INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION,
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
AND
INTEGRATING SOCIETIES
JAN NIESSEN1
MIGRATION POLICY GROUP2
Paper prepared at the request of the Foundation for European Progressive Studies
June 2012
For further information, please contact
Dr Ernst Stetter, FEPS Secretary General, at [email protected]
or
Judit TÁNCZOS, FEPS Policy Advisor, [email protected]
1
Jan Niessen is Director of the Migration Policy Group (MPG). Eefje de Kroon and Jasper Dag Tjaden assisted
with the collection and presentation of the statistics.
2
The Migration Policy Group is an independent non-profit European organisation committed to contributing to
lasting and positive change resulting in open and inclusive societies in which all members have equal rights,
responsibilities and opportunities in developing the economic, social and civic life of Europe's diverse societies.
MPG stimulates well-informed European policy debate, cooperation and action to achieve this goal in the three
related programme areas of Migration & Mobility; Anti-discrimination & Equality; and Diversity & Integration.
http://www.migpolgroup.com/.
FEPS Rue Montoyer 40 B-1000 Brussels +32 2 234 69 00 | www.feps-europe.eu
Table of contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
Introduction..........................................................................................................................2
1.1.
Key points Chapter 2 - Global migratory movements and human development ...................5
1.2.
Key points Chapter 3 - European migration and mobility regimes .........................................7
1.3.
Key points Chapter 4 - Integrating societies and the well-being of all....................................9
Global migratory movements and human development ....................................................... 11
2.1.
People on the move ............................................................................................................. 11
2.2.
Migration for development? .............................................................................................. 133
2.3.
Policy challenges and responses ........................................................................................ 177
European migration and mobility regimes ......................................................................... 233
3.1.
Internal and external migration in the European Union .................................................... 233
3.2.
Valuing and regulating migration ....................................................................................... 333
3.3.
Policy challenges and responses ........................................................................................ 366
Integrating societies and the well-being of all .................................................................... 411
4.1.
Mind and mend the gaps ................................................................................................... 411
4.2.
Diverse and inclusive societies ......................................................................................... 4949
4.3.
Policy challenges and responses ........................................................................................ 533
1
1. Introduction
Global economic, social, cultural and political developments are shaping a seemingly borderless
world in which persons, capital, goods, services, knowledge, information and ideas move with varying degrees of freedom and speed between regions and countries. Economies across the world are
becoming more closely knitted together and are more dependent on each other than ever before.
These developments can and often do reinforce the divide between the rich and the poor and the
powerful and the marginalised, but they also bring about economic and social progress to the benefit
of large sections of the population.
It is becoming increasingly difficult for individuals to locate opportunities and confront challenges in
one place alone. They therefore have to be prepared to be more mobile and to move both long and
short distances and for varying periods of time. Faster and cheaper means of transportation enable
them to work and live in more than one place and travel frequently within and between countries
and regions. Millions of people across the world work and communicate with each other without
ever meeting in person. Cultural and scientific exchanges as well as tourism continue to increase in
magnitude. Governments, civil society and private sector organisations are thus stepping up their
cross-border activities. People are not only geographically mobile but also socially. Ideally, policies
create favourable conditions for people to develop and utilise their skills and competences and to
improve their standard of living and enhance their well-being.
With economic change comes societal change. Many of society’s institutions are losing much of their
traditional meaning or taking on other functions, and new social arrangements are emerging. Traditional value systems are being reconfirmed or reconsidered: old values are acquiring new meanings
and new values are gaining importance. Globalisation in all its dimensions is encountering defensive
responses and even rejection at the same time as openness and proactive engagement. Social, economic and cultural factors are inextricably linked, calling for comprehensive approaches and joinedup policies which link the local with the global. Economic, social and cultural changes can be the result, origin or amplifier of conflict; in some instances all three at the same time. Conflict can be both
a blessing and a curse and in every conflict there are winners and losers. Governmental and nongovernmental actors can work to prevent conflict, mediate between conflicting parties and transform conflicts into constructive engagement.
Migration can only be understood when it is seen as an integral part of these developments. Societal
change can only be understood when the increased mobility of persons is taken into consideration.
Policymakers need to understand, explain and act upon the very complex and multifaceted processes
of international migration and societal integration. This requires an ongoing dialogue with those affected, open communication with the wider public and the intelligent use of research.
For migrants, migration is a way to work towards the fulfilment of their aspirations. For countries of
origin and of destination it can become part of an overall strategy to achieve economic and social
goals. Individuals may decide to move to another country to earn a decent living and enhance their
skills and competences. Governments may decide to open up national labour markets to nonnationals and members of their families as one means among many others to remedy labour market
2
shortages and mismatches. People may be forced to move for political, social or environmental reasons, or for a combination of these. Countries may honour their human rights commitments and
humanitarian obligations and offer these people protection and support. The journey of refugees and
other migrants may be long and painful but is often rewarding. It starts when they leave their country of origin and ends when they become fully participating members of society in the country in
which they settle. Sometimes the journey is completed not by themselves but by their children.
This paper follows migrants on their journey and suggests policy responses corresponding to each
step of this journey. The complexity of the changes individuals and societies are undergoing means
that there are no easy answers. The paper deals first with the reasons why people migrate, what they
aim to achieve and the immigration conditions to which they are subject, before turning to what they
do to adapt and become active citizens of receiving societies. It provides background information and
facts on global migratory movements and socio-economic change in Europe. Finally, it describes the
accompanying integration challenges and opportunities and makes suggestions for policy responses.
The first chapter is about migration and human development. It focuses on the international movement of people: how many people are moving, from where and to where? What are their reasons for
moving, and what do they hope to achieve by doing so? It also considers the advantages and disadvantages for the persons concerned and for the countries affected.
The second chapter is about how Europe can value migration as part of the solutions for demographic decline and labour market mismatches. It deals with European migration and refugee regimes, and how needs are assessed and opportunities identified. It pictures Europe’s internal and
external migrants with a focus on recruitment strategies and immigration rules.
3
The third chapter is about active citizenship, equality and diversity in Europe’s changing societies.
It aims to identify what needs to be done to keep European societies together. How can all citizens –
those with and those without a migration background – contribute to and benefit from societal wellbeing on an equal footing.
4
1.1. Key points Chapter 2 - Global migratory movements and human development
In order to migrate internationally, individuals must fulfil a number of criteria: they must be entitled
to leave and return to their country of origin; have the necessary resources to cover the cost of transportation; be in possession of identity papers; have the necessary drive, skills and competences; and
meet immigration conditions. The process is also greatly facilitated by family and friends already living in countries of destination.
Migration between developing countries is greater than migration from these countries to highincome OECD countries. It is estimated that 40-60% of migrants from developing countries reside in
other developing countries. The overwhelming majority of people on the move are internal migrants:
those who move within their own countries. Their numbers are estimated at approximately 740 million (against 215 million international migrants) which reflects a larger trend towards urbanisation.
Migration is not necessarily linear; in fact, it often becomes a circular process. It is more than the
geographical movement of people as it leads to the circulation of social and financial capital and to
cultural exchange. It also leads, in many cases, to the upward social mobility of migrants and their
families.
As three quarters of international migrants move to a country with a higher score on the UN Human
Development Index (HDI) than their country of origin, they have a good chance of gaining from migration. If migrants’ families are also taken into account, this means that hundreds of millions of people are benefiting from migration, which is of immense value.
Contrary to what is often claimed in policy debates, there are no generally applicable answers to the
deceptively simple question of whether development or underdevelopment leads to migration, or
whether migration leads to development or underdevelopment.
Because migration is inextricably linked to socio-economic developments, it is far better to concentrate on addressing the uneven distribution of its costs and benefits than to simply take a position in
favour of or against migration.
The complex and multifaceted character of international migration calls for a mix of general and specific policies and a great deal of international cooperation. Migration therefore deserves to be included in general policy mechanisms and to have its own governance structures.
The overriding argument for the respect and protection of human rights is not that this might reduce
migration, but rather that it enhances the freedom of individuals and broadens their options.
It makes little sense for development cooperation to be seen as a general instrument to reduce migration. Different stages of economic development lead to different migratory movements, which may
have both positive and negative effects on development for the countries involved at different points
in time.
5
The effect of remittances on development can be amplified by aligning private transfers and public
development policies. Diasporas and links between cities of origin and destination can also have a
positive effect on development, as can immigrant fundraising and philanthropy for emergency assistance and development.
Opening legal channels for migration and providing information on migration conditions reduces risks
and gives migrants more choice and security. This leads to a reduction in irregular migration and
makes migrants less vulnerable to exploitation.
It is very hard to assess the costs and benefits of migration and to whom they apply. It is equally difficult to identify who gains and who loses out in the migration. General approaches and policy responses will neither be effective nor satisfactory. Differentiated approaches, on the other hand, have
a better chance of remedying the defects of migration systems and of distributing the costs and benefits more fairly.
6
1.2. Key points Chapter 3 - European migration and mobility regimes
Migration is a never-ending story and remains a recurring and unfinished matter on European policy
agendas. The frequency, size and composition of migratory movements within and towards Europe
differ over time, as does the way in which migrants and refugees are perceived and received. They are
welcomed or turned away, seen as jobseekers or as asylum seekers, are successful or unsuccessful,
become part of society or return.
In 2010, the European Union was home to 32.5 million international migrants, making up 6.5% of its
total population. Of those, 20.2 million were nationals of non-EU countries and 12.3 million were EU
citizens. In the same year there were 47.4 million foreign-born EU residents (9.4% of the total population), of which 31.4 million were born outside the European Union and 16 million were born in another EU country.
It would be rather difficult and extremely costly to keep Europe’s borders open for goods, services,
capital, scientific and cultural exchange and tourism, but to close them for people. It is, therefore,
better to value migration as an actual and potential contributor to Europe’s prosperity and wellbeing.
Although its effect on population growth will diminish and then disappear in the long run, migration
will continue to make a significant contribution to reversing the decline in fertility in the short to medium term. Other solutions - promoting a better balance between work and family life, rewarding
bigger families, subsidising childcare, allowing flexible work schedules and parental leave – will have
only an effect over the longer term.
Europe needs to invest in its labour force in order to ensure that it remains sufficiently large, active,
well equipped and motivated. Measures include raising the participation rate of women and groups
that meet with discrimination, making work more attractive and challenging and keeping people in
work longer, and recruiting energetic migrants.
The overlapping interests of migration stakeholders continue to make a strong case for intraEuropean mobility and can help to make the case for extra-European migration as long as these interests are articulated, negotiated and communicated.
The distinction between EU internal mobility and external migration should be kept in mind as the
admission, residence and settlement conditions and associated entitlements differ considerably in
both cases. Treating EU nationals as non-EU nationals as opposed to treating the latter as the former
is levelling down equality standards.
Migration regimes assess labour market needs. They establish a preference for national workers and
those from other EU countries over foreign workers and include equal treatment, thus mitigating
negative social effects. They help to reduce delays and long procedures. The involvement of social
partners makes immigration more accepted in society.
7
The removal of the EU’s internal border controls required not only agreement on the admission of
migrants from outside the Union, but also trust among and cooperation between its members to control their common external borders. Europe needs once more to invest in both.
Smart security and border control systems are needed to facilitate increased human mobility in a
globalising economy. Visa and immigration procedures need to be concise and reasonably priced.
Entry and exit formalities are to be carried out expeditiously with full privacy protection.
The social mobility of immigrants is enhanced when they have equal access to education and health
services, are protected against expulsion and arbitrary treatment, enjoy the right to judicial redress
on immigration decisions, have access to justice and can acquire citizenship in a reasonably short
period of time.
Europe’s humanitarian commitments and its prosperity both oblige and enable it to offer international protection to refugees and asylum seekers wherever needed. Its commitment to human rights
and development, as well its economic power, can make Europe a trusted partner globally and for its
neighbours.
The increased mobility of capital, goods, people, services and information requires adequate policies
that turn the accompanying challenges into opportunities. Such policies combine flexibility with adherence to high standards in the realms of rights, dignity and sustainability.
