Research
Database

Despite a huge public and academic interest in post EU enlargement migrations of Polish citizens who by moving to WesternEurope take advantage of the principle of freedom of movement, there has been an almost complete silence on how these newmigration opportunities affect the Polish Roma populations. But according to Roma organizations own estimates there has been averitable exodus with sometimes over 90% of local Roma communities emigrating or otherwise engaging in internationalmobility. In that sense, scholarly and public silence on the matter is striking. This research aims at shedding some light onmigratory movements of that group taking an anthropological perspective and using qualitative methods – participant observation,interviews and spending considerable amount of time with migrating Roma, their friends and family who stay in Poland, as wellas those Polish Roma who live in Great Britain. To what extent their migrations differ from the overall patterns of migrations ofnon-Roma Polish populations? And how did transnational networks between Roma communities in Poland and Great Britaindeveloped? And what happens once they are there, how do they operate and make sense of living in global city like London orsmall English town? How the experience of their members living in Britain affects Roma communities back in Poland? These arethe questions this research aims at answering. By using so called multi-sited ethnography it will analyse Polish Roma patterns ofmigrations, the ways with which international EU mobility impacts on some aspects of their culture and what happens to PolishRoma’s sense of identity once no longer in Poland.

Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Integration von Flüchtlingen sind zu einer Kernfrage der Politik in Deutschland und Europa geworden. Die aktuellen Expertengespräche und die politischen Debatten konzentrieren sich vor allem auf die soziale und wirtschaftliche Seite der Integration, während das Spektrum der bürgerlichen und politischen Partizipation deutlich weniger präsent ist. Um einer Marginalisierung von Flüchtlingen schon frühzeitig entgegenzuwirken und bürgerliche und politische Partizipation zu berücksichtigen, unterstützt die Robert Bosch Stiftung das Vorhaben vom "International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance" (IDEA). Das Internationale IDEA führt ein globales Forschungsprojekt über Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der politischen Partizipation von Geflüchteten durch.

The European challenges in the field of migration have an impact on society, since the division between them opposed to newcomers and welcoming them has been continuously increasing. The project addresses the perceptions of the Belgian and European population about refugees/migrants and vice versa as well as their interactions with the policy agenda of asylum and migration with a European comparative perspective and a specific focus on Belgium. As Europe face important migratory challenges and political difficulties we have seen an increase of the public opinion’s polarisation regarding asylum and refugees, it is important to address this question. Including teams from our project will analyse this polarisation and its links to policies, as it is necessary for a better understanding of the current debate on migration in Europe and Belgium. The 2015 asylum crisis will be considered as indicative of the general European and Belgian citizens’ reactions about migration. The focus is then on attitudes, representations, discourses and practices about refugees, on the interactions at the local level between the majority populations and newly arrived migrants. The project will follow two objectives. First studying public opinion towards asylum seekers and refugees with a European cross- national perspective but also how these groups perceive Belgium, its asylum system and its reception policies. The second objective is to analyse the polarisation of the public opinion by focussing on pro and anti-refugees’ actions at the local level. This will allow understanding the links between public opinion and the implementation of asylum and reception policies. In order to fulfil these objectives, our project is based on 5 Work Packages that each focus on a specific dimension. The first two ones aim at developing a European comparative perspective on perceptions towards migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. This then includes a quantitative analysis of public opinion’s perceptions towards new immigration flows as well as a comparison of 5 European case studies (Sweden, Italy, Grece, Hungary and Germany). The three other work packages aim at a deep analysis of the Belgian situation. First, they consist of understanding actions and reactions towards asylum seekers and refugees at a local level. This implies to study the opposite reactions with an in-depth analysis of their content, justifications and determinants but also to focus on interactions between social groups (pro vs. anti migrants groups; ional citizens & refugees) as well as the interactions between the population’s reaction and the implementation of asylum and receptions policies. Second, studying the Belgian situation implies to analyse asylum seekers and refugees perceptions regarding the country’s asylum and reception policies. Lastly, it implies to realise a policy evaluation of those policies.

