How Does Immigration Affect Labor Productivity? Time-Series Evidence from Germany with Innovation as a Mediating Channel

Authors

Oguljennet Myshyyeva

Department of Master Student, Business Management, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology (China)

Qaisar Ullah

Department of Master Student, Business Management, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology (China)

Article Information

DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS.2026.100800047

Subject Category: Education

Volume/Issue: 10/8 | Page No: 614-632

Publication Timeline

Submitted: 2026-08-13

Accepted: 2026-08-18

Published: 2026-08-25

Abstract

Abstract
This paper investigates the impact of immigrants on labor productivity in Germany and their effect on innovation. The study relies on the World Bank's World Development Indicators (WDI) and combines four indicators of innovation output and input (R&D expenditure, researchers in R&D, resident patent applications, and scientific and technical journal articles) into a single composite Innovation Index using principal component analysis (PCA). The index captures 84.5% of the common variance among the indicators, with 2001-2021 serving as the core estimation window for annual national time-series data for Germany. Net migration is used to capture the level of immigration in the Baron and Kenny (1986) mediation model, supplemented by a Sobel test of the indirect effect. The model includes the following control variables: gross capital formation, trade openness, and foreign direct investment.
The results indicate that net migration is a significant positive predictor of the Innovation Index (a-path, p = 0.039). In turn, the Innovation Index is a significant positive predictor of labor productivity (b-path, p = 0.036), supporting the existence of an innovation-mediated channel. The indirect effect of migration on productivity is positive but weak (Sobel z = 1.60, p = 0.110), and the mediation effect, considered as an indirect relationship between the two variables, is not statistically significant. This finding is consistent with the mediation literature, where indirect effects may be weak or may only exist in one direction.
Compared with the limited evidence available from shorter time-series studies, these results provide more substantive, although still preliminary, support for the innovation-mediation hypothesis. However, several important limitations remain: the analysis is conducted at the national level; net migration is not disaggregated by skill level; and the sample size is relatively small for conventional econometric applications (n = 21 for the full model). The paper places these findings within the context of the international literature on skilled migration, innovation, and productivity. It also explores policy developments in Germany regarding skilled immigration and provides directions for future research using regionally disaggregated and skill-disaggregated migration data.

Keywords

Human Resource Management

Downloads

References

1. Alesina, A., Harnoss, J., & Rapoport, H. (2016). Birthplace diversity and economic prosperity. Journal of Economic Growth, 21(2), 101–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10887-016-9127-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Brücker, H., Ehab, M., Jaschke, P., & Kosyakova, Y. (2024). Labor market integration of refugees: Improved institutional settings promote employment (IAB-Kurzbericht No. 10/2024). Institute for Employment Research (IAB). https://doi.org/10.48720/IAB.KB.2410.en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Capoani, L., Chabert, G., & Izzo, F. (2024). Understanding the relationship between immigration and innovation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Economics, Race, and Policy, 7(2), 122–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41996-023-00135-x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Cedefop. (2025). Germany: Amendment of the Skilled Labor Immigration Act supports immigration. https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/news/germany-amendment-skilled-labour-immigration-act-supports-immigration [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. D'Amuri, F., & Peri, G. (2014). Immigration, jobs, and employment protection: Evidence from Europe before and during the Great Recession. Journal of the European Economic Association, 12(2), 432–464. https://doi.org/10.1111/jeea.12040 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Docquier, F., & Rapoport, H. (2012). Globalization, brain drain, and development. Journal of Economic Literature, 50(3), 681–730. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.50.3.681 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Dutta, S., Lanvin, B., Rivera León, L., & Wunsch-Vincent, S. (Eds.). (2024). Global Innovation Index 2024: Unlocking the promise of social entrepreneurship (17th ed.). World Intellectual Property Organization. https://www.wipo.int/web-publications/global-innovation-index-2024/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. European Patent Office. (2024). Patent Index 2023. https://www.epo.org/en/about-us/statistics/patent-index-2023 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Hammer, L., & Hertweck, M. S. (2022). The impact of EU immigration on labour market outcomes in Germany over the past decade (Research Brief No. 45). Deutsche Bundesbank. https://www.bundesbank.de/en/publications/research/research-brief/2022-45-eu-immigration-labour-market-886406 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Hunt, J., & Gauthier-Loiselle, M. (2010). How much does immigration boost innovation? American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 2(2), 31–56. https://doi.org/10.1257/mac.2.2.31 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Kerr, S. P., Kerr, W., Özden, Ç., & Parsons, C. (2016). High-skilled migration and agglomeration. Annual Review of Economics, 8(1), 201–234. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-063016-103705 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Kerr, W. R., & Lincoln, W. F. (2010). The supply side of innovation: H-1B visa reforms and U.S. ethnic invention. Journal of Labor Economics, 28(3), 473–508. https://doi.org/10.1086/651934 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates / Taylor & Francis. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Niebuhr, A. (2010). Migration and innovation: Does cultural diversity matter for regional R&D activity? Papers in Regional Science, 89(3), 563–585. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1435-5957.2009.00271.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. OECD/European Commission Joint Research Centre. (2008). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264043466-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Ozgen, C., Nijkamp, P., & Poot, J. (2013). The impact of cultural diversity on firm innovation: Evidence from Dutch micro-data. IZA Journal of Migration, 2, Article 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-9039-2-18 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Pellegrino, G., Penner, O., Piguet, E., & de Rassenfosse, G. (2023). Productivity gains from migration: Evidence from inventors. Research Policy, 52(1), Article 104631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104631 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Peri, G. (2012). The effect of immigration on productivity: Evidence from U.S. states. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 94(1), 348–358. https://doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00137 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 13, 290–312. https://doi.org/10.2307/270723 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. World Bank. (2025). World Development Indicators: Germany [Data set]. World Bank Group. https://databank.worldbank.org/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., Jr., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197–206. https://doi.org/10.1086/651257 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

Metrics

Views & Downloads

Similar Articles