ARRIVAL CITIES
BASELINE STUDY
1
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
3
Section 1. State of the Art
5
1.1
1.2
1.2.1
1.2.2
1.2.3
1.2.4
1.2.5
1.2.6
1.2.7
1.2.8
1.3
1.3.1
1.3.2
1.3.3
1.3.4
1.3.5
1.4
1.5
1.6
Introduction
Background information
Definitions
Numbers
Reasons for migration
Trends in international migration
Public attitudes towards immigration
Anti-immigration politics
European Union policy
Migrant integration
Current issues
European Union policy
EU funding
Migrant arrival issues
Migrant integration issues
Issues for ethnic minority populations
Migration projects and resources
Gaps in current knowledge and practice
Annexes
5
6
6
7
8
9
9
11
11
12
14
14
14
15
17
18
19
23
25
2
INTRODUCTION
This is the Baseline Study for the Arrival Cities network. Arrival Cities is an action
planning network within the URBACT III pogramme. URBACT is a European exchange
and learning programme supporting sustainable urban development. The URBACT
programme helps cities to develop pragmatic solutions to common policy challenges by
working together. The Arrival Cities network is focused on the challenge of managing
global migration flows at a local level.
The Arrival Cities network is led by the Municipality of Amadora in Portugal. Amadora’s
partner cities in the network are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Thessaloniki, Greece
Riga, Latvia
Messina, Italy
Roquetas de Mar, Spain
Vantaa, Finland
Dresden, Germany
Val-de-Marne, France
Oldenburg, Germany
Patras, Greece
Migration is a fundamental feature of human society. Throughout human history people
have migrated from place to place, in pursuit of new opportunities or in flight from
danger or hardship. In the modern age, the globalisation of trade, travel and
communications have created new dynamics in international migration. Although global
migration rates have remained relatively stable for many decades, the subject has grown
into one of the most emotive and controversial of contemporary society.
Recent events have propelled migration to the very top of the European political agenda.
Current migration issues are complex and multi-faceted. They include the growing crisis
of refugees seeking safety in Europe, the impacts of this on the frontline regions in
Greece, Italy and Spain, and the political fall out from attempts to agree a common and
humanitarian EU response to refugee arrivals. Other priorities within current migration
issues include: the expressed resentment of some communities towards incoming
migrants, reflected in the electoral success of anti-immigration parties in almost all EU
member states; the emergence of religious extremism with real or putative associations
to acts of terrorism, including the devastating attacks recently seen in Paris; and in
concerns about young people who are leaving their EU homes to join extremist groups
fighting in the Syrian conflict. Current migration issues also include the EU’s challenge of
balancing public, political and media hostility towards further migration with the need to
attract migrant workers to sustain the workforce of Europe’s rapidly ageing population.
Together, the Arrival Cities partners will be working within the URBACT methodological
framework of learning and exchange to improve their local capacity to deal with these
global challenges.
The Arrival Cities network was established in mid-2015 and will be operational through
the two phases of the URBACT Action Planning Network programme. Phase One, the
development phase, took place from September 2015 to March 2016. Phase Two, the
learning and exchange phase, will take place from May 2016 to May 2018.
The purpose of this Baseline Study is to set out the starting point and the context for the
Arrival Cities network’s work in Phase Two. The Baseline Study does this in the following
three sections:
3
Section one sets out the ‘State of the Art’ on global migration. Given the enormity of
this subject, this section provides no more than a snapshot of the EU context in which
the Arrival Cities network is operating. The aim is to provide a common understanding
across the network of the key issues, policies, actions and resources for migration and
integration across the EU and with particular reference to the eight member states where
the Arrival Cities partners are located.
Section two provides a profile of each of the ten cities within the Arrival Cities network.
These profiles summarise the key challenges for migration and integration for each city,
and the policy commitments and local actions which are already in place to address
these. The profiles also introduce the composition and leadership of the URBACT Local
Groups which each partner established during the URBACT development phase and
which will manage the common task of producing a Local Action Plan for migration and
integration by the end of the URBACT period in May 2018.
Section three presents a synthesis of the global and national policy contexts outlined in
section one with the local policy contexts described in section two, to show the common
themes within the Arrival Cities network and where the focus will be for the joint learning
and exchange activities in Phase Two.
This Baseline Study was developed in Phase One of the URBACT period. The method for
developing the Baseline Study included visits to each of the ten partner cities to identify
local challenges and responses to global migration and integration, plus two meetings of
all partners to jointly explore these issues and agree the themes for learning and
exchange in Phase Two. The Baseline Study research took place from September 2015 to
February 2016 and this report was produced in March 2016. The Baseline Study was
written by Liz Mackie, Lead Expert for the Arrival Cities network.
4
Section 1. State of the Art
5
1.1
Introduction
This section of the Baseline Study sets out the ‘state of the art’ on global migration
within the EU context in which the Arrival Cities network will operate. The aim is to
provide a common understanding across the network of the key issues, policies, actions
and resources for migration and migrant integration across the EU.
1.2
Background information
1.2.1 Definitions
According to UNESCO a ‘migrant’ can be defined as "any person who lives temporarily or
permanently in a country where he or she was not born, and has acquired some
significant social ties to this country." (UNESCO, 2015).
Within the European Union context ‘migrants’ are understood to be “non-EU, or third
country nationals who reside legally in the European Union”. (OECD/European Union,
2015)
The main forms of migration are generally distinguished by (a) the motives of the people
who are migrating, and (b) their legal status within the country of arrival. The most
common categorisations of international migrants include:
•
Temporary labour migrants (also known as guest workers, contract workers,
seasonal workers): people who migrate for a limited period of time in order to take
up employment and send money home.
