Research
Database

1. Effective labour market policies and measures are important tools for Member States to address increasing migration flows and persistent employment gaps between migrant and national populations. According to the ad-hoc module on migration of the Labour Market Survey in 2014, roughly two thirds of third-country nationals who migrated for work to the EU had no job at the time of migrating. While unemployment rates have decreased steadily since 2014, the gap in the unemployment rate between third-country nationals and native- and EU-born remains. 2. Most Member States have dedicated labour market integration policies in place, targeting multiple migrant groups, including newly arrived, first generation third-country nationals who were the focus of this study. These policies are usually integral to Member States’ more general integration policies. 3. The driving forces behind current labour market integration policies tend to be labour shortages and the need to help newcomers into employment quickly so they become self-sufficient. The 2014- 2016 influx of migrants has encouraged many Member States to update existing policies or develop new ones. 4. Member States combine mainstream and tailored labour market integration measures. While mainstream integration measures help to ensure equal access to general (public employment) services, tailored measures can specifically address some of the disadvantages facing newly arrived third-country nationals compared to other groups, including lack of language proficiency and unfamiliarity with the new society. 5. The most common obstacles encountered by Member States in supporting third-country nationals relate to the accreditation of job qualifications/assessment of skills of those arriving from outside the EU, tackling discrimination within recruitment processes and managing varying levels of language skills in integration measures. These difficulties are more pronounced when dealing with migrant women or vulnerable groups. 6. Public sector integration measures focus primarily on the phase prior to accessing employment, including preparing for and finding a job. Based on examples provided by Member States, these relate most often to the development of (soft) skills, vocational training and qualification and career counselling. 7. The best innovative measures connected migrant and host communities or developed inter-generational bonds by bringing together people of different ages or ethnic groups, not only to ease migrants’ integration into society but also to create social cohesion. 8. Employment centres and non-governmental organisations emerge as key partners in the implementation of labour market integration measures. Most of the measures are financed through national and/or EU funds, but examples exist of privately funded measures, including new tools such as social impact bonds and sponsorship. 9. Private sector measures aim more specifically at integrating (migrant) workers into the workplace. Examples reported were mostly implemented by large companies. They focussed predominantly on training and qualification, counselling and enhancing intercultural relations in the workplace, for example through ‘buddy’ programmes, on-boarding programmes or internal company workshops on intercultural relations.

In recent years, the Directorate of Immigration’s (UDI) handling of so-called revocation cases has received increased attention. These are cases where the authorities first grant residence permits and citizenship to migrants but later consider revoking these. Immigrants can have their right to stay in Norway revoked for a range of reasons, including having provided incorrect information when they were granted permits and in the case of refugees, because conditions improve in their home country. This report describes how those affected experience the process of revocation. The report is based on multiple data sources: statistics from the UDI’s data base; interviews with affected individuals from Afghanistan and Somalia, including representatives of their communities in Norway; and interviews with employees of the UDI and the police. After presenting descriptive statistics, we describe how the informants experienced the revocation process, including the effects of the revocation process on integration. Furthermore, we analyze how revocation affects the outlook and life strategies of those interviewed. This report provides a number of recommendations for improving the government’s handling of revocation, including developing a coherent communication strategy and reducing case processing time.

Since 2015, more than 3 million people have sought humanitarian refuge in Germany. Although the country has traditionally been a country of immigration, the integration of refugees has posed a challenge to its society and policy-makers. Given the disadvantageous position of refugees in terms of resources and legal status, the first years after arrival may shape their social and economic participation in the long run. Yet, only scarce empirical evidence exists on the early biographical trajectories of refugees in Germany. Based on the first representative survey of refugees in Germany, the IAB-BAMF-SOEP survey with more than 7,000 respondents, this paper seeks to shed light on the trajectories of refugees in the first years after their arrival. We apply sequence analysis and cluster typical trajectories of different refugee groups in Germany. As main events, we consider posing an asylum application, receiving the asylum result, picking up education, starting a job and having a baby. How many individuals in fact follow the “ideal” path starting with the asylum process, followed by education and, ultimately, labor market participation? Which groups deviate most from this pattern? The obtained groups of typical post-migration biographies will provide the basis for future inferential analyses on the effects of the early trajectories on latter integration. At the same time, the main drivers of recurring structures in the sequences (such as legal security, human capital or the family context) can be explored. Projektmethode - sequence analyses - cluster analyses Projektziel - identification of typical Integration patterns of refugees and their determinants

