Author Archive

Migration is a phenomenon inherent to the history of mankind, which has shaped cultures, economies and political structures. Spain, like other European countries, has historically been both a sender and a receiver of migration. In recent decades, the arrival of migrants has driven important social and economic transformations.

According to the National Statistics Institute (INE), in 2024 foreign residents accounted for 16.6 % of the population, playing a key role in sustaining the labor market and the pension system. OECD (2025) indicates that more than 25 % of employment growth in the last two years was generated by migrant population, especially in sectors such as hospitality, care, construction and agriculture. Since 2022, 45 % of new jobs were filled by migrants, contributing to economic growth of 3 % in 2024, well above the Eurozone average. The Bank of Spain has pointed out that without this contribution, population growth would have stagnated and the welfare system would be unsustainable.

This panorama reinforces the need to position migration policies as a strategic axis, not only as a response to emergency situations, but also as a planning tool aimed at economic development, social cohesion and democratic sustainability.

Some countries have designed effective models that can serve as a reference. Canada and Australia, for example, use point systems that prioritize training, work experience and market needs. These models have improved the labor market insertion of skilled migrants, reduced unemployment among this population and raised their incomes, with positive effects for the economy. During the first half of the 20th century, the United States also integrated massive migratory flows from Europe as part of its industrial expansion. More recently, Germany has promoted dual training as a way of integrating migrants into key productive sectors.

These experiences show that effective migration policies are those that anticipate, plan and include. In contrast, restrictive models have proven to be counterproductive. France, with a more securitarian approach in recent years, has seen an increase in social exclusion, segregation and xenophobic discourse. At the European level, the approach focused on border control and the externalization of responsibilities, such as the Dublin system, has overburdened countries such as Spain, Italy or Greece without ensuring fair redistribution or effective reception mechanisms.

Within this framework, Spain needs to move towards a planned, fair and sustainable migration model, based on principles of inclusion, social justice and co-responsibility. Aligning migration policy with the needs of the labor market, preventing both labor shortages and the precariousness of migrants. 2. Guarantee legal and safe entry channels, reducing the power of trafficking networks and promoting orderly migration. 3. Strengthen reception and inclusion programs, with access to rights, decent employment, education and housing. 4. Combat discrimination and hate speech, through awareness campaigns and regulatory frameworks that promote a positive narrative about the migrant contribution.

An effective migration policy has a direct impact on economic growth, the sustainability of the welfare state and the quality of democracy. It is not a marginal issue, but a structural component of national development. Well-managed migration is a source of innovation, demographic revitalization and cultural enrichment.

It is essential for Spain to move towards a concerted State policy, with the participation of political and institutional actors at all levels. At the same time, it is necessary to promote a critical review of the migratory agreements within the European Union, promoting a more supportive and co-responsible approach. This effort is key to preventing more complex social fractures, such as those already observed in other countries of the bloc.

In closing, I suggest understanding the new migratory dynamics in the light of global changes. Human mobility in the 21st century responds to structural causes such as inequality, conflict, climate crisis or demographic transformations that must be addressed from an integral, human and prospective perspective. To bet on well-managed migration is to bet on a more cohesive, just and future-ready society.

Dr. Elena Estaba Briceño

August 2025

As a teacher, consultant and trainer of generations, I ask myself: how can we incorporate AI without our students losing their capacity for reasoning, logical thinking and interest in research and reading, and how can we teach them to think in an era where machines already answer for us?

Artificial intelligence is here to stay in education. We cannot ignore it or fear it. But neither can we allow it to replace the most valuable process of teaching: the development of critical thinking, analysis, the ability to reason and make informed decisions. Our work as teachers is not limited to transmitting content, but to accompany students in the construction of criteria, autonomy and meaning.

I see with concern how many students start using AI as a shortcut, without understanding it, without questioning it. And here is the real challenge: it is not about banning AI, but teaching them how to use it well. Let them know how it works, what biases it may contain, when it is useful and when it is not. Let them learn to distinguish between an automatic response and their own reasoning.