•
Highly skilled and business migrants: people with high level skills who are often
encouraged to migrate to countries where there is a demand for those skills.
•
Irregular migrants (also known as undocumented or illegal migrants): people who
enter a country, usually to seek employment, without the required documents.
•
Forced migrants: this includes refugees, asylum seekers, trafficked people and
others forced to move due to external factors.
•
Family reunification migrants (also known as family reunion or family members):
people who share family ties with people who have already entered an immigration
country. All EU countries recognise the right to family reunification for legal migrants.
•
Return migrants: people who return to their country of origin after a period in
another country.
A separate set of definitions are applied to the descendants of settled migrants. These
are the people who are born in the host country but who are often perceived as different
from the host or majority population, perhaps due to characteristics of their appearance,
culture or religion. These populations are variously referred to as:
•
Second generation migrants;
•
Immigrant-descendants;
•
Native born immigrant offspring;
•
Ethnic, cultural or visible minorities.
6
1.2.2
Numbers
Globally, the total number of international migrants stood at 232 million in 2013,
representing around 3.2% of the 2013 world population.
In 2013, 72 million
international migrants were residing in Europe, representing 9.8% of Europe’s total
population. Four EU member states are in the top ten countries globally with the largest
number of international migrants: Germany (10 million in 2013); UK (8 million), France
(7 million) and Spain (6 million) (United Nations, 2013).
In 2014, 19.6 million people living in the EU were citizens of non-EU countries,
representing 3.9% of the EU-28 population.
The numbers and proportions of migrant populations depend on what measure is used.
Common measures are ‘citizens of non-EU countries’, although this excludes migrants
who are stateless, and people ‘born in a non-member country’, although this can include
EU citizens such as the children of citizens who were living or working abroad at the time
of their birth. The different population figures for Arrival Cities partner countries are
shown in Table 1.1.
Table 1.1: Non-EU migrant populations in Arrival Cities partner countries, 2013
Citizens of a nonmember country
Number
% of
(millions)
population
Finland
0.1
2.2
France
2.7
4.1
Germany
3.9
4.8
Greece
0.6
5.9
Italy
3.4
5.7
Latvia
0.3
14.9
Portugal
0.3
2.9
Spain
2.7
5.8
[Source: Eurostat, 2015]
Born in a nonmember country
Number
% of
(millions) population
0.2
3.5
5.5
8.3
6.0
7.4
0.9
8.4
3.9
6.5
0.2
12.2
0.6
6.1
3.9
8.5
Migration is a dynamic process and numbers are constantly changing. A total of 3.4
million people immigrated to one of the EU-28 member states in 2013, and at least 2.8
million people left an EU member state. The figures for migrant arrivals are more
accurate than those for departures and is the main reason why net migration figures are
difficult to calculate with any accuracy and are often subject to fierce political argument.
1.2.3
Reasons for migration
There are many different reasons why individuals choose or are forced to migrate.
Economic and social theorists group these reasons into ‘push’ factors, such as poverty
and ‘pull’ factors such as economic opportunities. Statistical data on migration into the
EU groups migrants by reason for arrival which are, chiefly: free movement within the
EU, work, family reunification and humanitarian. The largest group of migrants within
the EU is people moving from one EU state to another through freedom of movement.
This is illustrated in Chart I for the Arrival Cities partner countries, while Chart II shows
7
the reasons for migration into the same countries when freedom of movement is
excluded. For non-EU nationals, family reunification is the main source of inward
migration into most of the Arrival Cities countries. The exceptions are Italy and Spain,
where more migrants arrive for work.
Chart 1.1: Permanent inflows to Arrival Cities countries by migration category, 2005 to
2013
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
4
5
3
14
1
2
3
8
29
20
28
34
43
1
0
20
36
27
30
9
30%
43
7
0
7
20
40%
20%
9
5
40
10%
11
27
62
37
32
51
30
0%
EU(13)
Finland
France
Free movement
Work
Germany
Family
Italy
Humanitarian
Portugal
Other
Spain
[Source: adapted from OECD/European Union, 2015 1]
Chart 1.2: Permanent inflows to selected EU countries by category of immigrant
(excluding free movement) 2005 to 2013
100%
90%
7
9
80%
70%
60%
35
5
23
15
13
7
8
20
16
2
3
10
0
48
38
47
51
Italy
Other
Portugal
20
3
0
56
50%
40%
30%
20%
49
57
64
53
41
10%
0%
EU(13)
Finland
France
Family
Work
Germany
Humanitarian
Spain
[Source: adapted from OECD/European Union, 2015]
1.2.4
Trends in international migration
The literature on migration highlights a number of features which are characteristic of
contemporary migration movements. The international trends which are important for
understanding migration in the EU context include the following:
1
The data in Charts 1.2 and 1.2 is only available for OECD EU countries and so does not include all
Arrival Cities partners.
8
•
Migration has become a global trend. More and more countries are significantly
affected by international migration. In 2013, migrants accounted for at least 20% of
the population in 52 countries (United Nations, 2013).
•
The direction of dominant migration flows has changed. For many centuries,
Europeans moved outwards to colonise or settle in foreign lands in Africa, Asia,
Australia and the Americas. In the current period, Europe is a major destination for
global migrants. This reversal means that many countries are in ‘migration transition’
meaning that places from which people traditionally emigrated have become lands of
immigration (Castles, 2014). Within the EU, the southern member states of Spain,
Italy, Portugal and Greece are in migration transition.
