2018-2019 data found that individuals from remittance-receiving households are less likely to participate in labor. Northern Triangle countries show similar patterns, with studies demonstrating that remittances reduce labor supply through substitution and income effects.

Ghana revealed a strong negative association between remittances and participation, with concern that remittances can exacerbate long-term poverty reduction through lower participation. The research recommends rural-based and gender-based interventions to redirect income toward productive uses.

Reservation wage effects

Households with remittance income exhibit higher reservation wages — the minimum wage at which individuals accept employment. Research provides evidence that remittances may be raising reservation wages of recipients, contributing to upward trends in real wages.

In post-transition countries, a 10% increase in remittances per capita leads to a 0.10% decline in the total employment rate and a 0.18% in the female employment rate — with the negative impact particularly pronounced for women.

Gender disparities

Labor market effects hit women harder. In post-transition countries, a 10% increase leads to a 0.18% decline in female employment versus a 0.10% in total employment. In North Africa and the Middle East, a 10% increase results in a 1.99% decline in female employment — much greater than the 1.34% total decline. The gender disparity likely reflects:

• Cultural norms about women's work
• Household responsibilities and social expectations
• Women are increasing their unpaid household production time
• Families prioritizing the withdrawal of women from difficult jobs

Sectoral reallocation

Research analyzing 14 sectors found remittances have differential effects across labor segments. They increase employment in construction and real estate but reduce manufacturing employment. Remittances also induce shifts away from formal toward informal and unpaid work.

Interestingly, the impact on informality is greater in regions where informality is initially lower. In fragile states, however, remittances actually increase wage growth and don't depress participation — the opposite of effects in stable states.

How do remittances affect inequality?

Distributional consequences depend critically on which households can afford to send migrants abroad. Migration costs — both financial (travel, visas, fees) and social (risk, information) — determine whether remittances flow primarily to wealthy families or reach poorer households.

Global patterns

A meta-analysis examining 578 estimates from 45 studies found that while the overall mean effect on inequality is negative (inequality-reducing), it's economically small. Nevertheless, significant regional differences emerged — the effect varies based on channels and characteristics of migrant-sending communities.

The analysis found remittances contribute to increased inequality in South Asia while having a substantial inequality-reducing effect in East Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America. In the Middle East, North Africa, and Sub-Saharan Africa, only marginal impacts were found.

Migration costs as a determinant

Migration costs play a crucial role in determining inequality effects. In Latin America, where costs are lowest globally, low-income households can send migrants more easily, so remittances benefit the disadvantaged, reducing inequality. Proximity to the United States, established networks, and lower barriers mean even relatively poor families can send a member north.

Conversely, high costs in South Asia deter lower-income households. As a result, migrant-sending households are more likely to be urban, better educated, and less disadvantaged. Therefore, remittances primarily flow to advantaged households, which increases inequality. The cost to migrate from Bangladesh or Pakistan can exceed several years of median household income.

Network maturity effects

Research reveals a non-monotonic relationship depending on migration network maturity. In the first stages, there's an inequality-increasing effect because early migrants are from advantaged households — only they can afford initial costs. However, as diaspora communities become established, costs decline, leading to broader migration from lower-income households.

Studies support this, showing that remittances decrease inequality in communities with a large diaspora but increase it in those without a long migration tradition. The turning point typically occurs 10-15 years after initial waves, once pioneers establish support systems, reducing entry barriers.

Poverty reduction magnitude

Panel data analysis for Latin American and Caribbean countries demonstrates that remittances have increased growth and reduced inequality and poverty.

Research found that a 10% increase in per capita remittances correlates with a 1.3% reduction in poverty levels, 2% decrease in poverty depth, and a 3.12% drop in poverty severity.

What empowers women through remittances?

The feminization of migration — growing share of women in international movements — has transformed remittance flows and gender implications. Women increasingly migrate independently and as main economic providers, rather than as wives or dependents.

Economic autonomy

Migration and remittances can increase women's economic opportunities by giving them greater control over household finances and decision-making power.

According to the International Organization, remittances provide women greater inclusion in financial decision-making. This empowerment manifests in two contexts — migrant women who assume primary-earner roles, and women who remain in origin countries and take responsibility for expenditures.

Kerala research provides nuanced insights. The study found the positive effect manifests through timing of receipt, not amount. Women receiving remittances in a regular, frequent pattern are more likely to report increased healthcare autonomy, regardless of the amount.

When men migrate, their absence requires women to take greater roles in:

• Children's education
• Mobility outside the house
• Household purchases and investments
• Healthcare decisions

Spending patterns

Households benefit because women tend to spend remittances on nutritional, educational, and healthcare needs of members, especially children.

