Incorporación/integración de los inmigrantes

Recent developments in migration studies have shown how important it is to consider multiple actors, both at origin and destination, in studying migrants’ integration processes. In light of these developments, the INTERACT survey provides a new tool to research migrant integration. Its novelty lies in offering a cross-national approach to civil society organisations at both destination and origin. These organisations are taken as actors relevant for migrant integration in EU destination countries. Upon completion the survey gathered over 900 responses from organisations working predominantly (but not only) in employment, education, language and social relations. These organisations had different levels of reach, but their voices give us a better understanding of how they support migrants in their efforts to integrate in the EU. Although the exploratory character of the survey does not allow for generalisations about all civil society organisations, it sheds light on how these actors’ activities affect migrant integration between origin and destination, and how organisations perceive states of origin and their policies in the context of the day-to-day reality of migrant incorporation in the receiving society. In this methodological paper, we will present the survey’s rationale and structure, before moving onto a description of fieldwork and the challenges faced there. This paper will thus contribute to the multisite cross-national survey literature and map out migrant civil society organisations.

The work here is of both a theoretical and an applied character. The authors pay particular attention to understanding what the integration of migrants means and how it corresponds to the terms assimilation and adaptation. They also offer a classification of complete and partial integration. For Russia, the paper retraces how the disregard of migrant integration in the 1990s and the first half of the 2000s was gradually replaced – after a delay – by an understanding that these were closely interrelated spheres of State activities. This was particularly true for a country like Russia, which annually receives millions of migrants, both for permanent and temporary stays. The experience of Russia clearly demonstrates that the dissociation of the State from this important sphere of internal policy leads to ethnic tension, erosion of tolerance in society, alienation of migrants from Russian society, self-isolation, and open conflicts between migrants and local residents. Therefore, now that the integration of migrants has been understood to be an important issue in Russia, the elaboration and realization of the policy of integration of migrants is complicated by an extremely unfavorable atmosphere of xenophobia and a politically-loaded perception of migration. The Russian policy of migrant integration is evaluated in respect of the most privileged category of immigrants: Russian “compatriots”. The adaptation policy of temporary labour migrants is analyzed in the context of the Russian State’s 2012 initiatives. The authors also argue out the integration and the anti-integration potential of ethnic diasporas when – as in present-day Russia – the infrastructure for the admission and integration of migrants has not been properly developed.

Glasgow Caledonian University leads the EU AMIF (Asylum and Migrant Integration Fund) funded two-year project VOLPOWER: Enhancing Community Building and Social Integration through Dialogue and Collaboration amongst Young Europeans and Third Country Nationals. The project team consists of Professor Umut Korkut as coordinator, and Dr Fiona Reid and Dr Fiona Skillen as Principal Investigators as well as Marcus Nicolson as the Project Manager. GCU leads a consortium composed of Erasmus University Rotterdam, Austrian Academy of Sciences – Institute for Urban and Regional Research, EURAC-Institute for Minority Rights Bolzano, Zavod APIS Slovenia, SOS Malta, and IRMO Croatia. Volpower explores how youth volunteering in sports and arts activities can serve as a mechanism for social integration for youth. Sport and arts activities by their very nature demand high levels of interaction between participants. We believe that this interaction could help to foster, and facilitate community building and mutual understanding. In particular, we will be working with EU Nationals and Third Country Nationals in order to understand the challenges TCN’s face when settling within a new community. We hope that our research will demonstrate the power that volunteering can have in terms of empowering individuals within their local communities. The project will examine these ideas by working with volunteers in sport and arts organisations from across Europe. The main aims of this project are to initiate youth volunteering in sport and arts related activities amongst EU and TCNs in order to explore the effects which volunteering has on an individual’s or communities’ sense of social integration. The specific project objectives are summarised as follows: To increase integration of TCN volunteers into local communities through sport and arts volunteering, exposing TCNs to informal and formal institutions within their localities. To improve partnership between EUN and TCN volunteers through sports and arts volunteering. To provide participants with intercultural skills as well as life and leadership skills. 
 To generate communication between the local communities and volunteers of TCN and EUN backgrounds. To foreground the value of volunteering for community building through developing partnerships between the sports and arts volunteers and community stakeholders. To foster common grounds and goals for sustainable partnerships through dialogue, collaboration, and resource sharing enhanced by sports and arts volunteering. To assess practices for the inclusion of TCNs at the micro-community level via sports and arts and how participation in these activities forge intercultural dialogue and processes of integration. To introduce digital tools in illustrating good practice in volunteering. 