•
Migration has become increasingly differentiated. It is no longer the case that a
country experiences one dominant type of migration. Most countries are now
experiencing multiple types and flows of migration with labour migration, family
reunion, refugee movements, permanent settlements, seasonal migrations and
transitory migrations all happening at the same time.
•
Women make up a growing proportion of migrants. Traditional, labour
migration was led by men. But more recently women are also migrating to find work.
Worldwide, 48% of migrants are women.
•
Health worker migration is of growing importance. The OECD International
Migration Outlook for 2015 highlights the growing importance of health worker
migration for OECD countries. The proportion of foreign-born doctors employed in
OECD countries grew to an average of more than 22% by 2010/11, while the
proportion of foreign-born nurses increased to almost 15%. There are continuing
concerns about the impacts of this for countries, which are losing their skilled health
workers.
1.2.5
Public attitudes towards immigration
Within the EU, public attitudes towards immigration tend to be negative, although the
degree of negativity is generally less than that portrayed in the media. There are large
variations in public attitudes between member states, and significant differences
depending on the wording of the questions asked and the level of knowledge about
immigration.
A number of cross-national surveys collect data on attitudes towards immigration into EU
member states, including Eurobarometer, the European Social Survey and the
Transatlantic Trends survey. Unfortunately, not all countries participate in all surveys,
nor are these surveys designed to provide comparable data over time, so it is difficult to
collect accurate data about changing trends in public attitudes towards immigration at
member state level.
Research demonstrates that people greatly over-estimate the number of migrants living
in their country and that negative attitudes diminish when people are given accurate
information about migrant numbers. For example, the Transatlantic Trends survey for
2014 found that 31% of people across 10 EU countries agreed that there were “too
many immigrants in our country” when they were not given information about the actual
percentage of migrants in that country. But for people who were told the percentage of
immigrants only 21% agreed with this statement. The results for selected EU countries
are illustrated in Chart 1.3.
9
Chart 1.3: Agree that there are ‘too many immigrants in our country’ (%)
58
54
44
39
31
27
29
34
31
28
22
29
21
17
15
Greece
UK
Italy
Portugal
Spain
EU
France
Given % of immigrants
Not given % of immigrants
21
Germany
19 17
Sweden
[Source: Transatlantic Trends, 2014]
The European Social Survey for 2002 asked whether “immigrants make this country a
better or worse place to live”. A large majority in all participating countries tended
towards the middle response; that immigrants make the country neither a better nor a
worse place to live. At the extremes, more people believed that immigrants made the
country a worse place to live than a better place to live, particularly in Greece, where
37% believed this, compared with only 5% who believed that immigrants made Greece a
better place to live. At the other end of the scale, in Finland, more people believed that
immigrants made Finland a better place to live (13%) than a worse place to live (5%).
These findings are illustrated in Chart 1.4.
Chart 1.4: Immigrants make this country a worse/better place to live
37
23
18
17
14
9
5
Greece
11
13
13
8
7
8
3
Portugal
France
Italy
WORSE
Germany
Spain
Finland
BETTER
[Source: European Social Survey, 2002]
1.2.6
Anti-immigration politics
The increase in migration into Europe is linked with a resurgence in support for far right
political parties, some of which have achieved considerable success in regional and
10
national elections. Within the last few years, explicitly anti-immigration parties have
secured more than 10% of the votes in general elections in several member states
including Belgium, France and Finland.
Direct links between incitement to racial hatred by political representatives and racist
crimes committed by individuals have been reported by several Member States (ENAR,
2015).
1.2.7
European Union policy
For many years now, the EU has been working towards a shared European agenda on
migration through a series of policy directives, regulation and programmes in the
following broad areas:
•
Agreeing a common policy on asylum
Key actions here include the Dublin regulations on asylum. First established in 1990
and then reviewed through the Dublin II and Dublin III Regulations in 2003 and
2013, the Dublin Regulation aims to prevent asylum seekers from applying for
asylum in more than one member state. The regulation stipulates that the country
where an individual first applies for asylum is responsible for accepting or rejecting
that claim and the applicant may not re-apply in another member state.
•
Preventing irregular migration
Measures here include the Returns Directive 2008, which sets common standards for
the return and removal of irregular migrants, and the Employers Sanctions Directive
2009, which seeks to deter businesses from employing irregular migrants. Part of the
€3.137billion Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (2014 -2020) is for use by
member states to manage the return of irregular migrants to their countries of origin.
•
Ending human trafficking
The EU Strategy towards the Eradication of Trafficking in Human Beings (2012-2016)
sets our actions for the prevention of human trafficking, support for victims and
prosecution of traffickers.
•
Improving regular migration and migrant integration
The EU Common Basic Principles for Integration, adopted in 2004 and reaffirmed in
2014, provide a framework for assisting member states in formulating and applying
policies in this field (see box). The European Agenda for Integration, published in
2011, focuses on local actions to increase economic, social, cultural and political
participation of migrants.
1.2.8
Migrant integration
Various indices have been developed to measure progress on migrant integration by EU
member states on indicators such as labour market participation and educational
achievement. The main indices are further explained in Section Four. All of them provide
comparable data, which show that there are large variations between member states in
terms of migrant integration.
11
On the MIPEX index, where scores for the Arrival Cities countries are illustrated in Chart
1.5, Portugal consistently scores highly overall and has particularly high scores for labour
market access and protections from discrimination. Finland also scores very highly
overall, and particularly highly on political participation opportunities for its migrant
population. At the other end of the scale, Latvia scores poorly in all policy areas and
particularly poorly in terms of access to education, political participation and access to
health services.