8
1.3. Key points Chapter 4 - Integrating societies and the well-being of all
Integration can be coined in more socio-economic terms or in more cultural terms. It can be seen as
convergence of societal outcomes by closing gaps between the overall population and particular
groups such as immigrants. It can also been seen as accommodation of cultural differences and assertion of core values by promoting inclusive citizenship.
Integrating societies are those that remove obstacles to integration and support structures, organisations and individuals that facilitate it. In these societies, citizens and residents contribute to and benefit from prosperity and well-being on an equal footing.
The distribution of prosperity contributes to general well-being and makes economic sense. Equal
access to employment, equal opportunities for pursuing a career and equal access to services such as
health and education are beneficial for all, not only for those who are least successful. Antidiscrimination and equality policies are therefore crucial for the promotion of prosperity and wellbeing.
The diversity of Europe’s population is a fact. This is not a new development; Europe has always been
a diverse continent in terms of ethnicity, culture and religion, to which migratory movements have
added and continue to add.
How and when people are categorised depends on, among other factors, the purposes for which
categorisations are made, and who is making them. It is rather artificial, if not impossible, to reduce
people’s identities to their affiliation with a limited number of societal entities.
In diverse societies, freedom of choice, equal treatment, the respect of rights, dignity and difference,
tolerance and solidarity are core values, with dialogue and negotiation as invaluable mechanisms for
dialogue and negotiation.
Over time migration-related distinctions become less significant as immigrants and their descendants
acquire full citizenship and become active citizens and other more socio-economic and cultural distinctions gain importance. However, related distinctions in terms of ethnicity and skin colour may
remain relevant, in particular for the fight against racism and structural discrimination.
There are strong arguments for taking a citizen-based approach to defining individuals and adopting
policies that facilitate naturalisation, respect diversity and engage and empower all citizens irrespective of their backgrounds to shape society together.
While it is a democratic duty for the public sector to act upon and reflect the diversity of the population it serves, for civil society and the private sector this is more a matter of good citizenship.
In times of crisis, integration policies and practices are put under immense pressure from which vulnerable groups, including people with an immigrant background, suffer disproportionally. This has a
negative effect on the quality of democracy which, for the sake of integration, should be reversed.
9
Political parties should work to mobilise underrepresented groups among the population, including
immigrants, by responding to their needs and by recruiting them as (board) members, future elected
officials and staff.
Mainstreamed policies can only be effective when anti-discrimination and equality policies are well
developed and implemented, providing equal opportunities and access to services to all.
Mainstreamed organisations have undergone a process of cultural change, continue to implement
and improve diversity programmes, are an employer and service provider of choice for underrepresented groups and are a model for other organisations.
Integration is about ongoing negotiation and dialogue between groups in society which have at the
same time overlapping and competing interests. It is important to identify, recognise and reconcile
these interests.
In order to be able to bridge conflicting interests and to share costs and benefits, policy measures
should be assessed prospectively and retrospectively for their effects on various groups in society and
especially on vulnerable groups.
Forums for dialogue take many forms: they range from official dialogue mechanisms between social
partners or faith groups to sports clubs, voluntary associations, social and cultural movements and
organisations representing communities, neighbourhoods or cities. These are places where integration is taking place, and has made great progress.
10
2. Global migratory movements and human development
People move for different and usually a combination of reasons. The socio-economic and political
situation in countries of origin and of destination, as well as personal and family circumstances all
influence migration decisions in their own unique way. It is not easy to find out how free individuals
are to make these decisions and whether they have many options and a real choice, or feel they
have. It is, however, safe to say that many more people desire to move to another country temporarily or permanently than are actually planning this move and indeed migrate3.
In order to migrate internationally, individuals must fulfil a number of criteria: they must be entitled
to leave and return to their country of origin; have the necessary resources to cover the cost of transportation; be in possession of identity papers; have the necessary drive, skills and competences; and
meet immigration conditions. The process is also greatly facilitated by family and friends already living in countries of destination.
2.1. People on the move
Over the last fifty years the percentage of people living outside their country of birth remained rather
stable, namely around three percent of the world population. With the growing world population the
number of international migrants increases, amounting to 150 million in 2000 and 215 million in
2010, of which almost 50 percent are women. Migration between developing countries (often referred to as ‘South-South migration’) is larger than migration from the South to high-income OECD
countries. It is estimated that 40-60% of the migrants from developing countries reside in other developing countries. The top fifteen destination and origin countries include:
Top immigration countries
In millions
Top emigration countries
In millions
United States
Russian Federation
Germany
Saudi Arabia
Canada
United Kingdom
Spain
France
Australia
India
Ukraine
Italy
42.8
12.3
10.8
7.3
7 .2
7.0
6.9
6.7
5.5
5.4
5.3
4.5
Mexico
India
Russian Federation
China
Ukraine
Bangladesh
Pakistan
United Kingdom
Philippines
Turkey
Egypt
Kazakhstan
11.9
11.4
11.1
8.3
6.6
5.4
4.7
4.7
4.3
4.3
3.7
3.7
3
IOM
and
Gallup,
Gallup
World
Poll:
The
Many
Faces
of
Global
Migration
http://publications.iom.int/bookstore/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=2_3&products_id=755&zen
id=1926ae3b6f21878757375aab88eef3eb
11
Pakistan
4.2
Germany
United Arab Emirates
3.3
Italy
Kazakhstan
3.1
Poland
Source: World Bank Migration and Remittances Fact book 2011.
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTLAC/Resources/Factbook2011-Ebook.pdf
3.5
3.5
3.1
The biggest numbers of migrants are from the Asia-Pacific region (33%), followed by Europe (28%,
including internal EU free movement), Latin America and the Caribbean (16%) and sub-Saharan Africa
and the Middle East and North Africa (10%). Most countries in the world are affected by migration
and many of them are at the same time countries of origin and destination of migrants. Mexico and
the United States form the biggest so-called migration corridor followed by the Russian Federation,
Bangladesh-India and Turkey-Germany corridors.
Although in many instances there is a fine line between the two, a distinction can be made between
voluntary and involuntary migration. Persons who do not move voluntarily are usually categorized as
forcibly displaced persons, refugees and asylum seekers. An asylum seeker is a person who applies
for asylum under the UN Refugee Convention because of fear of persecution on the basis of, for example, political beliefs or ethnicity. A refugee is a person fleeing because of the situation in his or her
country and not necessarily because of persecution.
In 2010, there were 43.7 million forcibly displaced persons in the world, of which 15.4 million were
refugees, 837.500 asylum seekers and 27.5 million internally displaced persons. The top 10 source
countries and receiving countries of refugees include:
Top source countries of refugees
Numbers
Top receiving countries of refuNumbers
gees
Afghanistan
3.054.700
Pakistan
Iraq
1.683.600
Iran
Somalia
770.200
Syria
Dem. Rep. of Congo
476.700
Germany
Myanmar
415.700
Jordan
Colombia
395.600
Kenya
Sudan
387.200
Chad
Vietnam
338.700
China
Eritrea
222.500
United States
China
184.600
United Kingdom
Source: UNHCR Global Trends Report 2010. http://www.unhcr.org/4dfa11499.html
1.900.600
1.073.400
1.005.500
594.300
450.900
402.900
347.900
301.000
264.600
238.100
International organisations estimate that there are globally 30 to 40 million migrants in an irregular
situation or are undocumented. That is between 15 and 20 % of all international migrants. Their
numbers may well be higher as it is very difficult to obtain reliable information on their numbers and
situation. They include people that entered legally and overstayed their visa, entered illegally or were
smuggled into a country.
12
Migration between developing countries is greater than migration from these countries to highincome OECD countries. It is estimated that 40-60% of migrants from developing countries reside in
other developing countries. The overwhelming majority of people on the move are those who move
within their own country. In 2009, the UNDP4 estimated that approximately 740 million people are
internal migrants.
Their number in China is estimated at more than one-tenth of country's 1.3 billion people and at
even a third of India’s population. These figures include different forms of internal migration such as
circular and seasonal migration as well as temporary and permanent settlement.
Many but not all internal migrants are parts of a larger global trend toward population concentrations in cities. Today, half of the world’s population of 3.3 billion lives in urban areas and about 1
billion live in slums surrounding urban areas. The world’s biggest and most interconnected cities
serve as hubs of global integration. They are the engines of growth for their countries and the gateways to the resources of their regions.
2.2. Migration for development?
Migrants tend to move to neighbouring countries and regions and to countries where the dominant
language or religion is the same (49% of migrants are Christian and 27% Muslim5). Historical ties between countries and being connected with transnational networks also play important roles in migrants’ choice for a country of destination. Their residence may be temporary, for shorter or longer
periods, or become permanent. Facilitated by reduced transportation costs and modern means of
communication, migrants are able to maintain links with their country of origin. They may return to
their country of origin or go back and forth between home and destinations abroad. While abroad
they send their savings home and when back they bring their skills with them and maintain connections abroad.
Migration is not necessarily linear; in fact, it often becomes a circular process. It is more than the
geographical movement of people as it leads to the circulation of social and financial capital and to
cultural exchange. It also leads, in many cases, to the upward social mobility of migrants and their
families.
Those who are underemployed are the most likely persons to migrate, probably regardless a country’s level of human development. They are mostly drawn from middle-income households and they
have the financial means and the right connections to move. They tend to be better educated and in
better health. They and their families stand to benefit from migration.
As three quarters of international migrants move to a country with a higher score on the UN Human
Development Index (HDI) than their country of origin, they have a good chance of gaining from mi4
UNDP Human Development Report: Overcoming barriers. Human mobility and development 2009
See Pew Research Center, Faith on the move, the religious affiliation of international migrants, at
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/2214/religion-religious-migrants-christians-muslims-jews
5
13
gration. If migrants’ families are also taken into account, this means that hundreds of millions of people are benefiting from migration, which is of immense value.
Migrants from low-income countries have to gain most in terms of in income, education and health.
However, these persons are the least mobile as the costs seem to be too high for them. They are
more vulnerable to exploitation and trafficking, in particular women and children. When migration is
induced by human rights abuses, violent conflicts, generalised violence, social disorder and environmental degradation, people do not have much choice or no choice at all. In those cases migration
outcomes may still be important but tend to be minimal or adverse.
Contrary to what is often claimed in policy debates, there are no generally applicable answers to the
deceptively simple question of whether development or underdevelopment leads to migration, or
whether migration leads to development or underdevelopment. Because migration is inextricably
linked to socio-economic developments, it is far better to concentrate on addressing the uneven distribution of its costs and benefits than to simply take a position in favour of or against migration.
Policy-makers need to take into consideration a great number of factors and make distinctions between a) types of migrants; b) the situation in countries of origin and destination in terms of HDI
scores, human rights record, violent conflicts, social disorder and environmental situation, and c)
general economic climate and short-term and long-term effects and last but not least d) economic
and social effects.
Migration and socio-economic development assessment matrix
Migration for …
Employment
=
skills levels
Study
Family
Protection
Refugees
Asylum
Country ...
Country of
- Internal migration
- Origin
- Destination
With
Temporary
Permanent
Return
Seasonal
Circular
migration
Situation of country of
Origin
&
Destination:
HDI score
HR record
Conflicts
Environment
14
International relations
ODA
FDI
Remittances
Trade
Migration
Advantages
&
Disadvantages
for origin & destination
countries:
Business cycle
Long term / Short term
Economic and social
For individuals
Temporary as well as permanent migration for employment schemes may be very beneficial for developed countries’ economic growth. Traditional immigration countries such as the United States,
Canada and Australia are well-known examples. The European guest-worker system which remedied
temporary labour shortages and mismatches is a good example of migrants contributing to Europe’s
prosperity. The economies of the Gulf States very much rely on temporary migration. The disadvantages associated with labour migration include the real or perceived slowing down of economic
transformation from labour-intensive industries to less labour intensive service and knowledge
economies.
Developing countries also tend to benefit from labour migration in economic take-off phases, thanks
to the wage differentials between these countries and their neighbours. Examples can be found in
Africa (Western and South Africa) and Asia (Malaysia).