Men allocate larger shares to other purposes (consumer durables, social obligations, personal consumption). The gendered pattern has important implications for long-term human capital development. Evidence shows:

• Lower rates of frivolous spending
• Better healthcare utilization for children
• Higher nutritional quality when women control income
• Increased school enrollment when mothers receive remittances

Labor market trade-offs

Despite gains in autonomy, remittances can reduce women's formal participation, potentially limiting long-term independence. Research reveals concerning disparities: a 10% increase leads to a 0.18% decline in female employment versus a 0.10% total decline.

The pattern suggests that while remittances empower women in some dimensions (household decisions, healthcare autonomy, expenditure control), they simultaneously reduce economic engagement in formal markets. Families may prioritize withdrawing women from difficult jobs when remittances provide a financial cushion.

What challenges must recipient countries navigate?

Benefits come packaged with macroeconomic risks that can partially offset growth advantages, particularly in competitiveness and labor dynamics. High inflows create policy dilemmas where immediate relief must be balanced against longer-term distortions.

Dutch disease

Dutch disease represents the most cited risk. The phenomenon involves real exchange rate appreciation, loss of international competitiveness, and a shift from productive tradable to less productive non-tradable sectors.

A study of 32 Asian countries (2006-2016) found that as remittances per capita increase by 1%, the real effective exchange rate appreciates by 0.103%.

Interestingly, Dutch disease only appears in countries with low ratios (≤1% of GDP). For higher ratios, remittances result in real exchange rate depreciation. Dynamic modeling demonstrates remittance inflows lead to:

• Increased consumption demand is biased toward non-tradables
• Labor reallocation away from the tradable sector
• Higher non-tradable prices
• Decline in labor supply

Manufacturing firms face higher wages but can't raise prices (they compete globally), so they contract or relocate.

Dependency vulnerabilities

El Salvador's experience illustrates risks. While remittances significantly contribute to household income and poverty reduction, they create vulnerability to external shocks.

A U.S. recession would devastate El Salvador's economy through remittances, yet Salvadoran policymakers have no influence over U.S. economic policy.

Tajikistan provides the extreme case. with 45% of GDP from remittances (overwhelmingly from Russia), the country experienced catastrophic contraction when remittances collapsed 57% during the 2014-15 ruble crisis. Household consumption plummeted, government revenues contracted, and poverty spiked.

Mitigation strategies

Dutch disease isn't inevitable — policy choices moderate its emergence. Research indicates that floating exchange rate regimes dampen appreciation caused by capital flows.

In countries with low export levels, Dutch disease is more likely to occur, suggesting that export diversification serves as an essential buffer. Policy recommendations include:

• Implementing counter-cyclical fiscal policies
• Channeling inflows into productive investment
• Promoting commodity trade for long-term benefits
• Increasing exporter support through variable subsidies

Most importantly, sustainable growth requires directing capital toward productivity-increasing activities rather than merely boosting consumption.

How can recipient countries maximize remittance benefits?

Evidence supports a multi-pronged approach that focuses on reducing costs, expanding financial inclusion, channeling funds into investment, and strengthening governance. The goal is to transform remittances from simple transfers into catalysts for sustained development.

Cost reduction imperative

Transaction costs remain a critical barrier. Global averages stood at 6.35% in 2024, well above the SDG target of 3% by 2030. Sub-Saharan Africa suffers the highest costs at 7.9%, while South Asia has reduced costs to 5.01% through digital adoption. Digital channels demonstrate the path forward:

• Mobile money transfers cost just 4.11%
• Digital remittances average 4.95% versus 6.89% for cash
• Fast payment systems reduce costs by 0.30-1 percentage point
• Dilip Ratha emphasizes the magnitude:

"Making it just 5 percentage points cheaper would cut costs globally by nearly $30 billion a year."

The Center for Global Development estimates that cutting costs to 3% would save nearly $30 billion annually for developing-country households.

Financial inclusion acceleration

Countries should reduce taxes on remittances and transfer channels. Improvements in digital infrastructure can boost inflows, thereby boosting household expenditure and aggregate demand. These innovations also make it easier to understand how to send money to Uganda securely and affordably through regulated digital remittance providers. The World Bank emphasizes using remittances to promote financial inclusion and capital market access.

Digitalization presents an excellent opportunity to increase transaction account access, contributing to financial inclusion while reducing costs and improving Anti-Money Laundering risk mitigation. Policymakers should promote formalization through stronger regulatory regimes and differentiated approaches to risks.