Chart 1.5: Arrival Cities partner countries MIPEX scores
74 75
67 69
58
61
60 60
58 59
53 54
46 44
29 31
Portugal
Finland
Germany
Spain
Italy
2010
France
Greece
Latvia
2014
[Source: MIPEX]
12
The Common Basic Principles for Integration
CBP1: Integration is a dynamic, two-way process of mutual accommodation by all
immigrants and residents of member states.
CBP2: Integration implies respect for the basic values of the European Union.
CBP3: Employment is a key part of the integration process and is central to the
participation of immigration, to the contributions immigrants make to the host society,
and to making such contributions visible.
CBP4: Basic knowledge of the host society’s language, history and institutions is
indispensable to integration; enabling immigrants to acquire this basic knowledge is
essential to successful integration.
CBP5: Efforts in education are critical to preparing immigrants, and particularly their
descendants, to be more successful and more active participants in society.
CBP6: Access for immigrants to institutions, as well as to public and private goods and
services, on a basis equal to national citizens and in a non-discriminatory way is a critical
foundation for better integration.
CBP7: Frequent interaction between immigrants and Member State citizens is a
fundamental mechanism for integration. Shared forums, inter-cultural dialogue,
education about immigrants and immigrant cultures, and stimulating living conditions in
urban environments enhance the interactions between immigrants and Member State
citizens.
CBP8: The practice of diverse cultures and religions is guaranteed under the Charter of
Fundamental Rights and must be safeguarded, unless practices conflict with other
inviolable European rights or with national law.
CBP9: The participation of immigrants in the democratic process and in the formulation
of integration policies and measures, especially at the local level, support their
integration.
CBP10: Mainstreaming integration policies and measures in all relevant policy portfolios
and levels of government and public services is an important consideration in public
policy formation and implementation.
CBP11: Developing clear goals, indicators and evaluation mechanisms are necessary to
adjust policy, evaluate progress on integration and to make the exchange of information
more effective.
13
1.3
Current issues
1.3.1
European Union policy
Migration is currently very much at the top of the EU policy agenda. The growing refugee
crisis has highlighted some of the weaknesses in the EU’s migration policies, prompting a
greater focus on policy and resources directed at common actions to address both the
immediate crisis and longer term issues.
Current EU plans are set out in the European Agenda on Migration, adopted in May
2015. The Agenda sets the policy and budgetary framework for actions on migration at
European level. These actions are conceived in two main parts: (1) immediate actions in
response to the refugee crisis and (2) actions for better management of migration. The
immediate actions in the European Agenda on Migration include:
•
Tackling criminal smuggling networks;
•
Relocating newly arriving refugees across the member states;
•
Establishing a resettlement programme for 20,000 people per year across the EU
member states;
•
Measures in countries of origin and transit to prevent people from making hazardous
crossings to Europe;
•
Designating Hotspots for frontline refugee arrivals where EU resources can be swiftly
mobilised to manage asylum processing and return of irregular migrants.
The longer term actions for better migration management are conceived within four
pillars
•
Discouraging irregular migration through measures which include addressing the
root causes of departure from countries of origin;
•
Improved border management, including through strengthening the role and
capacity of the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at
the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (Frontex);
•
Agreeing a common EU policy on asylum;
•
A common policy on legal migration, including measures for effective migrant
integration.
1.3.2 EU funding
The EU’s main funding programme in this policy field is the Asylum, Migration and
Integration Fund. This programme allocates €3.137 billion in the 2014 to 2020
programme period to four objectives:
•
Asylum: strengthening and developing the Common European Asylum System;
•
Legal migration and integration: supporting legal migration to EU states and
promoting the effective integration of non-EU nationals;
•
Return: enhancing fair and effective return strategies which contribute to combating
irregular migration;
14
•
Solidarity: making sure that the EU member states which are most affected by
migration and asylum flows can count on solidarity from other member states.
For more information about the Asylum Migration and Integration Fund, please go to:
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/financing/fundings/migration-asylumborders/asylum-migration-integration-fund/index_en.htm
The European Agenda on Migration makes clear that stronger prioritisation of migrant
integration measures should be supported through the European Regional
Development Fund and European Social Fund. The agenda advocates that ERDF and
ESF programmes should be used support integration initiatives such as language
support, promoting labour market access, inclusive education, inter-cultural exchanges
and awareness campaigns targeted at both host and migrant communities. More
information about ERDF and ESF programmes is available from:
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/funding/social-fund/
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/funding/erdf/
Other EU funding programmes which will support actions for settlement and integration
of migrant populations include:
Urban Innovative Actions. The UIA programme will spend €371million over the 2014
to 2020 programme period to test new approaches to the challenges facing cities. More
information is available from:
http://www.uia-initiative.eu/en/about-us/what-urban-innovative-actions
Rights Equality and Citizenship Programme. The REC programme will spend
€439million in the 2014 to 2020 period on the promotion and protection of human
rights, including actions to promote non discrimination and to combat racism and
xenophobia. More information is available from:
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/grants1/programmes-2014-2020/rec/index_en.htm
1.3.3 Migrant arrival issues
Refugees
Refugees account for a relatively small proportion of all international migrants. In 2013,
the total number of refugees in the world was estimated at 15.7 million, representing
about 7% of all international migrants. Nearly 90% of the world’s refugees live in
developing regions. Europe hosts less than 10% of all global refugees; around 1.5
million people in 2013 (United Nations, 2013).
Throughout 2015, growing numbers of refugees entered Europe, driven by conflict,
violence and poverty. Thousands of people from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and other
countries have been seeking safety and opportunities in Europe. The war in Syria has
been the greatest cause in the mass movement of people. More than 11 million Syrians
have been forced to leave their homes, of which more than 4 million are now refugees in
other countries, including over 2 million who are currently living in Turkey (Echo, 2015).