The structure of the economy, business cycles and economic and social climate determine the demand for labour and in case of shortages or mismatches policies facilitate certain types of migration,
namely highly or low-skilled, temporary, permanent, seasonal and circular migration. These types of
migration have a short-term and a longer-term effect. There are times when temporary migration of
the low skilled or the high-skilled are preferred. Nowadays, developed countries prefer highly-skilled
migration which may well turn into permanent settlement, whereas developing countries tend to
attract lower-skilled migrants which circulate between their countries of origin and one or more
countries of destination (for example, in Western Africa and between East and South-East Asia and
the Gulf states). This phenomenon is known as circular migration.
For countries of origin emigration can help to reduce unemployment rates, attract remittances and
foreign investment and connect them to new markets. Developed countries tend to get more out of
emigration than developing countries. Nevertheless the development effect of emigration can also
be considerable for developing countries, but the negative effects tend to hit them harder. These
15
effects include the drain of human resources. Among the emigrants are young entrepreneurial people. They possess badly needed skills and competences, including critically important ones such as
doctors and engineers (notably small developing countries suffer from their departure). When emigration is seen as an attractive option, brain drain may lead to more investments in education and a
better educated population, as not all educated persons will ultimately migrate.
Remittances destination and source countries
US $ source
Destination countries
Source countries
billions
India
55
United States
China
51
Saudi Arabia
Mexico
22.6
Switzerland
Philippines
21.3
Russian Federation
France
15.9
Germany
Germany
11.6
Italy
Bangladesh
11.1
Spain
Belgium
10.4
Luxembourg
Spain
10.2
Kuwait
Nigeria
10
Netherlands
Pakistan
9.4
Malaysia
Poland
9.1
Lebanon
Lebanon
8.2
Oman
Egypt, Arab Rep.
7.7
France
United Kingdom
7.4
China
Source: Worldbank 2010 (for receiving countries) and 2009 (for sending countries)
US $ billions
48.3
26
19.6
18.6
15.9
13
12.6
10.6
9.9
8.1
6.8
5.7
5.3
5.2
4.4
Remittances can off-set negative development effects of migration. In 2010, migrants’ remittance
amounted to US$ 440 billion, showing an exponential increase since 2000 (US$ 132 billion). The
amounts are in all likelihood much bigger because they do not include transfers through all formal
and informal channels.
In 2010, the top recipient countries of recorded remittances were India, China, Mexico, the Philippines, but also rich and less rich European countries such as France, Germany, Belgium, Spain, Poland
and the United Kingdom. An estimated $325 billion is sent to developing countries. Rich countries are
the main source of remittances. The United States is by far the largest, with USD 48.3 billion in recorded outward flows in 2009. Saudi Arabia ranks as the second largest, followed by Switzerland and
Russia.
Migrants can become agents of change in both their countries of origin and destination. They provide
their family with additional income, acquire a new position in their community and bring back new
skills, ideas and values. This may in the longer run lead to changes in power and gender relations.
They open new horizons and connect their family with a wider community. These changes have a
longer-term effect on the development of the country or region of origin.
16
In countries of destination migrants may work in jobs nationals do not want to take and which may
be unsecure and unsafe. They may take positions for which they are over-qualified and meet discrimination and outright racism. They have to cope with disrupted family life and have to find, join
and/or create new communities. Their economic contribution is significant and by times even vitally
important for the destination country’s economy. They pay taxes and contribute to pension schemes.
They introduce new ideas and techniques and take up work native workers are not able or willing to
take up. By their presence they make the receiving society more diverse and open-up closed professional groups and communities and connect them with others.
2.3. Policy challenges and responses
The mobility of goods, capital, services and people plays a crucial role in the development of countries and regions, as well as of individuals and communities. The movement of persons may be lacking behind that of goods, capital and services, it still has many implications for countries of origin and
destination.
Because migration is inextricably linked with socio-economic developments, it is better to concentrate
on addressing the uneven distribution of its costs and benefits than to take position in favour or
against migration.
Despite the global dynamics, migratory movements originate and take shape in different ways and
forms in the various corners of the world. Migration works out differently for people who are different in terms of gender, ethnicity, race and religion and have different national, social, educational
and professional backgrounds. Migration is impacting on individual countries and regions in significantly different ways.
It is very difficult to make migration work in the same way and to the same extent for every party
involved at any moment in time. Policies can aim to maximise the advantages and minimise the disadvantages for different groups of migrants and for different types of countries. This requires sufficient room for the formulation of policy options, preferably underpinned by research, and for negotiations and trade-offs between various interested parties and interests.
The complex and multifaceted character of international migration calls for a mix of general and specific policies and a great deal of international cooperation. Migration therefore deserves to be included in general policy mechanisms and to have its own governance structures.
Policies shall be guided by common overall goals and principles, including:
Respect of human rights and dignity
Assessments and maximising development impacts of migration
Establishment and maintenance of legal migration channels
Safeguarding the integrity of the migration regimes and security in countries
Simplification and transparency of migration and asylum rules
Reducing costs of migration and transfers of remittances
17
The United Nations and regional bodies such as the Council of Europe have set high human rights
standards and established monitoring mechanisms for their effective implementation, such as human rights treaty bodies and specialised agencies. Governments have engaged relevant private sector and non-governmental actors and facilitate the exchange of knowledge and expertise. Relevant
national ministers of origin and destination countries work together and map the movement of people between their countries and assess the socio-economic effects. These assessments enable the
formulation of country or region specific policies. Very good examples are the drawing up of so-called
migration profiles by the International organisation for Migration6 which are supported by the European Commission and the annual International Migration Outlook produced by the OECD7.
Countries often negotiate migration deals which take the form of bi-lateral and multi-lateral agreements, for example, those concluded between the European Union and its Member States and third
countries. The Global Migration Group is a platform of international organisations which are working
to provide concrete support and protection for migrants and refugees and to develop and implement
policies8.
Migration should also be included in all relevant policy agendas9. The foreign policy agenda’s relevancy for international migration can be captured under the following headings:
Human rights and dignity
Human rights violations may be a reason to migrate and to escape repression, human rights improvements may have that effect as well, for example, enabling people to leave or return.
The overriding argument for the respect and protection of human rights is not that this might reduce
migration, but rather that it enhances the freedom of individuals and broadens their options.
Rights protection has many dimensions, from standard setting to implementation. These standards
concern economic, social, cultural and political and civic rights. They prohibit discrimination on the
basis of gender, race, ethnicity, religion and belief, national and social origin. They may cover all persons or target particular groups, including migrants and refugees. Official and civil society supervisory
mechanisms are in place. Governmental and non-governmental actors are trained and empowered
to implement human rights standards so as to prevent breaches and support victims of violations.
These mechanisms and programmes could be made more accessible for and used by migrants and
refugees and their advocates. Officials working on immigration and border control could receive human rights trainings.
The rights and dignity of all migrant workers, members of their families, refugees and undocumented
migrants are to be protected (from admission to settlement and integration). Children, undocu-
6
International Organisation for Migration (IOM), Migration profiles: Making most of the process (2011).
http://publications.iom.int/bookstore/free/MigrationProfileGuide2012_FINAL.pdf
7
www.oecd.org/migration/imo
8
http://www.globalmigrationgroup.org/
9
Global Migration Group, Mainstreaming migration into development planning (IOM, 2010)
18
mented migrants and persons vulnerable for trafficking deserve special attention. The enforcement
of rights includes sanctions against smugglers and employers of irregular migrants.
Human security
Violence and armed conflicts lead in many instances to displacement of people. They damage or destroy the economic and social infrastructure causing loss of livelihoods. They undermine or end the
provision of education and health services. Conflicts may be state-based, or arise as result of a state’s
weakness allowing warlords and militias to flourish.
Policies can protect and support people who either cross borders looking for protection or remain in
the country. Other policy instruments are conflict prevention and mediation, assisting people to return after the situation has become more stable or safe and supporting processes of reconciliation
and transitional justice. Internal and external movements of people may lead to instability in areas to
where people move and may cause insecurity for local populations. International support and sharing of resources can alleviate the pressures on the affected regions and countries. A broader concept
of human security includes not only the absence of violence, but also economic, food, health, environmental, personal, community and political security10.
Environmental sustainability
An increasing number of people are temporarily or permanently migrating because of environmental
factors. They include floods, soil and coastal erosion and droughts, which are related to climate
change as well as to natural and man-made accidents. These accidents tend to occur more in Asia
and Africa where developing countries have greater difficulties and lesser resources to prevent them
or deal with their consequences.
Governments may adopt different policies to deal with the migration effects of environmental degradation. They may try and stop the ensuing migratory movements and even depopulation by putting
obstacles in the way (limiting transport facilities, severe border control, etc.). They can try and channel these movements to cities or to neighbouring countries. They can also promote return migration
and involve returnees in a better and responsible use of the land.
Human development
It makes little sense for development cooperation to be seen as a general instrument to reduce migration. Different stages of economic development lead to different migratory movements, which may
have both positive and negative effects on development for the countries involved at different points
in time.
Both under-development and development produce migration. Depending on the situation in countries of origin and destination migration can become part of development and poverty reduction
strategies. Development assistance can support various migration related development projects:
10
UNDP Human Development Report 1994 and the Human Security Report http://www.hsrgroup.org/humansecurity-reports/human-security-report.aspx
19
from those supporting migration and migrants where migration promotes development, supporting
programmes that remedy migration’s negative consequences for development, to projects that provide a concrete alternative to migration.
The size and composition of the population are key factors in development. Demographic growth or
decline may produce imbalances which may lead to labour surpluses or shortages. The former can
create under-employment and place pressures on land, the latter can lead to stagnation of economic
growth. The age structure of a population may also be imbalanced for example, the dependency
ratio of old and young people, and between countries, for example, over populated developing countries with young people and declining and aging population in developed countries. These imbalances
may influence the decisions of potential migrants. It may also make governments to adopt immigration and emigration policies.
Investments in health and education are investments in development. There are several migration
related issues. Migrants may be more vulnerable for risk behaviour (such as drug abuse) and associated health risks (for example, sexually transmitted infections), for mental health risks and occupational health problems as well as for sexual and racial harassment. Policies can address these risks so
as to protect migrants and thus support them to get most out of the migration experience.
The recruitment of the skilled, better educated and healthier migrants may be very beneficial for
destination countries because they did not pay for their education and health. Compensation can
take various forms, including development assistance for education and health for the countries of
origin. Codes of conducts for the recruitment of skilled personnel could include limits to or a moratorium of recruitment for certain professions and during a certain period.
The transfer of knowledge and ideas) to the country of origin is another way of trying to compensate
for brain drain (technical and social remittances). Return migration is one vehicle of this transfer,
partnerships between immigrant communities in destination countries (Diasporas) is another. Policies can establish and maintain international networks, facilitate exchanges and support Diasporas
and their transnational activities.
Mobility of goods and services
The relationship of the movement of goods and services with migration is complex. Under certain
conditions they can substitute each other. For example, if for particular reasons a country wants to
possess and use certain products it does not produce itself, it can import these products or recruit
workers who can make them. Outsourcing for the production of goods and services may reduce migration. On the other hand, people often move with goods and services (for example, those involved
in transportation, instruction and use of services and specialised products).
Governments negotiate trade agreements and tariffs within the World Trade Organisation. The mobility of persons is an issue in these negotiations. Usually, the term mobility is being used and it often
concerns particular groups of persons, namely the highly skilled and the so-called intra-company
transferees. Developing countries such as India and the Philippines which promote temporary migration of their nationals use this international platform for calling for liberalisation of migration regimes.
20
Movement of capital
Huge amounts of money are circulating globally, including foreign direct investment (FDI), remittances of migrants and official development aid (ODA). In 2009, globally, FDI amounted to 359 US $
billions, remittances to 307US$ billions and ODA to 120 US$ billions.
Source: Worldbank Migration and Remittances Fact book 2011
Financial transfers have a development impact when they are used to produce prosperity. Policies
can influence how these transfers are made and what the social return on investments is. The OECD
coordinates cooperation between public and private organisations in this area11.