AI can be a great ally if we know how to incorporate it with purpose. But the leading role must remain human. Our task is not to compete with algorithms, but to teach what no machine can replicate: empathy, creativity, critical reading of the world.

UNESCO says it clearly: AI should complement, not replace, the work of teachers or the cognitive development of students. That is why I insist: education should focus not on the tool, but on thinking; not on the immediate result, but on the process of learning, making mistakes, asking questions and trying again.

From Asesórate, I would like to invite my colleagues, teachers, researchers and trainers to open this debate with courage. Educating in the age of AI requires more than adapting, it requires deciding how we use it, for what purpose and in the service of what values.

Prof. Rita Amelii

The history of humanity is, in large part, the history of its migrations. However, in the contemporary world, the phenomenon of migration has been progressively hijacked by narratives that simplify, distort and manipulate it. Instead of understanding its root causes or assuming our collective responsibility, we have opted for fear, criminalization and exclusion.

Migration has gone from being a manifestation of the right to seek a dignified life to becoming an ideological battlefield where States and their governments, many of them democratic, deploy discourses and policies that erode fundamental rights. There is talk of secure borders, demographic threats or cultures at risk, while ignoring the fact that behind every migrant there is a human story, a face, a dignity.

In this context, restrictive immigration policies are not only an ineffective response, but profoundly unjust. Imprisonment, arbitrary deportations, separation of families: these are practices that delegitimize the law as a guarantor of justice. As we have repeatedly pointed out, migration policies based on the friend-enemy logic feed a spiral of intolerance that ends up justifying the unjustifiable.

This is not to deny that States have the right to regulate entry into their territories. But this right cannot be exercised in isolation from the higher principle of human dignity. No policy will be legitimate if it strips the migrant of his or her status as a subject of rights.

For this reason, I have argued that the migration phenomenon requires an interdisciplinary approach. Law, economics and sociology are not enough. It requires an ethical framework that recognizes the complexity of migration and, at the same time, assumes its treatment as a moral duty. We propose a philosophy of migration that articulates social justice, respect for cultural identity, pluralism, and a sense of human responsibility.

This will also be the approach that I will share in the webinar "Migrations and Rights: new routes to justice", promoted by Asesórate, where we will talk about the urgency of opening paths of dialogue, hospitality and commitment. It is certainly possible to build regulatory frameworks that recognize the legitimate concerns of receiving countries, without sacrificing the lives, rights and dignity of those who migrate.

As John Paul II said, the causes that today drive millions to abandon their homes are not an inevitability: they are an ethical challenge to our collective conscience. And in the face of that challenge, silence is not an option.

Dr. Tulio Álvarez

It is not possible to remember everything, nor to forget completely. Every act of remembering also implies an act of forgetting. While this happens on the individual level, where remembering is always a selection, conscious or not, it also happens on the social level. Thus we speak of collective memories, as if human groups were capable of remembering or forgetting in a unified way. But even those who lived through the same episode, side by side, do not remember it identically. Their memories diverge, fragment, contradict each other. Yet we continue to speak of a "social memory" as if it were natural and homogeneous, without asking ourselves how it really works.

The problem is that we tend to think of social memory as a sum of individual memories. But this is not so. Social memory is shaped. Often, it is induced. Collective memory does not emerge spontaneously: it is the result of multiple operations of selection, repetition and silencing. These operations are not neutral. They are exercised by powerful bodies: the State, political parties, school systems, academies, the media, religions. These actors not only propose a version of the past: they institute it. They make it official. They tell us what we should remember and also, and this is fundamental, what we should forget.

In the present, these dynamics are intensifying. With massive digitalization and the multiplication of narratives in social networks and global media, the control of memories no longer passes only through school texts or national dates, but through algorithms, communication campaigns, bots, tags. Memories go viral or fade away according to strategic decisions. Forgetting is programmed. Memory is managed. In this context, the figure of the historian and of those who research the past becomes even more vulnerable: their work can be disproved, manipulated or made invisible in seconds. History runs the risk of being displaced by the immediacy of the dominant narrative.