More than one million refugees crossed into Europe in 2015, a huge increase on the
280,000 people estimated to have arrived in 2014. The great majority travelled by sea,
crossing from Turkey to Greece and from north Africa to Italy. The migrant sea-crossings
into Europe are highly dangerous. It is believed that that more than 3,700 people
15
drowned in 2015 during sea crossings to Europe, the majority (at least 2,800 people)
while crossing from Libya to Italy (BBC, 2016). The flow of refugees has continued to
increase in early 2016, with at least 82,000 people reaching Europe by sea in January
and early February.
From their arrival points in Greece and Italy, refugees have been travelling across
Europe to reach Germany and other north European countries. But the transit routes
established for these journeys are now being blocked as individual countries seeking to
avoid a build up of asylum seekers within their own territory impose tighter border
controls. Border closures have created acute crisis points, including at the northern
Greek border with Macedonia where at least 7,000 people are currently stranded in
freezing conditions without adequate food or shelter. As other European countries have
shut off the transit routes, Greece has been left to cope with the growing crisis as
refugees continue to arrive but are now unable to travel north.
More than one million people claimed asylum in Europe in 2015. The greatest number of
asylum claims were made in Germany (at least 476,000) followed by Hungary (at least
177,100). In relation to population size, Hungary received the highest proportion of
asylum claims at nearly 1,800 claims per 100,000 population. The EU average was 255
claims per 100,000 population. There were huge differences between member states.
The relative proportions for the Arrival Cities partner countries are shown in Chart 1.6.
Chart 1.6: Arrival Cities partner countries: Asylum applications per 100,000 local
population, 2015
591
587
138
Finland
Germany
Italy
110
Greece
100
France
22
17
8
Spain
Latvia
Portugal
[Source: BBC, 2016]
At an emergency meeting in September 2015, EU ministers agreed to an emergency
scheme for the immediate relocation of 66,000 refugees from Italy and Greece to other
member states. The provisional allocations to the Arrival Cities partner countries under
the emergency relocation scheme are shown in Table 1.2.
Table 1.2: Number of refugees for immediate relocation, September 2015
Destination
Finland
France
Germany
Latvia
Portugal
Provisional
number
1,286
12,962
17,036
281
1,642
16
Spain
8,113
[Source: Europa, 2015]
The influx of refugees has been regarded as a crisis for Europe and has highlighted
major political rifts between member states. The Schengen accord has come under
considerable strain as individual member states have imposed unilateral border controls
to slow down or stop the flow of refugees through their own territory. In response, on 4
March 2016, the European Commission announced a package of measures designed to
‘restore a fully functioning Schengen system’ including more support for Greece to
manage the external EU border (European Commission, 2016). In addition, the latest
EU response measures to the migrant crisis include a deal with the Turkish government.
Under the deal, which is not yet agreed, Turkey will halt refugee departures and accept
refugees who will be forcibly returned from EU member states. In return, it is reported
that Turkey will receive more than €3 billion and that Turkish citizens will be able to
travel without visas through the Schengen area from mid-2016 (Al Jazeera, 2016). It
remains to be seen if this, or other EU measures will provide an effective and
humanitarian solution to the refugee crisis.
Unaccompanied minors
Children aged under 18 years old who arrive alone are recognised as the most
vulnerable of all refugees and migrants. More than 24,000 unaccompanied children from
third countries claimed asylum in the EU in 2014, representing around 4% of all asylum
applications. The number of unaccompanied children who arrive in the EU and do not
seek asylum is unknown, but is believed to have been more than 8,500 in 2013
(European Migration Network, 2015). The international aid agency Save the Children
reports that at least 26,000 unaccompanied children arrived in Europe in 2015 (The
Observer, 2016). As the scale of the current refugee crisis escalates, there are growing
concerns for the safety of unaccompanied children tavelling through Europe and for
those who are trapped in makeshift camps at closed borders, prevented from travelling
on to reach relatives in other countries. The EU criminal intelligence agency, Europol,
reports that at least 10,000 unaccompanied refugee children have disappeared since
arriving in Europe. It is feared that many have been taken by criminal gangs (The
Observer, 2016).
Trafficking
More than 30,000 cases of people being trafficked into the EU were recorded between
2012 and 2016. Among trafficking victims, 80% are women and almost 70% are
trafficked for sexual exploitation purposes (European Commission, 2014).
1.3.4 Migrant integration issues
The main challenges for integration of non-EU migrants are generally considered to fall
within the areas of labour market, education and social inclusion.
Key labour market issues are lower employment, higher unemployment and higher
over-qualification rates for non-EU migrants:
•
The employment rate for non- EU migrants fell by 6 percentage points from 2008 to
57% in 2014, compared with the 69% average employment rate across the EU
(MIPEX, 2015).
17
•
Unemployment rates for non-EU migrants are least double those of EU nationals and
up to four times higher in some member states, including Belgium (OECD/European
Union, 2015).
•
The average rate of over-qualification for their job is 44% for non-EU migrants
compared with 20% for EU nationals. Over qualification rates for non-EU migrants
are 80% in Greece and Italy (OECD/European Union, 2015).
The main education challenge is the significant proportion of migrants who lack basic
skills:
•
Almost 20% of third country migrants aged 25-34 have very low levels of education
(no higher than primary schooling), compared with 4% of host country nationals
(OECD/European Union, 2015).