The distinction between FDI and the financial remittances of migrants is not always clear. For example, the UN estimated in 2004 that approximately 70% of the total FDI flows to China originate
among the Chinese communities living abroad, notably among those living in South-East Asia12.
The development potential of remittances is increasingly recognised. Receiving families use remittances for improving their standard of living and invest in housing, health and education. Together
with increased consumption this has a multiplier effect on the local, regional and to some extent also
national economy. The inflow of foreign currency fosters a countries financial position. Policies can
not only work to reduce transfer costs to not more than 5 %, they can also help to make the transfer
more secure and safe.
Policies can also aim to increase the development effect of remittances by aligning these transfers of
private persons to public development policies. Diasporas and links between cities and regions of
origin and destination can play a stimulating and facilitating role. Immigrant communities are also
contributing to the development of their country of origin through philanthropy and are often involved in fundraising and emergency aid after natural or man-made disasters.
11
12
http://www.djei.ie/trade/bilateral/Investment%20Committee%20Brochure.pdf
UN Department of Social Affairs, World economic and social survey 2004.
21
Official development aid can support migration and development related activities. It can promote
research and migration and development assessments. It can provide compensation for negative
impacts of migration as well as foster and top-up efforts to make migration work for development. It
can support programmes that offer protection and assistance to migrants and refugees, in particular
in developing countries. They may support activities of the diasporas, co-op them as development
experts using their knowledge of their country of origin.
Movement of people
Opening legal channels for migration and providing information on migration conditions reduces risks
and gives migrants more choice and security. This leads to a reduction in irregular migration and
makes migrants less vulnerable to exploitation.
Policies can reduce costs for migrants by simplifying visa regimes and charging lower fees. Dialogue
with stakeholders, including private sector and civil society organisations enhances the effectiveness
of policies. Governments of origin and destination countries can negotiate on migration, making it
part of a wider socio-economic and development agenda, which may lead to partnership agreements
which serves interest of both parties. Governments with a longer history of migration can exchange
information on the design of migration policies with newer migration countries. Developed and rich
countries can support developing and poor countries to adopt and implement migration policies.
In conclusion:
It is very hard to assess the costs and benefits of migration and to whom they apply. It is equally difficult to identify who gains and who loses out in the migration process. General approaches and policy
responses will neither be effective nor satisfactory. Differentiated approaches, on the other hand,
have a better chance of remedying the defects of migration systems and of distributing the costs and
benefits more fairly.
22
3. European migration and mobility regimes
Europe has always been a continent of population movements. People moved between countries
and regions and to and from cities. Over the centuries millions of people also moved from and to the
old continent. Poverty, social and political conflicts and wars set migratory movements in motion.
Migration sometimes leads to tensions between origin and destination countries. By times it also
generated social conflicts in receiving countries. Migrants adjusted themselves to their new environment, just as societies adapted itself to new realities of a more diverse population.
Migration is a never-ending story and remains a recurring and unfinished matter on European policy
agendas. The frequency, size and composition of migratory movements within and towards Europe
differ over time, as does the way in which migrants and refugees are perceived and received. They are
welcomed or turned away, seen as jobseekers or as asylum seekers, are successful or unsuccessful,
become part of society or return.
3.1. Internal and external migration in the European Union
International migrants are persons who reside in another country than that of their habitual residence or birth for a period longer than one year. They can be counted by their nationality, country of
birth, or country of birth of their parents. Migrants can be residing non-nationals who are born
abroad and foreign born persons who acquired the nationality of the country they reside in. They are
often referred to as first generation migrants. Persons whose parents (one or both of them) are foreign born and who may or may not have acquired the nationality of the country they reside in are
often referred to as second generation migrants or as persons with a migrant or immigrant background. Migrants can also be nationals who are born abroad and return to their country of origin.
In the European Union another important distinction is made between EU nationals moving between
Member States and nationals of non-Member States. The former are EU citizens exercising their free
movement rights and the latter are so-called third-country nationals. EU nationals may be born outside the EU and third-country nationals may be born within the EU.
The European Union has witnessed relatively large waves of migration from both within and outside
the Union during the first ten years of this century. In 2008, 3.8 million people migrated to and between the Union’s 27 Member States. The number of EU citizens moving to a Member State other
than their own country of citizenship increased on average by an annual 12 % during the period
2002–08, and peaked in 2007. EU Nationals born abroad or living abroad and returning to their country of origin or of that of their parents make up a relatively small group.
In 2010, the European Union was home to 32.5 million international migrants, making up 6.5% of its
total population. Of those, 20.2 million were nationals of non-EU countries and 12.3 million were EU
citizens. In the same year there were 47.4 million foreign-born EU residents (9.4% of the total population), of which 31.4 million were born outside the European Union and 16 million were born in another EU country.
23
In the great majority of countries the number of non-EU citizens and people born outside the EU
among the migrant population is bigger than that of persons from other EU countries and those born
in other Member States. In nine Member States the number of foreign born residents exceeded one
million persons.
Foreign and foreign-born population by group of citizenship and country of birth, 2010
Data not available; s Eurostat estimate; p Provisional value.
Source: Eurostat
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-11-034/EN/KS-SF-11-034-EN.PDF
24
The top immigration countries are listed below.
Top immigration
countries in 2006
Spain
Germany
United Kingdom
Italy
France
Switzerland
Greece
Austria
Ireland
Sweden
destination
Numbers
802 971
558 467
451 702
392 771
182 390
107 177
86 693
85 384
84 365
80 398
Source: Eurostat
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-08-098/EN/KS-SF-08-098-EN.PDF
In Bulgaria, Germany, Poland, Romania and the three Baltic States emigrants outnumbered immigrants. The United Kingdom, Spain and Germany are also countries of outmigration with 368.000,
324.000, 287.000 persons in 20009, respectively.
There are just more male than female migrants (52% versus 48%) with great differences between
Member States.
Migrants by gender, EU-27 and EFTA, 2008
(%)
Source: Eurostat
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-31-10-539/EN/KS-31-10-539-EN.PDF
Migrants in the EU were on average younger than the native population. In 2008, the median age of
the population in all Member States was 40.9 years, whereas the median age of all migrants was 28.4
years.
25
The median age of the foreign born population living in the European Union was 34.4 years in 2010,
which is 7.1 years lower than the median age of the nationals (41.5). For EU and non-EU foreigners
the share of persons aged between 20 and 39 years is 42% and 45% respectively, whereas it is 27%
for nationals.
Age distribution of nationals, EU and non-EU foreigners, EU-27, 2010 (%)
Source: Eurostat 2011
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-11-034/EN/KS-SF-11-034-EN.PDF
As for the countries of origin there exist big differences between Member States. In some countries
the migrant population is quite diverse, meaning that the five main countries of origin represent only
a small proportion of the total migrant population.
Romanians are the biggest group of EU nationals living in another Member State than their own,
followed by Poles, Italians and Portuguese. Nationals from neighbouring countries, namely Turks,
Moroccans and Albanians are by far the biggest group of third-country nationals, followed by China
and then again by nationals from countries at Europe’s doorstep.
Main countries of origin of non-nationals, EU-27, 2010 (million)
Source: Eurostat
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/images/c/c4/Main_countries_of_origin_of_no
n-nationals%2C_EU-27%2C_2010_%28million%29.png
26
Most Moroccans went to France, Spain or Italy. In 2008 Spain also received the largest share of Chinese immigrants. The United Kingdom received the biggest share of Indians. Germany received the
biggest share of Turks and France that of North Africa.
Of the EU residents born abroad 35.3% come from high HDI countries, 45.6 % from medium HDI
countries and 7.4% from low HDI countries. The 27 EU countries together receive 21.4 % of total high
HDI nationals worldwide, 68.3% of the medium HDI nationals and 10.3% of the low HDI nationals.
Immigration policies aim to regulate the admission of the various categories of migrants, including
migrants for employment, family purposes, study and protection. Not all migrants enter with the
necessary papers or leave the country when their permit expires.
Employment is the main reason for almost 50% of the foreign born men to migrate. They may have
or may not have employment before they move. For foreign born women less than 30% migrated for
employment reasons and for 50% of them family life is the main reason (accompanying and reuniting
with husband and family formation). Family reunion was for 24% of the foreign born men the main
reason to migrate13.
Foreign-born population aged 25–54 that entered the receiving country aged
15 and over by main reason for migration and gender, EU-27, 2008 (1), (%)
(1) This information is based on data from BE, DE, IE, EL, ES, FR, IT, CY, LT, LU, NL, AT, PT, SE
and UK.
Source: Eurostat, LFS 2008 ad hoc module
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-31-10-539/EN/KS-31-10-539-EN.PDF
Family reunion, often presented as the reason why people move to the European Union, has progressively decreased from half of all legal immigration in the early 2000s to about one third today. In
2010, most newcomers were not reuniting family members but people who came with permits to
work, to study or to benefit from international protection. People coming with a family permit do not
13
Eurostat, Labour Force Survey 2008. Ad-hoc module on the labour market situation of migrants. In: Migrants
in Europe. A statistical portrait of the first and second generation (2011).
27
make up the majority of newcomers, but they are a large and sometimes the largest group in the
majority. They include nationals from EU member States as well as from third-countries.
Permits for family reasons as % of all legal immigration in 2010
Source: Migration Policy Group 2011
http://www.migpolgroup.org/public/docs/Family_reunion_Confronting_stereotypes_understanding
_family_life_MPG_Briefing_1.pdf
In most EU countries the numbers of reuniting family members of third-country nationals is lower
than that of reuniting EU citizens. Turks, Moroccans and Albanians make up 3%, 12% and 7%, respectively. In countries such as Austria, Belgium, France and Germany, nearly every other person who
obtained a family permit in 2010 belonged to the family of an EU citizen. EU citizens’ family accounted for most of the people to reunite through family reunion in Cyprus, Denmark, Ireland, Malta
and Romania.
As for the composition of the reuniting families, in most EU countries more children arrive than
spouses or partners.
Source: Migration Policy Group 2011
http://www.migpolgroup.org/public/docs/Family_reunion_Confronting_stereotypes_understanding
_family_life_MPG_Briefing_1.pdf
28
Family reunion is not only an immigration issue but also very much an integration issue. The MIPEX
demonstrates that policies in Europe set slightly favourable conditions, despite the many proposed
or adopted restrictions. These concern a rather narrow definition of family (spouse and children under 18 years, but no parents or other children) and more admission conditions. Countries with restrictive definitions tend to impose burdensome conditions on the sponsors of family reunion. Countries with inclusive definitions often limit conditions out of respect of family life. Applicants must
prove sufficient income that is higher than what nationals need to live on social assistance. Few
countries impose language conditions. But as more do, they are extending those to the spouses before arrival. Nevertheless, families tend to acquire both a secure residence permit and equal rights.
For the acquisition of an autonomous residence permit they face long waiting periods14.
The number of students studying abroad has increased by 77% over the last decade, reaching almost
3.7 million in 2009. Of these students 18% goes to the United States, 10 % to the United Kingdom
and 7% to Australia, Germany and France each. China is the biggest source country followed by India.
Fifty three percent of the international students worldwide come from Asia. International students
are an attractive group of prospective skilled migrants: they are young, highly educated and already
equipped with host country credentials. But so far, not enough has been done to support their transition into the labour markets of their countries of study after graduation15.
There has been a rather sharp decrease in the number of asylum applicants in the European Union in
recent years, with 424 200 asylum applications in 2001 and an estimated 258 950 applications in
201016. The latter figure demonstrates a slight decrease of 5 050 applicants compared with the year
before. Afghanistan and Russia remained the two most common countries of origin for asylum seekers in the EU17.