That is why it is urgent to study social memories as constructions that can be manipulated by power. Before speaking of "collective memory", we must make sure that it is what identifies a given people and ask ourselves: who remembers? what is being left out? Is manipulation possible in that context and at that moment? Only in this way will we be able to resist prefabricated memories and make way for true and deeply human memories.

Dr. Yara Altez

The methodology of research for social transformation is distinguished by a deep and active commitment to generating positive and significant changes in society. Unlike traditional research, which often focuses on theoretical understanding or description of phenomena, this methodology prioritizes action and tangible improvement of the living conditions of people and communities, especially those in vulnerable situations.
A fundamental principle is the active participation of the social actors affected by the problem under investigation. This implies involving them not only as subjects of study, but also as essential collaborators in each stage of the process, from the initial definition of the problem to the implementation and evaluation of the proposed solutions. The aim is to create an environment of horizontal collaboration, where the expert knowledge of the researchers is complemented by the lived experience of the participants, enriching the understanding of the problem and increasing the probability of finding effective and sustainable solutions.
Reflexivity is another key pillar, which requires constant self-evaluation by the researcher about his or her role, possible biases and how their presence can influence the research process and results. This transparency and intellectual honesty are essential to ensure the validity and credibility of the findings, as well as to avoid the reproduction of unequal power dynamics between the researcher and the participants.
The action orientation is what fundamentally distinguishes this methodology. It is not simply a matter of generating knowledge, but of generating useful knowledge for decision-making and the implementation of concrete actions that contribute to social transformation. Research results should be translated into strategies, public policies or social interventions that have a real impact on people's lives, addressing the root causes of problems and promoting long-term solutions.
Social justice is the ethical horizon that guides the entire process. The research focuses on identifying and addressing inequalities, discrimination and social exclusion, seeking to empower marginalized groups and strengthen their capacity to defend their rights and interests. It seeks to generate knowledge that is relevant to the fight against poverty, gender inequality, racism, sexual orientation discrimination and other forms of social injustice.
A variety of methods are used to conduct this research, including participatory action research (PAR), which involves a continuous cycle of reflection, planning, action and evaluation in collaboration with participants; case studies, which analyze specific situations in depth to understand complex social dynamics; qualitative research, which uses interviews, focus groups and participant observation to understand participants' perspectives and experiences; and quantitative analysis, which identifies patterns and trends in large data sets.

Josefa Orfila

Research is not just a tool for understanding the world: it is a powerful way to transform it. Throughout my experience, I have found that data, when collected rigorously and interpreted with social sensitivity, can open unexpected paths, give voice to the invisible and generate concrete solutions to our societies' most pressing challenges.
But research for research's sake is not enough. Knowledge that is not translated into action runs the risk of becoming a dead letter. For this reason, I believe in committed, situated research, with ethical roots and a vocation for impact. For this reason, we need methodologies that do not stop at diagnosis, but that inspire, mobilize and transform. Methodologies that dialogue with the territories, that recognize community knowledge, that value experiences and that include people as protagonists of the processes of change.
Social innovation, in this context, is not only about introducing new technologies, but also about rethinking our ways of seeing, listening and acting. To innovate is to dare to ask uncomfortable questions, to question obsolete models and to explore more collaborative, empathetic and sustainable paths. It is to design projects with real impact, based on rigor and methodological versatility, strategic thinking and a genuine connection with the reality we want to improve.
In this approach, research becomes a bridge: between critical analysis and transformative action, between data and decisions, between social challenges and the policies that address them. It is not just about getting results, but about making those results count; making them count; making them count to influence, to inspire public policies, to strengthen community networks, to build fairer and more inclusive narratives.
In short, we do research not only to understand, but to co-create the future. To build fairer, more caring, more conscious societies. And that requires not only knowledge, but also passion, active listening and a real commitment to society.

Mony de Lourdes Vidal A.