Amidst heated debates on immigration and “migrant integration”, the European Union becomes an increasingly relevant actor, where important resources are earmarked for the implementation of civic integration measures, as well as for producing “scientific evidence” to guide policy. Simultaneously, a prolific scholarship attempts to understand, measure and compare how and whether immigrants are “integrated into society”, often in the effort to remain “policy-relevant”. This study joins other critical works that draw attention to the ways “integration” is debated, legislated, conceptualized, monitored, evaluated, and ultimately, normalized as a mode of governance. Situated at the interstices of migration studies, European studies, and the social studies of science, the dissertation examines the role of scientific research, EU policy, and research-policy knowledge infrastructures in shaping the “immigrant integration” paradigm in Europe. Interested primarily in integrationism as a technique of power, I take a decolonial and genealogical approach that situates integrationist discourses within wider and intersecting systems of hierarchy. The main argument is that the politics of integration research and the scientific claims in “evidence-based” policy intersect to produce “migrant integration” as the hegemonic paradigm in governing migration-related diversity in Europe. Through discourse analysis of research publications, policy documents, media statements, as well as a virtual ethnography of the EU’s science-for-policy community, I examine how integration comes to be seen simultaneously as a political problem and an object of scientific fascination, how is integration regulated at supranational level and through science-policy collaboration, and what are the power effects of integrationism, as a rationality of governance, on its target subjects. Ultimately, I argue, the practices of regulating, governing, measuring, theorizing and monitoring the integration of immigrants are shaped by power relations linked to the preservation of European liberal subjecthood against rapid demographic, social, political, and environmental shifts.

"Theoretical background and objectives This project explores how policies regarding immigrant rights and welfare state regimes have affected the socio-economic integration of immigrants. Most of the literature on immigrant integration assumes that the granting of easy access of immigrants to citizenship rights and government recognition and support for cultural diversity promote the socio-economic integration of immigrants. At the same time, existing work (e.g., Borjas, van Tubergen) has shown that immigrants with low human capital resources tend to migrate preferably to countries with equal income distributions and extensive social security protection. This raises the question whether immigrant integration policies that grant easy access to citizenship rights, and thus also full access to welfare state rights, might have the unintended consequence that they produce a high rate of dependence of immigrants on welfare state arrangements and attendant socio-economic marginalisation in other domains. If integration policies in addition do not demand cultural assimilation (e.g., in the domain of language) the risk of lower-skilled immigrants to become dependent on welfare benefits may further increase. This hypothesis of an interaction effect between integration policies and welfare state regimes is confronted with cross-national data on labour market participation, residential segregation, and imprisonment of immigrants. Where possible, these comparisons are controlled for cross-national differences in the composition of immigrant populations by drawing on comparative data for particular ethnic groups. The analysis includes eight West European countries that have turned into immigration countries at roughly the same time in the 1960s and early 1970s, where institutions have therefore had several decades to affect integration outcomes. They vary both strongly regarding integration policies (including the highest, Sweden, and the second lowest scoring country, Austria, in the 2007 Migrant Integration Policy Index) and regarding welfare state regimes (with Sweden and the United Kingdom at the extremes). Research design, data and methodology The study relies on various indicators of immigrant rights, prevalent typologies and indicators of welfare state regimes, and data from the European Labour Force Survey, International Prison Statistics, as well as results from a large number of previous studies on immigrants' labour market participation, residential segregation and imprisonment. To control for composition effects, the labour market data refer to immigrants from non-EU countries, and for specific country contrasts specific ethnic groups (Turks and ex-Yugoslavs). Residential segregation data refer to a few dozen European cities, partly referring to specific ethnic groups (e.g., Turks, Maghrebians, Caribbeans, Pakistani) and partly to more general categories (Muslims, foreigners, immigrants). Findings Across the three domains of socio-economic integration a consistent cross-national patterns is found (with the exception of residential segregation in the United Kingdom) in which the gap or the degree of segregation between immigrants and the native population is largest in the countries that combine easy access to citizenship rights and a large degree of accommodation of cultural differences with a relatively encompassing and generous welfare state (Sweden, the Netherlands, Belgium). Both the United Kingdom, which combines inclusive integration policies with low welfare state provision levels, and the three Germanophone countries (Germany, Austria, Switzerland), which combine restrictive policies with – at least in the German and Austrian cases – moderately strong welfare states, show relatively small gaps between immigrants and natives. These findings are confirmed for contrast comparisons for specific ethnic groups. For instance, compared to the native population, Turks in the Netherlands have much lower rates of labour market participation than German Turks, and similarly ex-Yugoslavs in Austria perform much better than those in Sweden. Because the results are mostly based on aggregate data – although some of the studies that are used do control for individual-level variables – they need to be further tested by taking individual and local context data more systematically into account. This will be one of the aims of the analyses in the context of project 6.3 further below."