Top source countries of refugees
Numbers
2010
Top receiving countries of refuNumbers
gees 2010
Afghanistan
Russia
Serbia
Iraq
Somalia
Kosovo
Iran
Pakistan
France
Germany
Sweden
Belgium
United Kingdom
Switzerland
Netherlands
Austria
20 590
18 590
17 745
15 800
14 355
14 310
10 315
9 180
52 725
48 490
31 875
26 130
23 715
15 435
15 100
11 050
14
Migrant Integration Policy Index (MIPEX) published by the British Council and the Migration Policy Group
(2011) at http://www.mipex.eu/
15
See the study on mobile talent undertaken by the German Expert Council on Integration and Migration and
the Migration Policy Group which reports on a survey among international students and provides an overview
of existing legal provisions governing admission and residence of students in five European countries. See,
http://www.migpolgroup.com/public/docs/news/Press%20Release_Study%20on%20international%20students
-19.4.2012.pdf
16
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php?title=File:Asylum_applications_(non-EU27)_in_the_EU-27_Member_States,_2000-2010_(1)_(1_000).png&filetimestamp=20111118151955
17
This section is based on UNHCR and Eurostat as summarized at
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Asylum_statistics#Data_sources_and_availab
ility
29
FYR of Macedonia
Georgia
Source: Eurostat 2010 Statistics
7 550
6 860
Greece
Italy
10 275
10 050
In 2010, the highest number of applications for asylum was lodged in France, while Germany, Sweden, Belgium and the United Kingdom were the other main recipients of applications. The number of
asylum claims lodged in the five countries accounted for more than two thirds of the total number of
applications lodged in the European Union. Out of each 20 asylum applicants in the EU on average
close to 6 were minors, of which 1 was unaccompanied, 10 were young adults aged between 18 and
34 years and the remaining 4 persons were aged 35 and older.
Across the EU the gender distribution tends to be more balanced for asylum applicants aged less
than 14 than for asylum applicants aged 14-17 or 18-34 for which around 14 out of 20 applicants
were men. Male applicants were even more represented when considering the group of unaccompanied minors as approximately four in every five unaccompanied minors were male. Women outnumbered men only in the group of asylum seekers aged 65 and over although this group is relatively
small and accounted for around 1 930 individuals.
A wide diversity in the handling of asylum applications between Member States can be observed. In
absolute terms, the highest number of positive asylum decisions in 2010 was recorded in the United
Kingdom (14 070), followed by Germany (12 910), France (10 375), Sweden (9 760) and the Netherlands (8 680). Altogether, these five Member States represented close to three quarter (73.9 %) of
the total number of positive decisions issued in the EU.
It is estimated that estimated that between 1.9 and 3.8 million people lived ‘irregularly’ in the European Union in2008, accounting for between 7% and 13% of estimated foreigners. Most of them are
non-EU-nationals. Their numbers seem to have decreased in recent years. Non EU citizens have become EU citizens when their country of origin joined the European Union and free movement restrictions were gradually lifted. Periodically, governments allowed the regularization of immigrants who
entered the country irregularly.
Migrants and refugees may stay for a shorter or longer period, move on to another country or prolong their stay and become a citizen. There are significant differences between Member States in
terms of the duration of stay of the foreign born population. In countries such as Ireland, Cyprus and
Spain, 50% of all migrants are recent migrants (resident for less than eight years), whereas in Latvia,
Slovenia, the Netherlands and Slovakia, the shares of migrants resident in the country for at least
eight years was higher than 80%.
30
Foreign-born population aged 25–54 by duration of stay, 2008 (1), (%)
(1) Data not available or unreliable (in at least one category) for BG, EE, LT, MT, RO and IS.
Source: Eurostat, LFS 2008
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-31-10-539/EN/KS-31-10-539-EN.PDF
In 2010, 2.5 million first residence permits were issued to third-country nationals in the European
Union for the purpose of work (32.5 %) for family reasons (30.2 %), for study (20.6 %) and for other
reasons, including protection and residence without work (17%). The biggest number of permits
were issued (in descending order) to citizens of the US, India, China, Ukraine and Morocco.
Immigrants can acquire a long-term residence status. Persons with that status can work, study, retire
and live in the country just like nationals. Immigrants must pass many different eligibility requirements and conditions – some more restrictive than others. Several permit-holders cannot apply,
even if after living in the country for 5 years or more. Countries retain discretion to refuse or withdraw a long-term resident’s permit, although personal circumstances must be taken into account and
there are grounds for an appeal18. Not many third-country nationals apply for the status of long-term
residence which, in addition to the bureaucratic hurdles, is due to the fact that many immigrants do
not seem to be fully aware of this status and the rights attached to it.
A recent survey among immigrants in 15 cities in seven European countries found that three out of
four migrants are or wish to become citizens in their country of residence, which in turn helps them
feel more settled, obtain better jobs and improve their access to further education19. However, much
of the naturalization procedure still discourage or exclude many immigrants from trying to become a
citizen, which partially explains the relatively low naturalization numbers. Immigrants have to wait
on average seven years and many countries make citizenship conditional upon income and high fees.
18
MIPEX
Migration Policy Group and King Badouin Foundation, Immigrants citizens’ survey. How immigrants experience integration (2012) at http://www.immigrantsurvey.org/
19
31
Applicants are normally required to know the language, often at high or unclear levels. Tests to be
passed rarely come with the support to pass them. After rather discretionary procedures, applicants
can at least appeal and enjoy some protections from statelessness and the withdrawal of citizenship.
One of the formal obstacles, namely the impossibility of having dual nationality, is gradually being
removed as dual nationality is becoming the norm for immigration countries. The jus soli principle is
gaining more ground in Europe, allowing children of immigrants to acquire nationality at birth20.
The share of foreigners resident in EU Member States who have acquired citizenship by age groups
and sex, 2009 (%)
Source: Eurostat Integration Indicators – A Pilot Study
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-RA-11-009/EN/KS-RA-11-009-EN.PDF
20
MIPEX
32
3.2. Valuing and regulating migration
The European Union is an attractive destination for migrants because of its high levels of economic
activity and development; its openness, standard of living and life style of the population; and its
political stability and absence of large scale violent conflicts. The Union, its members and closely associated countries are reluctantly acknowledging that as global economic players they not only attract but also need migrants to produce prosperity and well-being.
In 2011, the European Union’s GDP was over 12.629 trillion Euros, making it the world’s largest
economy. It is the biggest exporter and second biggest importer of goods with 19% of the total global
imports and exports. In 2010, the export of goods and services made up almost 12% and just over
4% of the EU’s GDP, respectively. In the same year, the import of goods and services made up 12 %
and almost 4%, respectively. The Union is itself the biggest export market for more than hundred
countries. Trade between EU countries makes up more than 60% of the EU’s total external trade. The
tourism industry generates more than 5% of the EU’s GDP and 10% when related sectors are taken
into account.
It would be rather difficult and extremely costly to keep Europe’s borders open for goods, services,
capital, scientific and cultural exchange and tourism, but to close them for people. It is, therefore,
better to value migration as an actual and potential contributor to Europe’s prosperity and wellbeing.
Since the end of the ‘guest-workers area’ of the 1960s and 1970s, and after having contributed significantly to Europe’s economies, migrant workers were considered as not any longer needed. Refugees were mostly seen as a burden. This started to change at the beginning of the century. This was
the case first in Southern Europe where traditional countries of origin turned into countries of destination and then in Northern Europe when reports on declining and aging populations were published. Migrants and refugees could after all be needed not so much to reverse but to delay this
process. Labour market mismatches raised the interest in recruiting specific categories of skilled
workers in the high-tech industries and health services, and less skilled workers in agriculture, hospitality and tourism. In some cases countries are competing for the highly-skilled and students becoming the most desired immigrants.
In 2010, the European Union’s population stood at just over 500 million, with two per cent more
women than men. For many years, natural growth was the major component of population increase,
but this has been in decline since the 1960s. In the EU, the total fertility rate has declined to about
1.5 children per woman, with a lower rate in 15 Member States (a fertility rate of 2.1 is considered to
be the replacement level in developed countries). The EU population is projected to increase to 521
million in 2035 and then begin to decline gradually to 506 million in 2060. The annual number of
births is projected to fall over this period, while at the same time the annual number of deaths is
projected to rise21.
21
Based on Eurostat 2008 population projections at:
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=STAT/08/119
33
From 2015 onwards more people will die than are born, hence population growth due to natural
increase would stop. Net migration will then be the only population growth factor. However, from
2035 onwards migration will no longer counterbalance the negative natural increase. Already for
decades so-called replacement migration makes up for the declining natural population growth and
for the next ten to twenty years even greater numbers of migrants would be needed to fully compensate for this decline.
Although its effect on population growth will diminish and then disappear in the long run, migration
will continue to make a significant contribution to reversing the decline in fertility in the short to medium term. Other solutions - promoting a better balance between work and family life, rewarding
bigger families, subsidising childcare, allowing flexible work schedules and parental leave – will have
only an effect over the longer term.
A mix of policy measures is being applied with varying degrees of success in various European countries. Immigration is seldom an explicit population policy instrument or a preferred one. Measures to
stimulate population growth come with rather high costs. In some countries they meet with strong
opposition because they require changes in traditional family life and gender relations, and have that
effect. The social impact of and resistance against immigration among sectors of the existing population often leads to immigration restrictions.
The population is also projected to grow older with the share of the population aged 65 years and
over rising from 17.1% in 2008 to 30.0% in 2060, and those aged 80 and over rising from 4.4% to
12.1% during the same period. The life expectancy at birth of women in the EU is around 82 years
and around 76 years for men. The old age dependency ratio in the European Union, meaning, the
population aged 65 years and older divided by the working age population, is projected to increase
from 25% in 2008 to 53% in 2060. In other words, there would be only two persons of working age
for every person aged 65 or more in 2060, compared with four persons to one in 2008.
The consequences of these demographic developments for the workforce are enormous. Western
and Central Europe’s work force would decrease to 229 million (-3%) in 2025 and to 207 million (12%) in 2050. Without international migration this decline would even be larger, namely 214 million
in 2025 (-10%) and 171 million in 2050 (-28%).
Europe can accept the demographic logic and the likelihood that a shrinking population leads to
shrinking economic and political power globally and begin to prepare itself for such a situation. It can
also try and prevent this situation from occurring. This requires the setting of ambitious goals and
dealing with consequences. Europe’s economies can be made less labour intensive. Relocation of
certain European industries and out-sourcing could be part of this strategy.
Europe needs to invest in its labour force in order to ensure that it remains sufficiently large, active,
well equipped and motivated. Measures include raising the participation rate of women and groups
34
that meet with discrimination, making work more attractive and challenging and keeping people in
work longer, and recruiting energetic migrants.
Migration regimes are developed to deal with solicited and unsolicited migration. Their main functions are the identification of migration needs, the assessment of the impact on the existing population and migrants themselves, and the protection of legitimate interests and rights. A distinction can
be made between free movement regimes and ordinary migration regimes.
An ordinary migration regime designs measures which deal with admission and residence of nonnationals for the purpose of (self-) employment, service provision, family reunion and study. A free
movement regime establishes for nationals of participating states a right to migrate and settlement
on the basis of equality. Members of a free movement regime share responsibilities for migration
from outside the area along similar lines as an ordinary migration regime. A distinctive part of both
types of regimes deals with the admission and settlement of people in need of international protection.
The European Union is the best and biggest example of a free movement area. The freedom of
movement of persons is one of the four freedoms on which this Union is built, the other freedoms
being those of goods, services and capital. All kinds of but not all barriers for these freedoms were
removed over a period of fifty years. Nationals of Member States are entitled to move to, look for
and take up work or deliver services and settle with their families in another EU Member State than
their own. Physical barriers such as border checks were gradually removed, facilitating a rather easy
going back and forth between countries.
The number of people benefiting from free movement increased tremendously over the last fifty
years with the successive enlargements of the European Union from six to 27 members and the association of Norway, Switzerland and Lichtenstein with the free movement regime. In addition, free
movement rights were not limited to workers but were extended to pensioners, students and other
non-economically active persons, to in fact all nationals of Member States. Nowadays, around 500
million EU citizens benefit from free movement.