Das ethnologische Forschungsprojekt betrachtet die Subjektivierung (Butler, Foucault) und Selbst-Bildung geflüchteter Mädchen zwischen 15 und 21 Jahren, die in der (ethnologischen) Forschung unterrepräsentiert sind. In ihrem Alltag begegnen ihnen teils miteinander verknüpfte Vorstellungen sozialer Differenz wie Alter, Klasse, Geschlecht, Ethnizität bzw. Nationalität oder Religion. Damit verbunden begegnen ihnen Erwartungen, wie sie sich entsprechend dieser Zuschreibungen zu verhalten haben. Ihr individuelles Selbstverständnis wird dabei selten erfragt und berücksichtigt. Besondere Aufmerksamkeit wird dabei der Verknüpfung von Genderstereotypen mit Kulturalisierungen bzw. Ethnisierungen in alltäglichen Praktiken des everyday bordering gewidmet. In der Forschung werden Ansätze aus der Theorie der Subjektivierung zum Zusammenspiel von Anrufung und Selbst-Bildung, Überlegungen zur Produktion von Differenz in Intersektionalitäts- und kritischer Migrationsforschung sowie ethnologische Diskussionen um Handlungsmacht als Ausgangspunkte genutzt, um das Geflecht von Anrufungen, in dem sich die Mädchen bewegen, näher zu beschreiben und um über die Möglichkeiten und Grenzen von Handlungsmacht im Rahmen diskursiv vorgegebener Subjektpositionen nachzudenken. Die gezielte Untersuchung der Subjektivität und "alltäglichen" Erfahrung junger geflüchteter Frauen soll dazu dienen, im Sinne einer "cultural critique", Alternativen zu verallgemeinernden Erklärungsversuchen und Homogenisierungen von "Flüchtlingen", insbesondere "Flüchtlingsmädchen", in der deutschen Gesellschaft aufzuzeigen. Methodisch stützt ich das Projekt auf ethnografische Methoden wie teilnehmende Beobachtung in Verbindung mit informellen Gesprächen, offenen und semi-strukturierten Interviews sowie Expert*inneninterviews. Als Ergänzung klassischer ethnologischer Feldforschungsmethoden werden biographisch-narrative Interviews sowie partizipative Methoden wie Fokusgruppeninterviews und auto-driven photo elicitation ins Forschungsdesign integriert.