In order to achieve better comparability among EU Member States, the 2010 Zaragoza declaration agreed on a set of common indicators which were further developed in the study Indicators of immigrant integration — a pilot study of 2011. Additional indicators were proposed by the report Using EU Indicators of Immigrant Integration — final report prepared for DG Migration and Home Affairs of 2013, with the objective of boosting the monitoring and assessment of the situation of migrants, along with the relative outcomes of integration policies. The following statistics from education are related to migration: Table codeDescription edat_lfs_9911Population by educational attainment level, sex, age and citizenship (%) edat_lfs_9912Population by educational attainment level, sex, age and country of birth (%) edat_lfse_01Early leavers from education and training by sex and citizenship edat_lfse_02Early leavers from education and training by sex and country of birth edat_lfse_23Young people neither in employment nor in education and training by sex, age and citizenship (NEET rates) edat_lfse_28Young people neither in employment nor in education and training by sex, age and country of birth (NEET rates) trng_lfs_12Participation rate in education and training (last 4 weeks) by sex, age and citizenship trng_lfs_13Participation rate in education and training (last 4 weeks) by sex, age and country of birth

This report examines the issue of integration of migrants in the Republic of Belarus. In the framework of migration policy strategy of the Republic of Belarus protection of migrants' rights and their social integration represent important tasks which are set forth in the Concept of National Security of the Belarusian state, and finding solutions to them implies development of special integration mechanisms. This research explores (1) the countries are in the focus of interest of migrant integration policy, in the context of all countries from which migrants come to Belarus, (2) the basic groups of migrants and their adaptive capabilities, (3) the typical features of migration processes in Belarus that shape and define the mechanisms of migrants' integration, as stipulated in the official documents of the Republic of Belarus, and applied in practice, (4) the strengths and weaknesses of Belarusian migrant integration policy.

In the European Union context, indicators have become increasingly important due to growing political commitment on integration policies at all levels of governance. In June 2010, EU Member States approved a number of European indicators of migrant integration, based on the EU2020 indicators and the EU’s Common Basic Principles, focusing on the core areas of employment, social inclusion, education, and active citizenship. The Commission’s July 2011 European Agenda for Integration views these indicators as a way to systematically monitor the integration situation and the EU2020 targets, enhance policy coordination, and make recommendations in dialogue with Member States. ICMPD together with the Migration Policy Group will produce an assessment report to confirm the relevance of current indicators for integration and whether current data sources are robust enough to calculate them. Objectives of the project • Analyse to what extent and whether the different integration realities in various EU Member States are the result of integration and migration policies, immigrant populations, and general contexts and policies. • Strengthen how European indicators of migrant integration capture and monitor the specific outcomes of integration policies. • Improve the way in which policy actors evaluate the effectiveness of integration policies, appreciate the other factors that shape the integration process, engage in the data and policy implications of indicators and mainstream integration into European cooperation and targets, including the EU2020 Strategy. Outcomes • Analysis reports (to explain the data behind the European indicators, test the effectiveness of certain migration and integration policies, and measure the impact of other policies). • Assessment report (to confirm the relevance of current indicators for integration and whether current data sources are robust enough to calculate them. ICMPD and the Migration Policy Group will propose additional indicators and data sources based on the chosen European indicators, the EU2020 strategy, and active citizenship). • Monitoring proposal (to outline how the European Commission can use the current and proposed indicators to monitor the results of integration policies). • Three expert seminars during the course of 2012 on the subjects of Employment, Education, and Social Inclusion and Active Citizenship.