The strong economic drivers behind the freedom of movement account to a great extent for its success. A lot of issues remain to be resolved including those related to the free movement of people
such as transferability of social security entitlements and recognition of qualifications. By times, the
tremendous achievements are challenged, for example, when governments threaten to reintroduce
border controls, or when they want to treat EU citizens from new Member States as migrants from
outside the European Union.
With international migration between EU Member States getting more the character of internal migration, the term migrant is hardly used for nationals who are exercising their free movement rights.
Therefore, the term migrant could have been used exclusively for those migrating to an EU Member
State from a non-Member State. However, for these persons the term ‘third-country national’ was
coined. The term serves as a reminder that for the European Union there are different types of international migrants: those who are crossing the soft internal borders between EU Member States and
those crossing the hard external EU borders.
35
The distinction between EU internal mobility and external migration should be kept in mind as the
admission, residence and settlement conditions and associated entitlements differ considerably in
both cases. Treating EU nationals as non-EU nationals as opposed to treating the latter as the former
is levelling down equality standards.
EU nationals have a right to migrate to other Member States and are to be treated equally. Migrants
from outside the EU do not have that right and are granted comparable rights with nationals. In addition, whereas in the former case the European institutions have a lot of power and are leading policymakers, in the latter case national governments are holding most powers and claim the leadership
position for their own.
The EU’s free movement regime was initially based on the assessment and recognition of needs,
namely those of persons wanting or having to move, of countries of origin wanting to support their
nationals with this effort and of receiving countries that were in need of workers. Nowadays, the
freedom of movement is an integral part of the common market and very much driven by EU citizens
exercise their free movements rights and employers benefitting from this freedom.
The overlapping interests of migration stakeholders continue to make a strong case for intraEuropean mobility and can help to make the case for extra-European migration as long as these interests are articulated, negotiated and communicate.
3.3. Policy challenges and responses
Given its demographic situation, Europe could be more relaxed and generous with admitting migrants. It is for policy-makers to address immediate expectations and anticipate those for the longterm. They have to decide on when it is necessary to admit foreigners in order not to miss economic
opportunities and on what realistic and long-term alternatives are. They also have to decide what
costs and benefits are acceptable and how they are shared.
By solving immediate labour market frictions migrants contribute economically in the short run, but
it may be difficult to integrate them socially in the medium term. Migrants may be seen as competitors in the labour market, thus potentially lower wage levels and working conditions. They may also
be seen as colleagues bringing additional working power and skills, thus increasing economic outputs. Social partners and governments negotiate about these issues. Once a principal decision is
taken to open up the labour market for foreign workers a migration regime is put in place,
which in many countries in Europe facilitates the recruitment of foreign workers.
All ordinary migration regimes contain limitations to the complete free movement of persons. They
provide a general framework for regulating how many and what type of migrants can migrate and
under which conditions. This can take many and different forms and may also translate into bilateral
or multilateral agreements with preferential treatment clauses. Situated between complete freedom
of movement and closed doors, ordinary migration regimes allow the adoption of specific measures
which cater for changing socio-economic needs. They often form part of an overall labour market
36
strategy to maintain a big enough and well-equipped labour force. Elements of different approaches
are applied in many European countries.
An employers’ driven system allows employers to recruit foreign workers on a needs basis and allows
migrants to accept job offers accordingly. Employers must demonstrate the economic need and
workers the required qualification. Labour market tests bring out precise information on what types
of migrants are needed and in which sector and for what period of time. To that end employers publicise vacancies and when no nationals apply they receive official authorisation to recruit foreign
workers. The labour market test guidelines prescribe where and for how long the vacancies are to be
announced. They also prescribe how the non-response from national workers is evidenced and how
authorisation to recruit foreign workers is given.
Another system is the drawing up of a shortage lists of certain occupations for which no national
workers are available. Migrants with the right qualifications are allowed to accept an offer that is on
such a list. The list is usually drawn up by governments in consultation with social partners and aims
to facilitate the matching of demand and supply of specific labour and speed up the recruitment of
foreign workers who can take up such an occupation. The lists are under regular review since in a
dynamic economy the shortages may change frequently.
A supply-driven point system defines which qualifications potential immigrants must have in order to
be admitted for reasons of employment. Usually, governments draw up this system and define
which points can be received for what kind of qualifications. The system may also consider qualifications which are not uniquely employment related but are considered to serve broader socioeconomic goals. National and/or sectorial quotas limit the total number of migrant workers, of certain categories of workers, or the total numbers in a sector or geographical area or economic sector.
Governments in consultation with the social partners can set these numerical ceilings on an annual
basis. Quotas protect the interest of national workers while allowing a steady inflow of foreign workers.
Migration regimes assess labour market needs. They establish a preference for national workers and
those from other EU countries over foreign workers and include equal treatment, thus mitigating
negative social effects. They help to reduce delays and long procedures. The involvement of social
partners makes immigration more accepted in society.
International migration and mobility’s manifold dimensions require various sets of general and targeted policies. Europe’s considerable economic and social progress is in no small measure the result
of the freedom of movement of capital, goods, services and persons.
The Union can keep its position in a globalised world when it maintains and improves its free movement regime for which it also has to better align internal mobility and external migration policies.
The common market and its internal and external borders
37
The removal of the EU’s internal border controls required not only agreement on the admission of
migrants from outside the Union, but also trust among and cooperation between its members to control their common external borders. Europe needs once more to invest in both.
Too little trust and cooperation lead to more attempts to re-introduce, partially and temporarily,
internal border control. Too many attempts to that effect and prolonged controls are at the detriment of the free circulation of goods, services and citizens. This will have a negative impact on trade,
foreign investments and economic growth.
The European Union has a large common market. Nevertheless, the Schengen area is smaller than
the European Union and countries can opt out on migration measures which they do not like.
Dividing the common market in smaller segments along geographical lines creates unfavourable economic circumstances in a globalising economy.
Subjecting persons to external border control and asking them to meet immigration conditions for
the first country of entry makes perfect sense, but subjecting them to border control within the
common market area and letting them meet the often different immigration conditions to enter
subsequent countries is unnecessarily complicating matters for these persons.
Greater numbers of workers move across borders without or without the necessary documents;
these persons are in many cases followed by their families; more short and long terms trade and
consultancy missions are undertaken; and tourism and cultural and academic exchanges keep on
gaining importance.
Smart security and border control systems are needed to facilitate increased human mobility in a
globalising economy. Visa and immigration procedures need to be concise and reasonably priced.
Entry and exit formalities are to be carried out expeditiously with full privacy protection.
The data collected for these purposes must be securely protected. Persons concerned should have
access to this data which can be corrected. At the same time these systems contribute to the fight
against terrorism and transnational crime.
The common labour market and mobility and migration
For the better functioning of the Union’s common labour market, principles governing internal mobility are adapted and applied to external migration providing facilitated entry, secure residence and
equal treatment.
This means that:
o
o
o
Immigration rules are anchored in national and international law, clear, transparent and publically available
Immigration services are well-equipped and capable to expeditiously process immigration
requests
Costs for meeting immigration conditions are kept low and are equally shared between
beneficiaries
38
o
o
o
o
Immigrants cannot be excluded on grounds of gender, race and ethnicity, religion and belief
and national and social origin
Equality principles apply for living and working conditions
It is made easy to travel and work in other Member States and to travel between country of
residence and origin
Immigrants acquire a secure residence status and are entitled to family reunion
Residence and citizenship
Visa and residence permits may be valid for shorter or longer periods, depending on the authorities,
visitors and migrants intentions and expectations. These may be different and change over time.
What was meant to be a short stay can turn into a longer stay and permanent residence.
Temporary residence permits are usually issued for a specific purpose and after applicants have
proven that they meet immigration conditions. These conditions should be strictly functional for the
purpose a permit is issued and which are different for persons who have already an offer for a high
or lower skilled job, are a student or a trainee, or are reuniting with their family. Income, insurance
and language conditions often limit, intentionally or unintentionally, the number of permits issued.
Permits may also tie the persons to the purpose of their stay. Workers may be tied to their employer,
or can only work in a certain sector or region, students may not work during their study or stay after
completing it, family members are not granted an independent residence permit.
Migrants get more out of migration if they have a greater choice to prolong, shorten or interrupt
their stay, can change their legal status from temporary to long-term resident or student to immigrant and have access to citizenship.
The social mobility of immigrants is enhanced when they have equal access to education and health
services, are protected against expulsion and arbitrary treatment, enjoy the right to judicial redress
on immigration decisions, have access to justice and can acquire citizenship in a reasonably short
period of time.
The fundamental rights of migrants who entered without the necessary documents or have become
irregular are to be respected. Their children are better integrated into school and their parents benefit from health services. The rights acquired by their employment should be honoured.
Humanitarian commitments
Europe’s humanitarian commitments and its prosperity both oblige and enable it to offer international protection to refugees and asylum seekers wherever needed. Its commitment to human rights
and development, as well its economic power, can make Europe a trusted partner globally and for its
neighbours.
Migrants and mobile persons may decide to return to their country of origin or move on to another
destination. They may also prolong their stay time and again or decide to settle permanently. Their
39
integration in the fundamentally changing European societies is a much debated issue throughout
Europe.
In conclusion:
The increased mobility of capital, goods, people, services and information requires adequate policies
that turn the accompanying challenges into opportunities. Such policies combine flexibility with adherence to high standards in the realms of rights, dignity and sustainability.
40
4. Integrating societies and the well-being of all
Global economic transformations are changing European societies raising fundamental questions as
to their integrating capacities. Can sufficient income be generated and the same level of productivity
and standard of living maintained? Are the same services needed, available and accessible, and will
they be delivered in the same way and by the same people? How will solidarity be organised and
cultural pluralism take shape? How will citizens, with and without a migrant background be engaged
in shaping society and how can they contribute to and benefit from society’s prosperity and wellbeing?
The meaning of the term integration regularly changes. At certain times, integration refers to the
incorporation of specific groups of individuals into society, while at others it is used more in the context of keeping society together. Some actors phrase integration in legal terms (equal treatment and
citizenship), whereas others phrase it in social terms (diversity and participation).
Integration can be coined in more socio-economic terms or in more cultural terms. It can be seen as
convergence of societal outcomes by closing gaps between the overall population and particular
groups such as immigrants. It can also been seen as accommodation of cultural differences and assertion of core values by promoting inclusive citizenship.
Whatever the angle is and definitions are, integration is a long-term and multi-facetted process that
is open-ended and not necessarily linear but even reversible.
Integrating societies are those that remove obstacles to integration and support structures, organisations and individuals that facilitate it. In these societies, citizens and residents contribute to and benefit from prosperity and well-being on an equal footing.
4.1. Mind and mend the gaps
Most EU Member States score well and some even very high on the Human Development Index and
on similar international comparisons of prosperity and well-being. A variety of social, economic, cultural and civic indicators are used in these exercises, including gross national product, median income, employment and unemployment rates, educational achievements, etc. The statistics underpinning these indicators are often broken down in terms of countries, regions and cities, male and
female, older and younger, persons with and without an immigrant background, etc. They demonstrate gaps between and within different countries and between particular categories. The wider the
gaps and higher the numbers of people affected, the bigger are the integration challenges.
Generally speaking income inequality is on the rise in most OECD countries. Nowadays, the average
income of the richest 10% of the population is about nine times that of the poorest 10%. The Gini
coefficient measures income inequality on a scale that ranges from 0 (when everybody has identical
incomes) to 1 (when all income goes to only one person). It stood at an average of 0.29 in OECD
41
countries in the mid-1980s and has increased over the last twenty years by almost 10% to
0.316.Countries with high social spending have lower income inequality.
The OECD warns that rising income inequality can create economic, social and political challenges. It
may impact economic performance and social mobility. It may generate social resentment and political instability and fuel populist, protectionist and anti-globalisation sentiments as people feel that
they are losing out while a small group of winners is getting richer and richer22.
In times of economic downturn, groups in society compete for jobs, quality education, health services and housing. There is then a higher risk that policies are used to play groups off against each
other. Social resentment may target people with certain characteristics such as minorities and immigrants who may be blamed for the economic downturn. Socio-economic and ethnic characteristics
may begin to coincide and to reinforce each other. This can lead and is in many European cities leading to social and spatial segregation.