De afgelopen jaren is veel kritiek geuit op de onevenwichtige verdeling van het aantal asielverzoeken en de daarmee samenhangende verantwoordelijkheden tussen de lidstaten van de Europese Unie (EU). Niet alleen verschilt het aantal asielaanvragen -zowel in absolute als relatieve zin- tussen de lidstaten sterk, ook de wijze waarop lidstaten omgaan met asielzoekers en asielverzoeken loopt uiteen. Dit is des te opvallender omdat de normen in de EU gelijk zijn en zijn vervat in bindende Europese richtlijnen. De onevenwichtige verdeling van asielverzoeken levert spanningen op in de EU. Om die reden heeft de staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie aan de Adviescommissie voor Vreemdelingenzaken (ACVZ) gevraagd hem te adviseren over de vraag hoe het Gemeenschappelijk Europees Asielsysteem (GEAS) zich kan ontwikkelen tot een solidair systeem, waarin de verantwoordelijkheden van lidstaten van de EU ten aanzien van asielzoekers en statushouders billijk worden verdeeld. De ACVZ beantwoordt deze vraag door een voorstel te doen voor een permanent verdelingsmechanisme van asielverantwoordelijkheden. Onder de term asielverantwoordelijkheden verstaat de ACVZ niet alleen de behandeling van asielverzoeken en de daaraan gekoppelde opvang, maar ook de integratie van toegelaten asielzoekers en de terugkeer van, of het omgaan met asielzoekers wier verzoek is afgewezen. Door de grote aantallen asielzoekers die dit jaar naar de EU zijn gekomen, is de discussie over de ongelijke verdeling van asielverantwoordelijkheden in een stroomversnelling terechtgekomen en zijn er in Europees verband verschillende maatregelen getroffen om de komst van deze asielzoekers in goede banen te leiden. Ook wordt gepoogd om de verantwoordelijkheden billijker over de lidstaten te verdelen, bijvoorbeeld door in totaal 160.000 asielzoekers met een hoge kans op een verblijfsvergunning te herplaatsen uit Italië en Griekenland naar de overige lidstaten. De uitvoering van deze maatregelen komt echter maar moeizaam van de grond en leidt tot verdere spanningen tussen de lidstaten. Het is dus zeer de vraag of een advies over een permanent verdelingsmechanisme op dit moment op breed politiek draagvlak kan rekenen in alle lidstaten. Een dergelijk mechanisme is volgens de ACVZ in de toekomst echter onontkoombaar. Daarom heeft de ACVZ gepoogd een advies te schrijven dat zowel juridisch haalbaar, als praktisch uitvoerbaar is

Sinds eind 2017 is het mogelijk om overlastgevende asielzoekers een maatregel op te leggen en hen te plaatsen in een zogenaamde extra begeleiding en toezichtlocatie (ebtl). De ebtl-maatregel is te beschouwen als een aanvulling op de al bestaande maatregelen die het Centraal Orgaan opvang asielzoekers (COA) kan opleggen. De ebtl-maatregel is vormgegeven als een pilot voor twee jaar en is binnen deze termijn geëvalueerd. De voor u liggende rapportage is het resultaat van deze evaluatie. De evaluatie valt uiteen in een plan-, een proces- en een effectevaluatie. Binnen de planevaluatie is gekeken wat de oorspronkelijk bedoelde doelen, doelgroep, werkzame bestanddelen en randvoorwaarden waren en is een oordeel gegeven of in vier elementen voldoende is voorzien. De procesevaluatie richtte zich op de daadwerkelijke invulling van deze elementen in de praktijk en de effectevaluatie op de daadwerkelijke resultaten van de ebtl-maatregel.