The Migrant Integration Policy Index (MIPEX) is a unique tool which measures policies to integrate migrants. The MIPEX aims to address this by providing a comprehensive tool which can be used to assess, compare and improve integration policy. The index is a useful tool to evaluate and compare what governments are doing to promote the integration of migrants in all the countries analysed. The tool allows you to dig deep into the multiple factors that influence the integration of migrants into society and allows you to use the full MIPEX results to analyse and assess past and future changes in policy. The MIPEX includes 38 countries in order to provide a view of integration policies across a broad range of differing environments. Countries included are all EU Member States, Australia, Canada, Iceland, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, Turkey and the USA. 167 policy indicators have been developed to create a rich, multi-dimensional picture of migrants’ opportunities to participate in society. MIPEX addresses 8 policy areas of integration: Labour Market Mobility, Family Reunion, Education, Political Participation, Long-term Residence, Access to Nationality, Anti-discrimination and Health. Thanks to the relevance and rigor of its indicators, the MIPEX has been recognised as a common quick reference guide across Europe. Policymakers, NGOs, researchers, and European and international institutions are using its data not only to understand and compare national integration policies, but also to improve standards for equal treatment.

The Migrant Integration Policy Index (MIPEX) is a useful tool that measures policies to integrate migrants in all EU Member States, Australia, Canada, Iceland, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, Turkey and the USA. 167 policy indicators have been developed to create a rich, multi-dimensional picture of migrants’ opportunities to participate in society. The index is a tool to evaluate and compare what governments are doing to promote the integration of migrants in the countries analysed.

This project proposal aims to analyse the existing scope for European cities to develop policies for migrant integration in multi-level governance systems. The role of lower tiers of governance, and that of cities in particular, is receiving growing attention from both researchers and policy-makers as the potential of cities to influence social inclusion and the weakening force of national citizenship models are recognised. Much-needed, systematic comparisons of local approaches to migrant integration remain scarce. Addressing this issue, this project will look at the scope left to the local level to develop integration policies within multi-level governance frameworks, and explore the convergence of local approaches in Europe. It will do so by 1) mapping policy developments regarding the multi-level governance of migrant integration in the EU; 2) conducting an in-depth comparison of integration policy approaches of pairs of cities in three different national contexts; and 3) analysing the degree of convergence of integration policies in cities towards measures for fostering local forms of citizenship in Europe. The project uses a transdisciplinary (or intersectoral) approach by closely involving an existing working group of integration policy makers from big European cities in the research process.

The purpose of the project LOMIGRAS is two fold: (a) to investigate the local goverment's involment in the process of migrants' integration and the extent to which it promotes, or conversely hinders their integration, and (b) to develop a usable interactive tool to monitor and assess the effects of local goverment in promoting migrant integration. The starting assumption of this research is that local goverment institutions have a profound role in promoting, or conversely hindering, immigrants' integration, regardless of whether they explicity assigned competences in this area. The research program is implemented in 2015-2016, and it has a 12-month duration. It is funded by the "Diversity, inequalities and social inclusion" program of the EEA Financial Mechanism 2009-2014 operated by the General Secretariat for Research and Technology of Greece.

Despite the polarization in public and policy debates generated by the post-2014 fluxes of refugees, asylum applicants and migrants, European countries need to work out an evidence-based way to deal with migration and asylum rather than a prejudice-based one. The proposed project, SIRIUS, builds on a multi-dimensional conceptual framework in which host country or political-institutional, societal and individual-related conditions function either as enablers or as barriers to migrants’, refugees’ and asylum seekers’ integration via the labour market. SIRIUS has three main objectives: A descriptive objective: To provide systematic evidence on post-2014 migrants, refugees and asylum applicants especially women and young people and their potential for labour market employment and, more broadly, social integration. An explanatory objective: To advance knowledge on the complexity of labour market integration for post-2014 migrants, refugees and asylum applicants, and to explore their integration potential by looking into their spatial distribution (in relation to the distribution of labour demand across the labour market), while taking into account labour market characteristics and needs in different country and socio-economic contexts. A prescriptive objective: To advance a theoretical framework for an inclusive integration agenda, outlining an optimal mix of policy pathways for labour market integration including concrete steps that Member States and other European countries along with the EU can take to ensure that migrant-integration policies and the broader system of workforce-development, training, and employment programmes support new arrivals’ access to decent work opportunities and working conditions. SIRIUS has a mixed methods approach and innovative dissemination plan involving online priority action networks, film essays, festival, job fair and an applied game along with scientific and policy dialogue workshops and conferences.