For immigrants income inequalities are often more pronounced.
Absolute and relative difference of median annual equalised disposable income between thirdcountry nationals and nationals aged 25–54, 2008 (1) (PPS and %)
22
OECD
2011,
Divided
We
Stand,
Why
Inequality
Keeps
Rising
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/40/12/49499779.pdf and Society at a Glance 2011 - OECD Social Indicators
(www.oecd.org/els/social/indicators/SAG)
42
The graph shows that, in most countries, a migrant who works the same hours than a native person,
has significantly less money to spend at the end of the month.
Income is mostly generated by (self-) employment and there are striking differences between native
and foreign born persons. The labour market activity rate of men and women with immigrant parents
varies per Member State, but is on average close to the rates for people with native-born parents.
Activity rate of women aged 25–54 by groups of country of birth and number of dependent children
(aged less than 15) in the household, EU-27, 2008, (%)
The first-generation has slightly lower activity rates than national or native-born people. This gap can
be attributed to the significantly lower activity rates for foreign and foreign-born women, particularly
from non-EU countries. The gap with national/native-born women widens as the number of dependent children in the household increases. Foreign and foreign-born mothers tend to be less active on
the labour market than national and native-born mothers with the same number of children. The
reasons for inactivity differed for EU-born people and non-EU migrants. For the latter personal and
family responsibilities seem to be more important.
Unemployment rates for native-born persons are lower than for non-EU nationals and non-EU-born
men and women, particularly newcomers. A higher level of education lowers unemployment rates
for non-immigrants and immigrants, but at a much lower rate for immigrants. Foreign/foreign-born
men and women systematically encounter greater difficulties in finding a job than nationals/nativeborn with the same level of education. Foreign/foreign-born people are less protected from unemployment by their education level. The gap in unemployment rates increases as the education level
increases. The gap is wider between highly-educated foreign- and native-born people than between
low-educated people. It seems that the higher unemployment rates among immigrants are clearly
influenced by other factors than educational attainment, such as non-recognition of foreign qualifications and skills, language problems and discrimination.
43
Unemployment rate of persons aged 25-54 by groups of country of birth, gender and highest level of
educational attainment, EU-27, 2008 (%)
Employment rates are slightly lower for foreign and foreign-born persons than for native-born persons because of the combination of two factors, namely the lower activity rates of migrant
women/mothers and the higher unemployment rates of non-EU migrants. Male and female foreignborn workers are systematically less represented in the public administration, defence, and education sectors. Foreign-born men are 1.4 times more likely to work in construction than native-born
men. More than 10% of working foreign-born women worked in other persons’ homes, compared to
only 1% of working native-born women. Foreign-born men and women were more likely to work in
accommodation and food services.
Distribution of employed persons aged 25–54 by selected employment sectors (with the highest percentage difference between foreign-born and native-born persons), EU-27, 2008, (%)
Non-EU-born workers, especially newcomers, tend to be more often in lower quality jobs. Non-EUborn workers are more likely than EU-born workers to have temporary contracts and involuntary
fixed-term employment. This can be partly explained by their over-representation in highly seasonal
sectors (e.g. agriculture, construction, and hotels and restaurants). These sectorial and occupational
concentrations generally persist over time, even though the position of settled male and female
workers is slightly better than of newcomers. Employment rates for the second-generation with two
parents born outside the country was, on average, higher than for the first-generation, but significantly lower than for people with one or both parents born in the country. This gap can be explained
by the slightly higher unemployment rates for the second-generation and slightly lower activity rates
specifically for women.
There are also striking differences between native and foreign born persons in terms of the qualification rates. Persons with a migrant background tend to be more overqualified for the work they do
than native born persons.
44
Over qualification rate of persons aged 25–54 by groups of country of birth and duration of residence
in the receiving country, 2008, (%)
Not all foreign residents with the right to work have equal access to the whole labour market and
employment services. For instance, only nationals and EU nationals enjoy equal opportunities in the
public sector and better procedures to recognise their non-EU degrees. Most immigrants can use
public employment offices. Targeted support is the major area of weakness in most countries. Rarely
are these general services able to address specific needs, especially for migrant women and youths.
Once migrants find jobs, they should enjoy the same working conditions and access to unions as nationals. These workers, who pay full taxes, are excluded from parts of the social security system. Immigrants have better access and targeted support in the established countries of immigration. Likewise, the countries that restrict access are not usually the ones that try to take advantage of immigrants’ specific skills23.
The situation on the labour market and the level of income increase the risk of poverty. Also here
there are striking differences between foreign citizens and third-country nationals.
23
MIPEX
45
People at risk of poverty or social exclusion — differences between foreign citizens and third-country
nationals and nationals (persons aged 25–54), 2008 (1),(percentage points)
The graph shows that non-EU immigrants face a much greater risk of poverty and social exclusion in
comparison to EU immigrants and nationals.
There are also gaps concerning educational outcomes of native and foreign born s the graphs demonstrate.
Early school-leavers’ rate by type of background and gender, EU‑27, 2008
(%)
46
Share of 30–34-year-olds with tertiary educational attainment by sex and groups of country of birth,
2009 (%)
Source: Eurostat, Labour Force Survey
Note: DE data - DESTATIS estimate Published in Eurostat Migrant Integration Indicators
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-RA-11-009/EN/KS-RA-11-009-EN.PDF
The graphs show that persons with a migrant background, but especially first-generation immigrants,
are more likely to drop out of school and less likely to attain tertiary education.
MIPEX demonstrates that few school systems make professional assessments of what newcomer
children learned abroad. Most children have at least an implicit right to attend kindergarten and
compulsory education. They also access general measures to help disadvantaged students. They will
benefit as much or as little as other students with the same social background. Still, migrant pupils
may also be struggling in school for different reasons than their peers. Here, schools retain wide discretion on whether or not to address the specific needs of migrant pupils, their teachers and parents,
and monitor the results. Without clear requirements or entitlements, pupils do not get the support
47
they need throughout their school career and across the country, especially in communities with
many immigrants or few resources. Migrants are entitled to support to learn the language, but frequently it is not held to the same standard as the rest of the curriculum. Hardly any countries have
systems to diversify schools or the teaching staff; most schools are therefore missing out on new
opportunities brought by a diverse student body.
There is a relationship between economic prosperity and well-being. However, it is increasingly acknowledged that economic growth does not necessarily lead to greater well-being, and that wellbeing can be measured by means other than economic indicators. Indicators of well-being include
such matters as health and social and civic participation.
At the European Union level, in the age groups 20-64, 25-54 and 55-64 the shares of foreign born
persons who perceived their health as good are almost identical to those of the total population. The
same patterns can be observed for both foreign-born men and women in those age groups. However, the situation at EU level masks significant differences between individual Member States.
Similar overall results apply to the analyses by civic participation.
On civic participation MIPEX found that most immigrants have few opportunities to inform and improve the policies that affect them daily. There are still countries in the EU that still have laws denying immigrants basic political liberties. Non-EU nationals can stand as municipal candidates in thirteen of the countries covered by MIPEX, vote locally in nineteen, regionally in seven, and nationally
in two. A recent survey among immigrants in 15 cities in seven countries demonstrated that immigrants are as willing if not more willing than regular citizens to participate in civil society for example
by voting and joining political parties and trade unions24.
The distribution of prosperity contributes to general well-being and makes economic sense. Equal
access to employment, equal opportunities for pursuing a career and equal access to services such as
health and education are beneficial for all, not only for those who are least successful. Antidiscrimination and equality policies are therefore crucial for the promotion of prosperity and wellbeing.
The difference in societal outcomes between people with and without an immigrant background calls
for further research. This could, for example, show that the differences are more or less pronounced
when looking at age, gender and other individual characteristics in both groups of people. It could
demonstrate that there exist differences between first and second generation but that these diminish over time. It could shift the attention from immigrants who are lagging behind to immigrants who
are substantially contributing to society.
Research can also demonstrate that discrimination is in play. The Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA)
and the Eurobarometer found that ethnic minorities are on average almost five times more likely to
experience multiple discriminations than persons belonging to the majority population and report it
24
Migration Policy Group and King Badouin Foundation, Immigrants citizens’ survey. How immigrants experience integration (2012) at http://www.immigrantsurvey.org/
48
the least25. The public perceives higher levels of discrimination against foreigners in countries with
wider gaps in men’s and women’s activity and employment rates. These countries are often also the
countries developing strong anti-discrimination laws and extensive labour market integration policies. The results from these surveys underline the importance of discrimination as one potential explanatory factor for labour market integration outcomes. Public policies and information campaigns
can make links between labour market integration measures, anti-discrimination laws, and equality
policies.
The European Union has adopted rather strong anti-discrimination legislation which is implemented
and enforced. A wide range of actors in most areas of life cannot discriminate against a person on
the grounds of race, ethnicity or religion. Generally, a victim seeking justice benefits from protections
against victimisation, sharing the burden of proof, financial aid and interpreters. Equality NGOs have
stronger legal standings to represent victims, lead class actions and use situation testing. The major
areas of weakness are equality policies. States cannot guarantee that staff and service-providers are
promoting equality in their daily work. Too few equality bodies have the full legal standing and independence they need to help victims26.
Monitoring and measuring socio-economic outcomes and gaps between various groups within the
population can be done in different ways and with different means. Keeping statistical records and
surveying the population are among them. There are many national and international surveys which
provide valuable information on how citizens think and feel about their situation. The above mentioned survey among immigrants, for example, found that immigrants today are generally as
satisfied with their lives as most people in the country where they live. Monitoring and analysing
developments can inform policies thus enhancing their effectiveness. This helps to decide when to
apply general policies and when and for how long to adopt specific measures for particular groups.
4.2. Diverse and inclusive societies
The diversity of Europe’s population is a fact. This is not a new development; Europe has always been
a diverse continent in terms of ethnicity, culture and religion, to which migratory movements have
added and continue to add.
This can be demonstrated by the way Europe’s cities have grown over the centuries and how they
have absorbed new inhabitants who came by the hundreds in relatively short periods of time, or in
smaller groups over longer periods of time. Fifteen cities in Europe have a population of over 100,000
foreign-born residents, eight cities have a population of over 250,000 foreign-born residents and two
cities have a population of over 1,000,000 foreign-born residents. On average, cities across Europe
have 5.86 per cent of non-EU nationals as a proportion of total population. Over the last three to four
decades a great number of people with often very different national and cultural backgrounds has, in
25
See the reports on the survey among people with a migrant background and minorities of the Fundamental
Rights Agency at http://fra.europa.eu/fraWebsite/media/pr-020211_en.htm
26
MIPEX and for an in-depth comparison and analysis see: Isabelle Chopin and Uyen Do, Developing European
anti-discrimination
law.
The
27
Member
States
compared
at
http://www.nondiscrimination.net/content/media/Comparitive%20EN%2017052011.pdf.
49
bigger or smaller waves, migrated to Europe’s cities. By times this posed serious challenges at local
level and stretched integration capacities of receiving societies.
Societies are made up of individuals interacting with each other in societal entities, of which there
are many and different types. Their nature is defined by common sense, by how they describe themselves and/or by general agreement or law. They range from groups to communities, from public to
private institutions, from civil society organisations to businesses. These interacting entities differ in
nature, size, importance and power. They are dynamic and undergo change, or are static and remain
the same. They can be more or less formal and can function by design or default, by written or unwritten rules. Some more than others have integrating effects and provide stability.
In times of rapid and frequent change many lose their traditional meaning, take on new functions,
while new ones emerge. Changes may be desired or undesired and may give rise to uncertainty, defensive reactions and resistance. This explains to a great extent that nowadays issues of identity have
gained so much attention. Debates on national or regional values, cultures and identity show a mix of
nostalgia, conservatism and acceptance. By times there are racialist and exclusionist undercurrents in
the debates, but it would be an unfortunate mistake to qualify the differing positions in the debates
as racialist and exclusionist. An open and constructive debate should be able to find a balance between a shared past and plans for a shared future.