Investment mobilization

Sustainable growth requires channeling inflows into productive investment. Bangladesh should enhance policies on remittance management and invest in skill development for migrant workers. Nepal needs to direct inflows toward productive sectors while managing inflation through monetary intervention.

Countries should implement targeted programs to:

• Ensure accountability in public spending
• Channel remittances into education and health
• Improve the quality and accessibility of services
• Invest in skills development for youth and women

Diaspora bonds represent a powerful mechanism for converting private transfers into public capital financing. India and Israel have raised $35-40 billion, while Nigeria raised $300 million versus $25 billion in annual remittances — illustrating untapped potential.

Governance strengthening

Good governance emerges as essential for maximizing positive impacts. Research on 89 countries found that governance significantly mediates the effect on financial inclusion. In weak-governance countries, remittances may hinder inclusion through inefficiencies and corruption.

The Sub-Saharan Africa study revealed that good governance enhances impact on human capital development, while public spending showed negative effects due to corruption and poor policy alignment. Therefore, in weak institutional environments, private remittance decisions actually outperform public investment.

What does the future hold?

Demographic trends in wealthy countries create insatiable demand for migrant labor. Aging populations in North America, Europe, East Asia, and Gulf states need workers in healthcare, construction, agriculture, hospitality, and domestic services. Income differentials remain vast enough (often 10:1 in purchasing power) to justify migration despite costs.

Climate change will accelerate displacement. The World Bank notes climate stresses (droughts, floods, extreme weather) are driving more migration, which could further raise remittance volumes. Regional conflicts continue displacing populations — Russia-Ukraine war, Venezuelan crisis, Syrian civil war, and Afghan instability create massive diaspora communities that will send remittances for generations.

The development financing landscape is shifting significantly. With ODA stagnant or declining and FDI increasingly concentrated in China and large emerging markets, remittances represent an area for more intentional policy interventions.

Iffath Sharif notes:

"Migration and resulting remittances are essential drivers of economic and human development."

Remittances won't solve all development challenges. They can't replace sound macroeconomic policy, institutional reform, infrastructure investment, or the development of the education system. However, they provide reliable, countercyclical foreign exchange that reaches households directly, builds human capital, deepens financial inclusion, and supports entrepreneurship.

With appropriate policies — cost reduction toward 3%, financial inclusion through digitalization, channeling toward productive sectors, and governance improvements — remittances can be a powerful force for economic growth and poverty reduction in developing countries for decades to come.

References

1. Aggarwal, R., Demirgüç-Kunt, A., & Martínez Pería, M. S. (2011). Do remittances promote financial development? Journal of Development Economics, 96(2), 255-264.
2. Asian Development Bank. (2024). Remittances and household expenditures in the Philippines (Economics Working Paper 714).
3. Bank for International Settlements. (2022). Remittances and financial inclusion (FSI Insights No. 43).
4. Clemens, M., & McKenzie, D. (2018). Why don't remittances appear to affect growth? The World Bank Economic Review, 31(1), 1-31.
5. Global Partnership for Financial Inclusion. (2024). 2024 update to leaders on progress towards the G20 remittance target.
6. Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security. (2015). Remittances: A tool for women's economic empowerment?
7. Giuliano, P., & Ruiz-Arranz, M. (2020). Remittances, financial development, and growth (IMF Working Paper 20/66).
8. International Fund for Agricultural Development. (2024). Global Partnership for Financial Inclusion report 2024.
9. International Monetary Fund. (2009). Workers' remittances and economic development. Finance & Development, 46(4).
10. International Monetary Fund. (2018). The impact of remittances on economic activity (IMF Working Paper 18/102).
11. International Monetary Fund. (2019). Remittances and sectoral development (IMF Working Paper 19/175).
12. National Bureau of Economic Research. (2010). Remittances and economic activity: Evidence from Mexico (NBER Working Paper 15419).
13. Oxford Economics. (2019). The economic impacts of remittances.
14. Social Science Research Council. (2024). Remittances, health, and education.
15. World Bank. (2024a). In 2024, remittance flows to low- and middle-income countries are expected to reach $685 billion. World Bank Blogs.
16. World Bank. (2024b). Migration and development brief 40.
17. World Bank. (2024c). Remittances slowed in 2023, expected to grow faster in 2024 [Press release].
18. World Bank. (2024d). Remittances and GDP growth: Multi-country evidence.
19. Yoshino, N., Taghizadeh-Hesary, F., & Otsuka, M. (2021). International remittances and poverty reduction. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 57(4).