The paper assesses opportunities and develops proposals for the integration of immigrants, as well as the adaptation of re-emigrants – long-term Ukrainian labour migrants returning home. An analysis of immigration to Ukraine has been carried out on the basis of: the 2001 population census; the current registering of migration processes; and also administrative sources of information. These sources include material from the Ministry of the Interior of Ukraine, the State Migration Service of Ukraine, the State Employment Service of the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine, the Ministry of Education and Science, Youth and Sports of Ukraine, as well as data from special sampling surveys, including those held under the author’s guidance. The paper considers three specific migration groups in Ukraine: ‘non-traditional’ immigrants; the ‘Soviet Diaspora’; and long-term labour emigrants. An assessment has been made of ‘non-traditional’ immigrants in Ukraine and the prospects for their integration. A bilateral approach was here employed – the comparison of opinions from Ukrainian citizens and from foreigners on the basis of student youth surveys (including foreign students). It has been demonstrated that the frequency of contacts between immigrants and the receiving society is an important integration mechanism. An assessment has been made of the conditions of long-term Ukrainian migrants in recipient countries with the conclusion that these conditions are not significantly different from the conditions of short- and medium-term migrants. Particular attention has been paid to the ‘Soviet Diaspora,’ thus far practically untouched by scholarly publications in Ukraine. It is shown that the Soviet Diaspora in Ukraine (and other former USSR republics) has certain features sharply distinguishing it from ‘diaspora’ in the classical sense. An attempt has been made to define the term, develop the criteria to limit the reference groups and to assess the dimensions of the Soviet Diaspora. An analysis of current Ukrainian immigration policies has been given. Policy recommendations for perfecting Ukrainian state policy in the field of immigration, immigrants’ integration and the reintegration of returning long-term Ukrainian labour migrants have been formulated as well.

This project analyses how, why and to what effect governments at the EU, national and local level mainstream their migrant integration policies. It aims to promote a learning process in terms of policy coordination, practices and outcomes in the governance of migrant integration. It asks the central question ‘What are the obstacles and opportunities that mainstreaming generates in terms of migrant integration policies and outcomes?’. It aims to: UNDERSTAND WHY AND WHEN POLICIES ARE MAINSTREAMED: What is the policy rationale behind mainstreaming, and under what conditions does mainstreaming occur? ENHANCE UNDERSTANDING OF AND EXCHANGE LESSONS ON HOW TO MAINSTREAM POLICIES: What does it mean in terms of policy coordination? What does it mean in terms of policy practices? UNDERSTAND AND IMPROVE THE CONSEQUENCES OF MAINSTREAMING: What integration outcomes can be associated with mainstreaming? What are the consequences for specific (vulnerable) groups and for policy coordination? Mainstreaming is one of the key trends in the governance of integration that is taking place throughout Europe. The rationale is that adapting mainstream services to address the needs of the entire diverse population — including, but not limited to, immigrants – has the potential to build a more inclusive society and improve integration outcomes. Mainstream programmes may also garner more political and public support than programs targeted at specific groups, and respond to the challenges faced by government agencies with constrained financial resources. In this study we will look at various sorts of obstacles and opportunities that may occur in mainstreaming, in terms of the rationale of mainstreaming, how it is put into practice as well as its consequences in terms of integration outcomes. As migrant integration is a strongly multi-dimensional issue, we will focus on two specific areas of migrant integration policies: education and social cohesion The focus on these two areas enables an an in-depth analysis of how mainstreaming efforts have resorted to specific effects in terms of policy coordination, practices and outcomes. Furthermore, the project promotes the exchange of knowledge and experiences by bringing together policymakers from different countries and government levels. We conceive of exchange of knowledge and experiences as a continuous process throughout the project. This on-going exchange will promote mutual learning between stakeholders as well as mutual learning between the researchers and the stakeholders. Cases This project explores how the governance and effectiveness of integration measures is affected by mainstreaming at the EU, national and local level. Mainstreaming means embedding integration into generic policies for the entire population. Besides an EU case, five country cases are selected: the UK, Spain, the Netherlands, France and Poland. These are countries with different governance structures in the domain of integration, ranging from the highly centralized in France, to moderately decentralized in the Netherlands and strongly devolved in the UK. In addition, Spain and Poland as new immigration countries are developing migrant integration policies against a very different background, with many local (and regional) initiatives. The country cases involve an analysis of national policies and policies in two cities (one major and one medium-sized city). – EU level – The Netherlands (Rotterdam and Amsterdam) – The UK (London-Southwark and Bristol) – France (Lyon and Saint Denis) – Spain (Madrid and Barcelona) – Poland (Warsaw and Poznan)