Affiliations with societal entities shape and reflect a person’s identity. Individuals may distinguish
themselves or be distinguished as being a member of or belonging to one or more entities. The question is how mutually exclusive and static these entities are, and how open or closed; whether belonging is determined by birth (for example gender and family) and descent (for example nationality and
class), or rests on individual choices (for example belonging to a social movement or cultural, religious and professional groupings). Economic and cultural distinctions (such as class and ethnicity)
may cut across many other distinctions and can influence and even condition the choices made by
individuals. In times of change people’s affiliations change as they move at a greater pace between
entities which incorporate new ‘members’ with varying interests and values (including persons with
an immigrant background).
One single factor or a few factors cannot explain the changes societies are going through, nor can
specific groups of people be blamed for the social tensions that accompany these changes. There are
many factors playing a mutual reinforcing role. As with all change and conflicts, some people benefit
more than others and there are winners and losers. Conflicting socio-economic interests should be
mapped, recognised and addressed. The search for and emergence of new identities deserve patience and must be given time.
How and when people are categorised depends on, among other factors, the purposes for which
categorisations are made, and who is making them. It is rather artificial, if not impossible, to reduce
people’s identities to their affiliation with a limited number of societal entities.
Categorisations are made regularly and for a range of reasons, both good and bad. For example,
people may be excluded because they belong to a certain category (when they belong to one or
more minority groups), or receive preferential treatment for that same reason (by means of temporarily positive action measures which aim to remedy historic disadvantages or persisting inequalities).
50
People may define their identities in terms of association with a limited number of entities as a strategy to achieve their goals (interest groups), or they are defined by others as part of their own strategies (to protect access to certain professions). At certain times economic categorisation is predominant (when immigrants are defined as workers), and at others, cultural categorisation is seen as
more important (when immigrants are defined as belonging to a religious group).
In diverse societies, freedom of choice, equal treatment, the respect of rights dignity and difference,
tolerance and solidarity are core values, with dialogue and negotiation as invaluable mechanisms for
dialogue and negotiation.
It is important to understand why people are classified, by whom and in what terms, to establish the
necessity and usefulness of such classifications and to identify their unintended effects. It is also necessary to take into account the limits of the data on which classifications are based and to decide
whether they can and should be used. For example, policies which aim to close the gaps in employment and service uptake among various groups in society may benefit from monitoring employees’
and service users’ national and ethnic backgrounds. However, in a changing political climate, such
data could also be used to demonstrate the under-performance of these groups and may lead to
claims that their integration has failed.
Nowadays, it is broadly accepted across the European Union to make a distinction between foreign
and native born, between nationals and non-nationals of first and second generations. For policy
purposes these are helpful distinctions. Immigrants incrementally acquire rights depending on their
length of stay, gaps in societal outcomes can, to a bigger or smaller extent, be explained by someone’s migration history.
Over time migration-related distinctions become less significant as immigrants and their descendants
acquire full citizenship and become active citizens and other more socio-economic and cultural distinctions gain importance. However, related distinctions in terms of ethnicity and skin colour may
remain relevant, in particular for the fight against racism and structural discrimination.
In public debates distinctions are often made on one or more of these characteristics. These nominators often change. Immigrants were once called foreign workers, at other times and places they were
referred to as immigrants or new or ethnic minorities. Nowadays, immigrants and people with an
immigrant background are often defined in religious terms (notably Muslims). This has certainly to
do with the fact that many immigrants are Muslim and are articulating their identity not only but also
in terms of belief. It has to do with the socio-economic position of immigrants in receiving societies
which is linked with the socio-economic position of their country of origin. It has to do with fear for
fundamentalism that is generated by terrorism. It has also to do with the fact that role of religion in
the daily life of people in secular societies is so different from those who come from other cultures.
There are strong arguments for taking a citizen-based approach to defining individuals and adopting
policies that facilitate naturalisation, respect diversity and engage and empower all citizens irrespective of their backgrounds to shape society together.
51
Societies’ commitment to integration is expressed in policies of equal opportunities, equal treatment
and equal access to services. Individuals’ commitment to integration is expressed in their resolve to
develop their skills and competencies necessary for active participation. Progress can be measured in
terms of openness and inclusion, namely the degree to which opportunities are offered and seized to
be part of society.
Societies’ commitment to integration affects the policies and activities of public, private and third
sector organisations, while individuals’ commitment affects the aspirations and responses of all citizens and residents. For each actor, indicators can be developed that measure their efforts and input,
obstacles and facilitators and results and impact.
The purpose of governmental agencies should be (and often is) to create an environment that is conducive to the prosperity and well-being of all. Rule of law principles codified in international treaties,
constitutions and laws define the role of government as a regulator and policymaker. The commitment to integration finds an expression in the promise of and dedication to equal treatment, antidiscrimination and the sharing of opportunities and solidarity, which inspire:
Robust anti-discrimination law and equality proofing of existing general policies and laws
Policies and practices facilitating effective access to employment, education and other public
services (such as health and housing), decision-making and citizenship
Strategies incorporating complementary general and specific integration measures.
The purpose of non-governmental entities is often described in acts establishing their legal status
and in mission statements. The former provide organisations with a proof of existence and licence to
operate as, for example, a commercial firm, a social enterprise, a welfare organisation or a foundation. The latter describe an organisation’s aims, the means to achieve them and the values on which
these goals are based. The commitment to integration finds an expression in the acknowledgement
of society’s diversity, which inspires:
Compliance with anti-discrimination and equality policies and laws
The screening of by-laws and internal regulations on provisions preventing or facilitating the
participation of specific groups of individuals
Programmes, projects and products that are designed to be beneficial to a diverse population
Clear integration targets for specific categories of people within the population.
Governmental and non-governmental organisations whose work is directly related to integration can
(although often need to be convinced to) set general and specific integration targets and work towards their achievement. Both these organisations and those whose main purpose is not directly
related to integration can also promote integration by the way in which they function and operate.
Different as they may be in many respects (including size, purpose and legal status) many organisations are employers as well as consumers and providers of goods and services. By adopting workforce and supplier diversity policies, organisations contribute to the socio-economic integration of all
52
citizens and residents, thus enhancing participation. By tailoring their services to a diverse population
they serve and better equip the population, thus enhancing well-being.
While it is a democratic duty for the public sector to act upon and reflect the diversity of the population it serves, for civil society and the private sector this is more a matter of good citizenship.
By including integration in their employment, procurement and service delivery practices, governments at different levels not only demonstrate their commitment to integration, but also set a powerful example that may attract followers in the private and civil society sectors.
4.3. Policy challenges and responses
Migration and integration are shared responsibilities of governmental and non-governmental actors
operating on different levels of governance. The policy challenges and responses can be captured
under three main headings: adoption and implementation of legislation; mainstreaming; and dialogue and negotiation. Governmental and non-governmental monitoring mechanisms play an important role informing, assessing and as implementing policies.
Adoption and implementation of integration policies and law
Legal integration is a first step in promoting societal integration. It is a key determinant and the basis
upon which expectations and obligations for the integration process are established. In its role as
regulator, governments adopt policies and laws that promote integration, a process that links European and national legislators and provides a facilitating framework for local authorities. Legislation
aims to achieve equal rights, responsibilities and opportunities for all citizens and residents. The immigrant integration related fields usually include family reunion, long-term residence, access to nationality, political participation, labour market mobility, education and anti-discrimination.
Policy-making processes should be inclusive and engage citizens irrespective of their national or ethnic background. Therefore, in addition to general measure to mobilise citizens, specific measures
should be taken to incorporate those with an immigrant background in the political process, which
includes granting them voting rights and facilitating their naturalisation.
Political parties should work to mobilise underrepresented groups among the population, including
immigrants, by responding to their needs and by recruiting them as (board) members, future elected
officials and staff.
Once policies are adopted, they have to be enforced and implemented in a fair and efficient way.
Several factors play a role. They concern the more general principles of good governance and principles for the good administration of justice. The entails the allocation of sufficient resources, the establishment of implementing agencies, the introduction of measures limiting discretionary powers,
the setting up of ombudsmen and equality agencies, the adopting of codes of conducts and regular
policy reviews and audits of policy implementation agencies.
53
Access to justice should be safeguarded, not hindered by excessive fees and unreasonable procedural hurdles and sensitive to the diverse environment. The legal system should provide for effective
legal representation which ensures that attorneys or representatives are competent, adequately
trained for operating in a diverse society. Everyone should have the right to be represented and receive support where necessary. NGOs and specialised bodies should have independent legal standing
where appropriate and alternative dispute resolution should be available.
In times of crisis, integration policies and practices are put under immense pressure from which vulnerable groups, including people with an immigrant background, suffer disproportionally. This has a
negative effect on the quality of democracy which, for the sake of integration, should be reversed.
Mainstreaming
Integration policies are a dynamic mix of general and specific measures promoting the inclusion of
specific groups among the population. Mainstreaming immigrant integration is the incorporation of a
migration and integration perspective in all policy areas at all levels and all stages by the actors normally involved in policymaking and implementation. Specific measures are necessary as long as they
are needed for a significant number of people and for as long as general measures cannot satisfactorily respond to specific needs. Over time, migrant related problems will play a smaller role in the life
of immigrants, if at all. Citizens and residents with and without an immigrant background will benefit
from the same opportunities and cope with similar problems. Over time policies will become adapted
to a diverse population and accommodate different groups within the population.
Mainstreamed policies can only be effective when anti-discrimination and equality policies are well
developed and implemented, providing equal opportunities and access to services to all.
In addition to mainstreamed policies, institutions and organisations of all kinds need to open up for
people with a diverse background. This entails five steps that can summarised as follows and with
each step including strategic planning, programme development and delivery, monitoring, outcome
assessment and evaluation.
o
o
o
o
o
Making the case: Organisations demonstrate awareness of their responsibilities as operating
in a diverse society.
Internalising diversity: Organisations commit resources to design a sustainable diversity programme. They assign managerial responsibilities, adopt an internal training and communication strategy enabling staff to identify areas of activity and resources needed.
Outreach to diverse and underrepresented beneficiaries: Organisations have a diversity programme in place. They have mapped the diverse landscape and underrepresented groups.
They have tested whether the programme can meet needs and have established contacts
with underrepresented groups.
Consolidating the programme: Organisations have in place a solid and widely supported programme which receives the full support from senior management
Improving the programme: Organisations are seen as model of best practice. Their diversity
programme is seen as leading in the field and is recognised by other organisations and organisations of underrepresented persons.
54
Mainstreamed organisations have undergone a process of cultural change, continue to implement
and improve diversity programmes, are an employer and service provider of choice for underrepresented groups and are a model for other organisations.
Dialogue and negotiation
Integration is about ongoing negotiation and dialogue between groups in society which have at the
same time overlapping and competing interests. It is important to identify, recognise and reconcile
these interest.
In areas with high concentrations of persons with low-income who are foreign born, everyday integration challenges are quite different from those in areas with mainly persons with higher income
who are native born. In times of economic downturn and austerity measures, competition between
different groups for employment and public services become more intense. The articulation of interests and resulting conflicts should be taken for what they are and not judged as expressions of discrimination or racism per se.
The divergence of societal outcomes for different groups in society can be the result or reinforce
current differences in opportunities, capacities and power. Policy interventions can aim to reverse
divergence into convergence. Often this is not a zero-sum game or just taking from one group and
giving to another group.
In order to be able to bridge conflicting interests and to share costs and benefits, policy measures
should be assessed prospectively and retrospectively for their effects on various groups in society and
especially on vulnerable groups.
Political parties, trade unions, professional organisations and interests groups are negotiation platforms. Many of them have lost members, power and credibility and they have themselves to deal
with greater competition with other new and emerging platforms. Repositioning and regaining terrain and confidence require sincere and sustained efforts and take considerable time.
Forums for dialogue take many forms: they range from official dialogue mechanisms between social
partners or faith groups to sports clubs, voluntary associations, social and cultural movements and
organisations representing communities, neighbourhoods or cities. These are places where integration is taking place, and has made great progress.
55