Funding support through EU programmes and their objectives is the EU’s main lever to promote the integration of migrants and refugees. Next to the soft law embodied in policy guidelines like the Common Basic Principles of immigrant integration, it is the amounts, binding provisions and concrete spending rules of instruments such as the Asylum-, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) or the structural funds including the European Social Fund (ESF) that define EU policy and a joint European approach in the integration domain. In a number of Member States, EU funds are even the sole or nearly only source of support for integration measures and -policies, rendering them crucially important for the outlook and opportunities of migrants and refugees in many places across Europe. Against this background, the proposals and negotiations on the upcoming Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), i.e. the 2021 to 2027 EU programme and funding period, have become the focal point of the EU integration debate since 2018. Local level integration actors including cities and civil society organisations are key stakeholders in these policy debates, whose oucomes will be decisive for the availability of means both for early and longer-term integration, and on local level as much as for mainstreaming integration across all relevant policy areas. This report synthesizes previous ReSOMA briefs in the area of integration that have focused on the unfolding MFF debate. Following an overview of the 2018 Commission proposals which set out scope and structure of the future EU instruments (chapter 1.2), it presents twelve policy debates related to the ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of EU support for integratin and their stickicking points from a local level and civil society perspective (chapter 2). Partly refering to the discourse responding to recent policy trends and how they became incorporated in the Commission proposals, partly referring to long-standing debates between stakeholders and EU institutions, the chapter offers an abridged version of key topics of debate as identified in the previous ReSOMA Discussion Briefs on ‘Cities as providers of services to * By Alexander Wollfhardt, Migration Policy Group 4 migrant populations’, ‘Sustaining mainstreaming of immigrant integration’ and ‘The social inclusion of undocumented migrants’. Against the background of these conversations and controversies, stakeholders came forward with numerous proposals to improve and amend the Commission proposals to better address their concerns. The European Parliament in 2018 has been the key arena of decision-making towards the 2021 to 2027 MFF, with MEPs able to amend the proposed legislation based on the concerns driving the policy controversies and offering stakeholders the opportunity to advocate for their own proposals. Chapter 3 shows how the suggestions for alternative solutions brought forward converge around four mayor policy options for the future of EU spending on integration:  Adequate funding – to ensure sufficient and flexible spending on integration according to changing needs across all Member States  Meaningful needs assessment – to base AM(I)F national programming and Partnership Agreements on structured and standalone assessment of needs and challenges  Mainstreamed, longer-term policies – to promote comprehensive integration policies with a long-term orientation and mainstreaming them on Member State and EU level  Broader participation – to ensure funds can be accessed by civil society and local/ regional authorities, and that these actors are fully involved in the funds’ governance For each of these options main proposals are listed as voiced by stakeholder organisations in the field, including the ReSOMA partners ECRE, EUROCITIES, PICUM and Social Platform. The chapter also shows, in each of the options, how the European Parliament has amended the Commission proposals, thus illustrating the uptake by Parliament of solutions advocated for by stakeholders. References to the previous ReSOMA Policy Options Briefs on ‘High levels of EU support for migrant integration, implemented by civil society and local authorities’ and ‘Comprehensive and mainstreamed, longer-term support for the integration of migrants’ point to more in-depth information on the evidence base supporting these proposals, the details of the various stakeholders positions and a mapping of the EP amendments. Chapter 4.1 sheds light on the state of play as of spring 2019, with the EP positions on the key EU instruments all decided before the EP elections and clarified at time when MFF negotiations are gearing up in the intergovernmental Council arena. Compromises among Member States and with the European Parliament are expected to be reached in late 2019/early 2020. Next to highlighting current debate among governments, the chapter stresses the importance of the preparations taking place already now on Member State level in terms of programming and priority setting. How the national AM(I)F and ESF+ programmes are shaping up even now, in advance of final EU-level decisions on the scope of the instruments, is crucially important for the future availability of EU means for integration support and the possibilities of key actors to benefit from 5 programmes. Across all levels, governments, the Commission, European Parliament and integration stakeholder are called upon to act accordingly, to ensure full exploitation of the new instruments’ potential for integration support, complementarity in programme planning, comprehensive compliance with the partnership principle and a need-based approach to the services funded. Drawing the consequence from the lack of realtime evidence on the actual uptake of EU instruments supporting integration and on the practice of partnershipled implementation, the Synthetic Report culminates in a proposal for a new, independent EU-wide quality monitoring mechanism (chapter 4.2). Led by civil society and local level stakeholders across the EU, the mechanism would provide for ongoing, regular monitoring of how the partnership principle is observed, national programmes are implemented, different funds are used, and of the quality of coordination and coherence among the instruments. Quality assessment of content and effectiveness of projects funded would improve the evidence base for future AM(I)F midterm reviews and allocation decisions for the second tranches of the fund. The new mechanism would thus aim to generate the necessary knowledge for pushing towards  compliance with the partnership principle,  purposeful use of AM(I)F and structural (ESF+) funds to support integration,  coordination and collaboration among the implementing authorities,  robust mid-term review procedures. This recommendation to set up a new, enhanced quality monitoring mechanism not only responds to a core gap identified in activities and analyses of stakeholders, but also builds on ReSOMA’s dialogue with local level and civil society experts, policymakers and researchers. In a very concrete way ReSOMA suggests the contours of a transnational mechanism that brings together implementation monitoring, qualitative evaluation, empowerment and capacity building of stakeholders, as well as EU-wide benchmarking and mutual exchange

Building on my previous research on Family Language Policy (FLP), LaFS (‘Language, Families, and Society’) will focus on three types of linguistic minority families—autochthonous, immigrant, and refugee—as a means to elucidating more about how social inequality is perpetuated (or arrested) along linguistic lines, and how policy at the local, national, and international levels can better support linguistic minority families. The project will therefore provide a key means to understanding more about Europe’s three main sociolinguistic challenges: the decline of its many autochthonous minority languages; increased linguistic diversity due to increased mobility among European member states; and the refugee crisis. LaFS will centre on families who speak Irish as a home language (autochthonous); Polish (immigrant); and Arabic (refugee) as a means to understanding the challenges these linguistic minority families face and how these challenges affect their sense of identity, belonging, and overall well-being. This understanding will be broadened by a secondment with the Glasgow Refugee, Asylum, and Migration Network (GRAMNet). LaFS will be hosted by the National University of Ireland, Galway, complementing NUIG’s Centre for Population and Migration Research and UNESCO Child and Family Research Centre. The project will be supervised by Prof. Tadhg Ó hIfearnáin, a leading expert in minority language issues. The secondment will be supervised by Professor Alison Phipps, UNESCO Chair in Refugee Integration through Languages and the Arts. My professional development over the course of the project in terms of innovative research practice; high-impact dissemination and communication skills; and effective project management skills will be invaluable to my long-term goal of embedding sociolinguistics into social justice research.