The main objective of this report is to analyze Azerbaijani legislation in the field of integration of foreigners, stateless persons and forced migrants, in order to see if it complies with international documents that Azerbaijan has signed. The authors also examine the application of this legislation and identify key public agencies and positions dealing with different aspects of integration. They also offer recommendations on how to resolve existing problems. It is established that Azerbaijan has signed key international ocuments and that legal framework has been formed to regulate foreigners’ entry to, departure from, and residence in Azerbaijan, as well as acquisition of Azerbaijani citizenship.

In this 2019 MEDAM Assessment Report, we present insights from MEDAM research and policy dialogue since 2016 to explain how closer cooperation among EU member states and with countries of origin and transit can improve outcomes for all stakeholders. Crucially, short of establishing a new Iron Curtain on the EU’s external border or continuing to tolerate abuses, there is no way that either individual member states or the EU as a whole can insulate themselves from irregular migrants and asylum seekers. Yet, if crossing the EU border enabled all irregular migrants to remain in the EU for good, the integrity of EU visa and asylum policies would be undermined. Thus, close cooperation with countries of origin for the return and readmission of their citizens who have no right to remain in the EU is crucial. Still, it is typically not in the interest of countries of origin to limit the mobility of their citizens. Cooperation between the EU and countries of origin must therefore cover a wide enough range of policies to ensure that all parties consistently benefit from the policy package and have a strong incentive to meet their commitments. We emphasize more EU support for refugees hosted by low- and middle-income countries and more legal employment opportunities for non-EU citizens in the EU. Rethinking EU asylum and migration policies along these lines requires extensive consultations and negotiations among stakeholders in Europe and in countries of origin and transit. Our ‘insights’ are meant to inform and stimulate such conversations. However, sustainable reforms will come only as the result of stakeholders working out the details and developing a sense of ownership of the necessary reforms. Our first set of insights relates to popular attitudes toward immigration and the structure of public preferences for asylum and refugee protection policies (section 2 of this report). Next, we explain how the EU and countries of origin and transit can all benefit from cooperating on border management, refugee protection, and expanding legal labor migration to the EU (section 3). Finally, we consider the implications for cooperation among EU member states and the long-standing plans for reform of the European asylum system (section 4).

This paper is based on the information included in the twenty-one explanatory notes from CARIM East network members, covering the demo-economic, legal and socio-political aspects of the situation of asylum seekers, refugees and IDPs in individual countries of the CARIM East region. This paper gives an overview of the basic facts concerning populations in need of protection in the Eastern Partnership countries, who are defined as asylum seekers, refugees and IDPs. It focuses especially on their recognition, social protection and integration.

The DIASP project aims to bring the personal experiences of asylum seekers directly into the EU and member state debate on Dublin. Its central objective is twofold: to study the level of protection asylum seekers have access to under the implementation of the Dublin Regulation, and to identify and advocate for best practices in implementing Dublin procedures in 10 member states of the EU.

"TIES (The Integration of the European Second Generation) nahm seinen Anfang im Jahr 2005 als Forschungsprojekt zur zweiten Generation in acht EU-Staaten unter der Leitung des Institute for Migration and Ethnic Studies (IMES) der Universität Amsterdam und des Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute (NIDI). Die TIES-Studie richtet sich auf die Nachkommen von Einwanderern aus der Türkei, Jugoslawien (Nachkommen jugoslawischer „Gastarbeiter“) und Marokko, wobei die „zweite Generation“ gefasst wird als die Kinder von Einwanderern, die im Einwanderungsland der Eltern geboren wurden und leben. Zum Zeitpunkt der Erhebung waren die Befragten zwischen 18 und 35 Jahre alt. Daneben wurde eine Kontrollgruppe von Probanden „nicht-migrantischer“ Herkunft interviewt. Da es sich bei Migration um ein größtenteils urbanes Phänomen handelt, wurde die Studie in 15 Städten in acht EU-Ländern durchgeführt: Paris und Straßburg in Frankreich, Berlin und Frankfurt am Main in Deutschland, Madrid und Barcelona in Spanien, Wien und Linz in Österreich, Amsterdam und Rotterdam in den Niederlanden, Brüssel und Antwerpen in Belgien, Zürich und Basel in der Schweiz und Stockholm in Schweden. In fast allen Städten wurden jeweils drei verschiedene Gruppen unterschiedlicher ethnisch-nationaler Herkunft befragt, namentlich zwei Gruppen der zweiten Generation und eine Kontrollgruppe autochthoner Herkunft. Die jeweiligen Gruppen der zweiten Generation waren türkischer und marokkanischer Herkunft in den Niederlanden und Belgien sowie türkischer und jugoslawischer Herkunft in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz. In Frankreich und Schweden wurde nur die zweite Generation türkischer Herkunft und die Kontrollgruppe untersucht, in Spanien nur Marokkaner der zweiten Generation und die Kontrollgruppe. Die TIES-Studiengruppe bestand aus neun nationalen Partnern und einer internationalen Koordinationseinheit. Die deutsche Volkswagen-Stiftung stellte die Mittel für eine Kernuntersuchung unter Türken zweiter Generation in fünf Ländern zur Verfügung stellte. Zusätzliche nationale und internationale Förderung insbesondere durch ESF ECRP und die Bertelsmann-Stiftung gestattete die Ausweitung der TIES-Erhebung auf drei weitere Länder und die Einbeziehung zweier weiterer Befragtengruppen."