"Ziel des Kooperationsprojektes „RADIKAL“ ist das Verständnis des Zusammenhangs von Migration, Religion und Radikalisierung. Zentral ist dabei die Analyse der Beziehung zwischen Migrationserfahrungen, Akkulturationsprozessen, Diskriminierungswahrnehmungen und -erfahrungen und der Bildung von politischen wie religiösen Überzeugungen, vor allem extremistischer Einstellungen. Im Fokus des Projektes stehen muslimische junge Menschen, die sich radikalisieren bzw. radikalisiert haben. Bestehende Theorien und Daten werden zu Modellen zum kausalen Zusammenhang der Kernkonzepte entwickelt und anhand eines Mixed-Methods-Designs überprüft. Dadurch wird es möglich sein, empirisch fundiert Modelle zu identifizieren, die eine evidenzbasierte Grundlage für die Prävention und Intervention bieten. Die Kernfrage des Kooperationsprojektes „RADIKAL“ ist die Frage nach dem Zusammenhang von Migration, Religion und Radikalisierung. Die theoretische wie die empirische Analyse zielt dabei auf das Verständnis des Zusammenhangs von Migrationserfahrungen, Akkulturationsprozessen, Diskriminierungswahrnehmungen und -erfahrungen und der Bildung von politischen wie religiösen Überzeugungen, hier v.a. extremistischer Einstellungen. Migrationsprozesse werden dabei vor allem auch als Akkulturationsprozesse verstanden, in denen Menschen soziale, politische und religiöse Überzeugungen auf der Grundlage ihrer Erfahrungen während der Akkulturation entwickeln. Es wird angenommen, dass gerade hier extremistische, fundamentalistische und polarisierte (eben radikalisierte) Überzeugungen entstehen können. Auf der Grundlage bestehender Theorien und Daten entwickelt das Projekt zunächst theoretische Modelle zum kausalen Zusammenhang der Kernkonzepte. Diese werden dann anhand einer Kombination von quantitativen wie qualitativen Methoden empirisch untersucht. Dies ermöglicht es, mithilfe der Ergebnisse des Projekts empirisch fundierte Modelle zu identifizieren, die eine evidenzbasierte Grundlage für die Prävention und Intervention bieten. Im Fokus des Projektes stehen muslimische junge Menschen, die sich radikalisieren bzw. radikalisiert haben; sei es in besonders schwerer Weise (Terror) oder weniger schwer (kognitive wie emotionale Nähe zu extremistischen wie fundamentalistischen Gruppen oder Weltanschauungen). Die Aufarbeitung der Analyse soll zudem einen Vergleich mit anderen Phänomenbereichen ermöglichen. Das Projekt besteht aus zwei Phasen: In der ersten Phase wird unabhängig von späteren Einzelfallanalysen kompletter Biografien ein Kodierschema zu den zentralen Konzepten (Migration, Integration/Akkulturation, Diskriminierung, religiöse Bindung und Orientierung) erstellt, um vorhandene und neue Daten zu den Biografien von jungen Menschen zu integrieren. In der zweiten Phase sollen im Besonderen migrations- und integrationsbedingte Risikofaktoren mit Blick auf Radikalisierung und die Bindung an extreme Gruppen herausgearbeitet werden. Auf der Grundlage der Daten der ersten Phase werden dazu hoch radikalisierte Personen mit besonders fundamentalistischer Orientierung identifiziert (qualitative Fallrekonstruktion). Anhand dieser Daten wird eine quantitative Überprüfung der Bedeutung bestimmter Risiko- und Erklärungsfaktoren vorgenommen. Die Ergebnisse von Experteninterviews mit staatlichen und zivilgesellschaftlichen Stakeholdern aus den Bereichen Religion, Sicherheit, Jugendarbeit, Prävention und Deradikalisierung u.a. sollen die Evaluierung der Projekterkenntnisse erweitern und als Grundlage zur Entwicklung von gemeinsamen Strategien der sensiblen Prävention, wie auch neuer Wege der Jugendarbeit dienen."

This paper advocates the idea that the European Union’s “two way process” approach to migration and integration should boldly be replaced by the notion of a “three way” approach for the better incorporation of immigrants in the EU. The first part of the paper outlines the emergence of a “common” immigration and integration policy at the EU level, its main features and in particular the role of the European Commission in shaping this policy. The second part critically examines the place that is attributed to sending countries in efforts to draw up a “common” immigration and integration policy. Particular emphasis is laid on the ways the EU defines and frames the place and function of “sending countries” in its immigration policy. In the last section, the role that sending countries could play in the context of a “three way” approach to integration is explored against the background of the Turkish experience. In this section, the author makes various concrete suggestions in support of a “three way” approach whose aim is to assist Turkish immigrants’ integration into mainstream life within the EU.