 In this paper, we investigate the impact of openness to trade and openness to migration on African economies. The user data, the user word sample, and once geographic capacity are used to instrument both trade and migration, there is no significant impact of trade, while there are strong positive effects of migration on income. However, the study of Ortegar and Peri doesn't account for heterogeneity of countries. Therefore, we focus on the sweaty case of Africa for the following reasons. First, African trade is mainly realized with developed countries, and intracontinental trade is very low. At this time, very strong intracontinental migration and emigration to industrial countries. This is conveyed by this following figure. One can see that intracontinental migration represents more than half of the total African migration. At the same time, emigration from Africa to OECD countries represents more than 30% of African emigration. Concerning trade, intracontinental trade are less than 20% of the total African trade. At the same time, trade with developed countries represents more than 60% of African trade. So, one can think that the impact of openness on African growth may depend on the type of partner. Particularly concerning the partner environment impact of trade openness, if you will rely on new trade theory, a country can obtain advanced technology from its trading partner for trade. In this case, to examine the impact in function of the subset of partner, we contact the following regression in which we focus on a particular subset of partner. This subset may be the subset of African partners, the subset of partner among developing countries, or the subset of partner among industrial countries. So, for trade, we just take a measure of trade openness with the subset of certain S of partners. For emigration, the definition depends on the subset of partner. For example, in the intra-African case, the measure is emigration received by an African country from over African countries. In the case of Africa trade, Africa openness with non-industrial countries, we also use emigration received by an African country from non-industrial countries including African countries. In the case of Africa openness with industrial countries, the measure of openness to emigration is emigration, because we have emigration from Africa to OCD countries, while emigration from OCD to Africa is very insignificant. To construct our gravity, our instrument, we rely on this gravity regression in which we look at bilateral trade or bilateral migration. Bilateral trade is the sum of exports and imports between country G and G, plus divided by GDP of origin country I. For bilateral emigration, we take the sum of emigrants born in country G and living in country I, a share of country I population. We construct bilateral immigration in the same way by replacing I by G. For explanatory variable, we use distance between the two countries. We use population in the area. We use a demi-variable for long-long countries, a demi-variable for boring, for sharing a common border, a demi-variable for colonial relationships, a demi-variable for sharing a common official language, and a demi-variable for sharing of common currencies. We finally use a time zone difference between the two countries. After estimating this gravity regression, we compute the gravity-based instruments. For example, the gravity-based predator for total openness is given by summing up over the partner of countries, all the countries of countries. For example, this is the case of trade in which Z here is a vector of explanatory variable in gravity regression, and gamma is the expected of estimate coefficient in gravity regression for trade. We do the same thing for emigration. For the subset of partner, we sum up only on the subset of partner. For trade for emigration, we do the same thing. We focus only on the subset of partners. Just to think about the estimation method of gravity regression, we use two methods. This is a linear OLS estimator that we call the linear productive instrument. The second is non-linear Poisson-Pistole Maximilikelu proposed by Silva in 2006. This method has two advantages. The first is to deal with oscillation of the demand and variable with zero value. The second advantage is to take account heterocystically related to the gravity regression. We call it the non-linear productive instrument. Concerning data, we use data on 200 countries in the world including 52 African countries for the year 2000. Our bilateral trade are taken from IMF direction of Tristassini. Data on bilateral emigration are taken from Bokeh and Wilcovites. We take geographic variable from safety gravity database. Our dependable is very real personal poverty parity reduced GDP per person taken from pennywall tables. The population data is taken from world banks and our colonial control are taken from Asimogul and Kukofar. This is the result of the baseline case that is the impact of total openness with the world. If you look at the face column that is when we use the linear productive as an instrument, we think that if you consider a narrow set of control, trade has a significant impact on income. While if you control for an eccentric set of control, trade becomes insignificant while emigration becomes a positive significant impact. In the last two columns, we use the non-linear productive instrument. If you use a narrow set of instrument, trade is significant. While if you use the eccentric set of control, trade is not significant and emigration is not significant. So one can see here from Africa, we don't have a significant impact of emigration on trade as fined by Ortega and Peris. So now we look at the impact dependent on the subset of partners. In the last four columns, we investigate the impact of African openness with African countries. If you look at trade is not significant and emigration is not significant. In any case, we have a significant impact of trade and emigration. We do the same thing with African openness with non-industrial countries. Only if you use an eccentric set of control, emigration is positive when we use the linear productive instrument while trade is significant if you use the non-linear case. Now we focus now on the case of African openness with industrial countries. In this case, the openness to emigration is measured by emigration. So if you look at the first column with the narrow set of instruments, trade and emigration have a positive impact. That is, that are significant. However, if you use the eccentric set of control, only trade remains significant. In the case of a non-linear case, trade is significant while emigration has not a significant impact. Here, we found a strong evidence of a positive impact of trade with developed countries on African economies. So in the last step, we asked whether how trade with industrial countries promote growth in Africa. We think that if you rely on new trade theory, this maybe do the transfer of technologies. Now we will check for this based on the output decomposition of Al and Jones. In this decomposition, the production, the output is a cobb life function of physical capital and human capital. So we can rewrite this expression in per workers. We show that incompatible capital is the sum of physical capital, human capital and technology. In this case, to make the decomposition, human capital is assumed to be a function of a return to school as estimated in the Ministerial Regression. And we set alpha to one third in line with standard new classic approach. This is the result of the decomposition. In the first column, we just report the significant impact of trade on incompatible capital. In the last column, we report the impact on physical capital. We think that the impact is not significant. In the third column, we report the impact for human capital is not significant. In the last column, we report for productivity. It is highly significant. So we see here that trade with developed countries promote growth in Africa, particularly through the transfer of technology. To conclude, in the paper, we show that the impact of trade of openness on African economies depends on the type of openness. For example, trade and migration depends also on the type of openness, trade or migration depends on the partner. We find that there is no impact of immigration or immigration, whatever the partner. Why do we find that trading more with developed countries helps to promote growth in Africa, particularly through the transfer of technologies? Thank you.