The European challenges in the field of migration have an impact on society, since the division between them opposed to newcomers and welcoming them has been continuously increasing. The project addresses the perceptions of the Belgian and European population about refugees/migrants and vice versa as well as their interactions with the policy agenda of asylum and migration with a European comparative perspective and a specific focus on Belgium. As Europe face important migratory challenges and political difficulties we have seen an increase of the public opinion’s polarisation regarding asylum and refugees, it is important to address this question. Including teams from our project will analyse this polarisation and its links to policies, as it is necessary for a better understanding of the current debate on migration in Europe and Belgium. The 2015 asylum crisis will be considered as indicative of the general European and Belgian citizens’ reactions about migration. The focus is then on attitudes, representations, discourses and practices about refugees, on the interactions at the local level between the majority populations and newly arrived migrants. The project will follow two objectives. First studying public opinion towards asylum seekers and refugees with a European cross- national perspective but also how these groups perceive Belgium, its asylum system and its reception policies. The second objective is to analyse the polarisation of the public opinion by focussing on pro and anti-refugees’ actions at the local level. This will allow understanding the links between public opinion and the implementation of asylum and reception policies. In order to fulfil these objectives, our project is based on 5 Work Packages that each focus on a specific dimension. The first two ones aim at developing a European comparative perspective on perceptions towards migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. This then includes a quantitative analysis of public opinion’s perceptions towards new immigration flows as well as a comparison of 5 European case studies (Sweden, Italy, Grece, Hungary and Germany). The three other work packages aim at a deep analysis of the Belgian situation. First, they consist of understanding actions and reactions towards asylum seekers and refugees at a local level. This implies to study the opposite reactions with an in-depth analysis of their content, justifications and determinants but also to focus on interactions between social groups (pro vs. anti migrants groups; ional citizens & refugees) as well as the interactions between the population’s reaction and the implementation of asylum and receptions policies. Second, studying the Belgian situation implies to analyse asylum seekers and refugees perceptions regarding the country’s asylum and reception policies. Lastly, it implies to realise a policy evaluation of those policies. The aim of this project and the main questions it addresses focus more on the relations and on the dynamics existing between the citizens and the migrants, asylum seekers and refugees. Hence, we propose to broaden the scope of what is usually done by extending the focus on actors that are often not implied in migration studies: the majority population and the impact of new migration waves on social cohesion. The expected results concerns: 1) an in-depth and comparative knowledge of attitudes towards migrants and refugees in Europe; 2) an analysis of the factors influencing the attitudes of rejections, disregards and support; 3) an in-depth analysis of the specificities of the current wave of migration compared to the last ones; 4) an in-depth analysis of citizens’ and migrants’ discourses, representation and practices and of their reaction on social cohesion at a local level;