Key social inclusion issues are poverty, housing and discrimination:
•
Non EU migrants within the EU face a higher risk of poverty; 49% are considered at
risk of poverty, an increase of four percentage points since 2008. This is twice the
level of EU citizens (MIPEX, 2015).
•
Non-EU migrants live in poorer housing and are three times less likely to own their
own homes than host-country nationals (OECD/European Union, 2015).
•
More than one in four (27%) people from ethnic minority populations report
experiencing discrimination (MIPEX, 2015). Perceived discrimination is lowest in the
Scandinavian countries and most widespread in Austria and Greece (OECD/European
Union, 2015).
1.3.5
Issues for ethnic minority populations
National and regional policies in most EU member states make no distinction between
minority and majority populations. One result is that information about the experiences
and outcomes for ethnic minority populations within the EU is patchy, as few countries
collect or publish data on this. However, there is now considerable evidence which
shows that some ethnic minority populations experience social and economic challenges
which are similar to, and in some cases worse than, those facing migrant populations.
Issues for ethnic minority populations within the EU include:
•
Residential segregation. In some cities ethnic minority populations are clustered in
distinct geographic locations, often with poor housing and few facilities. However,
this pattern is not found in all member states (OECD/European Union, 2015).
•
Racial discrimination. Young people born in the EU of non-EU migrant parents are
more likely to report being discriminated against than young immigrants
(OECD/European Union, 2015).
•
Racist violence. Levels of racist crime are rising across Europe, although the lack of
systematic recording makes this difficult to track and compare. Racist crime is most
frequently perpetrated against people from Black, Asian and Roma populations and
anti-Semitic crimes have increased in some member states. Victims are often
unwilling to report racist crime and there are notable levels of non-investigation of
racially motivated crimes in some member states (ENAR, 2014).
18
•
Poorer education outcomes. Some ethnic minority groups achieve lower
educational qualifications within the school system. However, the academic
performance of immigrant-descendent children has improved considerably in a small
number of OECD countries, notably Germany and Belgium (OECD/European Union,
2015).
•
Higher unemployment rates. The EU youth unemployment rate for young people
with immigrant parents is almost 50% higher than for those with native born parents
(OECD/European Union, 2015).
•
Higher poverty levels. The proportion of young people from migrant backgrounds
living in poverty is double that of other young people. (OECD/European Union, 2015)
•
Radicalisation, particularly among young people, is now emerging as a major issue
for some ethnic minority populations. There are growing concerns, particularly in
France, about the number of people who are leaving to join militant Islamic groups.
Of the 3,000-plus Europeans who are known to have travelled to Syria and Iraq for
this purpose, almost half have been French (Henley, 2015). Radicalisation is a very
new area of concern where definitions, data and policies are still developing.
1.4
Migration projects and resources
European Migration Network
Established in 2008, the European Migration Network is composed of national contact
points with responsibility for providing up to date and reliable information on migration
to policy makers and the general public.
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-wedo/networks/european_migration_network/index_en.htm
European Website on Integration
This website contains hundreds of case studies and good practice examples submitted
from EU cities and organised within the following themes:
•
Active citizenship,
platforms;
including
political
participation,
volunteering
and
•
Economic participation, including employment, skills and self-employment;
•
Social cohesion, including housing and urban development;
•
Education and culture;
•
Anti-discrimination.
dialogue
The website includes a host of tools for migrant integration including measurement
indicators and evaluation guidance. Also on the website are a series of focused reports
on topical issues which brings together tools, case studies and best practices. These
topical reports are on the following themes:
•
The role of employers in immigrant integration;
19
•
Recognition of qualifications and competencies;
•
Immigrant self-employment and entrepreneurship;
•
Using public procurement as an element of diversity and equality policies.
These topic reports are available from:
https://ec.europa.eu/migrant-integration/analysis/integration-dossiers
Handbook on Integration
The European Commission has produced a Handbook on Integration for policy makers
and practitioners. The Handbook provides practical guidance for promoting migrant
integration through actions in the following areas:
•
Influencing through the media;
•
Raising public awareness;
•
Building capacity for migrant empowerment;
•
Creating dialogue;
•
Active citizenship;
•
Young people, education and the labour market.
The Handbook is available from:
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/elibrary/docs/handbook_integration/docl_12892_168517401_en.pdf
Measuring migrant integration
There are various sets of published data which provide national-level, comparative
measures of migrant integration. These include:
•
The OECD Indicators of Immigrant Integration (OECD/European Union, 2015).
This measures outcomes for immigrants and their children using 27 indicators
organised into five areas: education, employment, social inclusion, civic engagement
and social cohesion. The OECD information covers 21 EU member states plus other
OECD countries. The OECD Indicators of Immigrant Integration report can be
accessed from:
http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/indicators-of-immigrantintegration-2015-settling-in_9789264234024-en
•
The EU migrant integration indicators. In 2010, the EU developed a set of
common of migrant integration indicators, also known as the Zaragoza indicators,
which cover the four areas of employment, education, social inclusion and active
citizenship. Eurostat has published annual updates of these indicators since 2013.
The
EU
migration
integration
indicators
can
be
found
at:
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/employment-and-social-policy/migrantintegration/indicators
20
•
The Migrant Integration Policy Index (MIPEX) measures migrant integration
policies in 38 countries, including the EU28 member states. MIPEX is produced by the
Barcelona Centre for International Affairs and the Migration Policy Group. MIPEX uses
167 indicators of integration across eight policy areas which include labour market,
education, health services, political participation and discrimination. The results give
each country a score on a 100-point scale, enabling comparison between countries
and progress over time. MIPEX scores and detailed data can be found at:
http://www.mipex.eu/
URBACT I: MILE
Managing Migration and Integration at Local Level (MILE) took place from 2007 to 2009
as a Fast Track Pilot Project within the URBACT I programme. Nine cities participated
including Amadora and Vantaa. MILE produced a suite of case studies and good practice
materials within the following themes:
•
Enterprise development and support;
•
Active inclusion for labour market access;
•
Access to key services (education, housing, health);
•
Intercultural dialogue.
URBACT II: OPENCities
The URBACT II OPENCities network took place from 2008 to 2011. OPENCities focused
on identifying what makes a city attractive to international populations and developing
practical strategies for economic and social integration to help cities to attract and retain
international migrants. The nine participating cities included Bilbao and Dusseldorf.
OPENCities produced city-level case studies within the themes of:
•
Leadership and governance;
•
Internationalisation;
•
Integration and inclusion.
This initiative also produced the OPENCities monitor, an on-line tool which enables
participating cities to benchmark their performance across 11 sets of indicators
including ‘barriers of entry’ ‘diversity actions’ and ‘international presence’. The 27 cities
whose benchmarking data is included in the OPENCities monitor include Paris and Berlin.
The
OPENCities
monitor
can
be
accessed
from:
http://www.opencities.eu/web/index.php?monitor_en
URBACT II: PREVENT
PREVENT took place from 2013 to 2015 involving nine partners including Nantes, Catania
and Antwerp. The PREVENT network focused on prevention of early school leaving. The
results include a thematic report on issues and principles for prevention of early school
leaving for young people from ethnic minority and migrant backgrounds.
http://urbact.eu/sites/default/files/preventethnicitymigrantsreportapril2015.pdf
21
EUROCITIES Integrating Cities
Integrating Cities is a partnership between EUROCITIES and the European Commission
to promote local level implementation of the Common Basic Principles on Integration.
The Integrating Cities process has included a series of learning, exchange and peer
review projects for local authorities. Following publication of the EUROCITIES Charter on
Integrating Cities in 2010, the learning and exchange projects have focused on testing
practical measures to support cities to deliver the Charter. The EUROCITIES Integrating
Cities projects include:
•
Diversity and Equality in European Cities (DIVE) (2008 to 2010) which focused on
policies for the promotion of diversity and equality in municipalities and looked at
how cities can effectively implement these policies for diversity management and
equal opportunities. Participating cities included London, Berlin and Rome.
•
The INTI-CITIES (2007-2009) project ‘Benchmarking Integration Governance in
European Cities' used peer reviews to assess integration policies in European cities.
The project measured policies against a benchmark of high standards to deliver
expert-validated, comparative knowledge on local practices. Participating cities
included Helsinki, Genoa and Dusseldorf.
•
Making Integration work in Europe’s cities (MIXITIES) (2010 to 2012) aimed to
deliver the Integrating Cities Charter. Participating cities included Helsinki, Tampere,
Athens, Barcelona, Gent, Florence, Genoa, Munich and Nuremburg. Among other
outputs, MIXITIES produced a set of toolkits to help cities reach the Integrating
Cities Charter standards. These toolkits focus on:
•
o
Introductory and language courses;
o
Anti-discrimination policies;
o
Promoting cultural diversity.
ImpleMentoring (2012-14) used a city to city mentoring approach to work on four
themes within this policy field. Participating cities included Athens, Genoa, Ghent,
Milan, Riga and Tampere. The project produced a set of toolkits focused on:
o
Enhancing public perception on migration and diversity;
o
Managing diversity and promoting equality in cities’ administration and service
provision;
o
Making participation effective in diverse neighbourhoods;
o
Engagement of migrant communities in local policy-making processes and
political participation.
OECD
The OECD publishes a wealth of research papers, case studies and data on migration and
migrant integration. This is a particularly useful resource for information and case
studies on entrepreneurship and labour market integration of migrant and ethnic
minority populations. A 2006 publication, From Immigration to Integration, focuses on
local solutions to global challenges of migration and features transferable initiatives in
labour market integration from cities in Italy, Spain and the UK (OECD, 2006).
22
In November 2015, the OECD issued a call for initiatives from local authorities to share
knowledge of what works in initial reception and longer term integration of refugees. It is
anticipated that the OECD will share information on promising practices in the form of
case studies and recommended actions for local authorities. The scope of the OECD’s call
for initiatives covered the following themes:
•
Integrated services/one stop shops for refugees;
•
Providing housing and access to health services;
•
Fair employment in local job markets;
•
Access to education and training, validation of skills and experience, integrating
children of refugees into local education systems;
•
Business start-up and enterprise support for refugees;
•
Raising public awareness and challenging stereotypes about refugees;
More information can be found at:
http://www.oecd.org/regional/leed/call-local-refugees.htm
1.5
Gaps in current knowledge and practice
During Phase One of the Arrival Cities network (September 2015 to March 2016), the 10
cities in the Arrival Cities network shared their experiences about how municipalities are
currently dealing with migrant arrival and longer term integration. This research
identified a series of gaps in current knowledge and practice, which the Arrival Cities
network will address in Phase Two. Key gaps are in the following areas :
Building community cohesion
The Arrival Cities partners bring a wealth of experience in the design and implementation
of community cohesion and inter-cultural cooperation initiatives. Despite the success of
previous initiatives in this area, community cohesion continues to present major
challenges. Local areas are struggling to manage the tensions of overt public, political
and media hostility to new migrant arrivals; to address widespread concerns about the
impacts of migration on local jobs and services; and to challenge the media narrative
linking young people of migrant origin with radicalisation and potential terrorist threats.
For Arrival Cities, the emphasis within the theme will be on promoting effective and
sustainable approaches, seeking to build and draw on a stronger evidence base about
what works to overcome community tensions and build cohesive communities. Specific
areas of focus will be:
•
Developing community cohesion through inter-cultural activities (including sports and
cultural activities);
•
Promoting rights, responsibilities and shared values;
•
Challenging negative perceptions of new arrivals;
•
Managing community tensions.
Improving co-ordination
23
The Arrival Cities partners recognise the opportunity to participate in the URBACT
programme as a vehicle for improving the local co-ordination of their policies and actions
on migration and integration. The URBACT Local Groups bring together key stakeholders
for exactly this purpose. The limitations of resources for this policy field, including the
often very small number of municipality staff dedicated to this work, mean that
improved co-ordination is essential. Influencing and co-ordinating the work of all
stakeholders is the only way to achieve effective and sustainable impacts with limited
resources. For Arrival Cities, the emphasis here is on joining up services, both within
municipalities, and between the municipality and external stakeholders, including the
very many ordinary citizens who have stepped in as volunteers to help welcome and
support refugees arriving or in transit through the partner cities. Additionally, within this
theme, there will be a strong emphasis on building the capacity of migrant communities
to play an active role in developing policy, designing and implementing interventions to
support migrant integration, ensuring that the migrant communities themselves are
active participants and not just passive recipients of work in this field. Specific areas of
focus within this theme will be:
•
Empowering migrant communities to have a stronger voice/play a more active role in
policy or service delivery;
•
Co-ordinating volunteer support for refugee/migrant integration;
•
Influencing the inclusion of migrant needs in all areas of city council policy and
service delivery.
Economic integration
There have been many initiatives to support economic integration of migrants, including
through training programmes, language classes, employment preparation projects and
job brokerage schemes. As a result, there is a considerable body of knowledge within the
Arrival Cities network and across the EU about good practice and effective approaches.
However, migrant unemployment rates continue to be considerably higher than local
averages, including for second and third generation migrant people. For Arrival Cities,
the emphasis within this theme should be on early interventions: preventing migrant and
migrant background children from falling behind within the school system; helping new
arrivals to find jobs or to re-train for jobs in the local labour market; delivering intensive
language support to new arrivals to ensure that no one is excluded from social or
economic opportunities because they cannot speak the local language. Specific areas of
focus within this theme will be:
•
Preparing new arrivals through education and training;
•
Engaging employers in the design and delivery of employment support programmes;
•
Supporting labour market integration in a fragile/collapsed economy.
24
1.6
ANNEXES
ANNEX ONE. References
Al Jazeera (2016) Refugee Crisis: EU and Turkey reach breakthrough deal, 8 March 2016
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/03/refugee-crisis-eu-turkey-agree-proposal160308021149403.html
BBC (2016) Migrant crisis. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34131911
Castles, Stephen, Hein De Hass and Mark J Miller (2014). The Age of Migration. Fifth
Edition. Palgrave Macmillan. UK.
Echo (2015) Syria Crisis: Echo Factsheet, November 2015, European Commission
Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection.
http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/syria_en.pdf
ENAR (2015) Racist Crime in Europe: ENAR Shadow Report 2013-2014.
http://www.enar-eu.org/IMG/pdf/shadowreport_2013-14_en_final_lowres-2.pdf
European Commission (2016) European Commission press release 4 March 2016
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-585_en.htm
European Commission (2015) Refugee crisis Q & A on emergency relocation. European
Commission Press Release Database, 22 September 2015. http://europa.eu/rapid/pressrelease_MEMO-15-5698_en.htm
European Commission (2014) Mid-term report on the implementation of the EU strategy
towards the eradication of trafficking in human beings. COM 2014, 635 final.
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-is-new/news/news/docs/20141017_midterm_report_on_the_2012-2016_eu_strategy_on_trafficking_in_human_beings_en.pdf
European Migration Network (2015) Policies, practices and data on unaccompanied
minors in the EU member states and Norway. Synthesis report for the EMN Focused
Study 2014.
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-wedo/networks/european_migration_network/reports/docs/emnstudies/emn_study_policies_practices_and_data_on_unaccompanied_minors_in_the_eu_
member_states_and_norway_synthesis_report_final_eu_2015.pdf
European Social Survey http://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/about/index.html
Eurostat (2015) Migration and migrant population statistics.
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statisticsexplained/index.php/Migration_and_migrant_population_statistics
Henley, John (2015) ‘Figures show France sees more citizens go to militant Islam than
any EU country’. The Guardian, 14 November 2015.
MIPEX (2015) Huddleston, Thomas; Bilgili, Ozge; Joki. Anne-Linde and Vankova, Zvezda.
Migration Integration Policy Index. Barcelona/Brussels; CIDOB and MPG www.mipex.eu
The Observer (2016) 10,000 refugee children are missing says Europol, 30 January
2016. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/30/fears-for-missing-child-refugees
25
OECD (2006) From Immigration to Integration: Local Solutions to a Global Challenge.
http://www.oecd.org/cfe/leed/fromimmigrationtointegrationlocalsolutionstoaglobalchalle
nge.htm
OECD/European Union (2015) Indicators of Immigrant Integration 2015: Settling In.
OECD Publishing. Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264234024-en
Transatlantic Trends (2014) Transatlantic Trends: Mobility, Migration and Integration.
http://trends.gmfus.org/transatlantic-trends/
UNESCO (2015) http://www.unesco.org/most/migration/glossary_migrants.htm
United Nations (2013) Population Facts No 2013/2, September 2013. Department of
Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. www.unpopulation.org
26