Zuwanderer unterscheiden sich in vielen Fällen von der im Herkunftsland verbleibenden Bevölkerung und stellen insofern keine Zufallsstichprobe dieser Population dar. Das Forschungsvorhaben widmet sich diesem für die Migrationsforschung bedeutsamen Phänomen der selektiven Migration. Die erste Zielsetzung besteht darin, das Ausmaß der Bildungsselektivität für eine Vielzahl wichtiger Migrantengruppen in einer Reihe von westeuropäischen Zielländern zu beschreiben. Zusätzlich zur Selektivität nach Bildung, welche im Zentrum des Projekts steht, soll es um die Selektivität in den Einstellungen von Zuwanderern gehen. Die zweite Zielsetzung richtet sich auf die theoretische und empirische Auseinandersetzung mit der Frage, wie sich derartige Selektivitäten auf die Integration von Migranten auswirken. Hierzu werden zentrale Integrationsdimensionen in den Blick genommen: Die kulturelle Integration (im Hinblick auf den Spracherwerb), die strukturelle Integration (im Hinblick auf die Eingliederung in das Bildungssystem und den Arbeitsmarkt) sowie Aspekte der sozialen und identifikativen Inkorporation (im Hinblick auf interethnische Beziehungen und Einstellungsmuster). Ein zusätzliches methodisches Anliegen besteht darin, optimierte Selektivitätsmessungen zu implementieren. Zu diesem Zweck wird Selektivität – im Gegensatz zur in der Literatur verbreiteten Betrachtung als Gruppenmerkmal – als eine individuelle Charakteristik aufgefasst. Zur Bestimmung der relativen Position wird jedes Individuum in die jeweilige alters- und geschlechtsspezifischen Verteilung des betrachteten Selektivitätsmerkmals in der Herkunftsgesellschaft eingeordnet. Hierüber kann der Tatsache Rechnung getragen werden, dass verschiedene Migrantengruppen nicht per se überwiegend positiv oder negativ selektiert sind, sondern sich typischerweise aus variierenden Anteilen von mehr oder weniger positiv beziehungsweise negativ selektierten Individuen zusammensetzen. Die inzwischen deutlich verbesserte Datenlage ermöglicht die Betrachtung einer größeren Anzahl von Herkunftsgruppen in den wichtigsten Zielländern Europas. Die hierfür erforderliche Aufbereitung und Harmonisierung der unterschiedlichen Datenquellen soll entsprechend dokumentiert und zusammen mit den Skripten, die für Replikationen der zentralen Analysen erforderlich sind, der wissenschaftlichen Gemeinschaft zugänglich gemacht werden.

Le projet MOBILISE demande: Quand mécontents avec le situation economique ou politiquoi, pourquoi certains individus protestent tandis que d'autres quittent les frontieres? En reliant les intuitions théoriques de la littérature sur la migration internationale et de celle sur les mobilisations collectives, nous examinons a) Si des facteurs similaires soustentend le choix de migrer et/ou de protester au niveau individuel b) Comment le contexte influence ces mobilisations c) Dans quelle mesure ces choix sont-ils independants l'un de l'autre ou ils se renforcent / se découragent l'un l'autre. MOBILISE utilise une methodologie mixte (des enquêtes quantitatives representatives au niveau national, des enquêtes en ligne auprés des migrants, des enquêtes auprès des protestataires, des focus groups, des entretiens retrospectifs et de l'analyse des réseaux sociaux) ainsi qu'un design multi-situé. Le projet couvre l'Ukraine, la Pologne, le Maroc et le Bresil, qui ont tous récemment connu des protestations de masse ainsi qu'une forte émigration. Nous suivons des emigrés de ces pays en Allemagne, la Grande Bretagne et l'Espagne. Le projet offre quatre innovations clés 1) Il combine les protestations et la migration 2) Il capture tous les groupes pertinents pour la comparaison (des protestataires, des migrants, des migrants protestataires et des individus qui ne font ni l'un ni l'autre) 3) Il suit des individus au fil du temps en utilisant des methodes de panel 4) Il inclut dans l'analyse l'utilisation des réseaux sociaux en fournissant de l'information sur le role des réseaux et des transferts politiques en temps réel. Ces innovations nous permettent d'apporter une contribution importante au développement théorique autant dans l'étude des migrations que des protestations. De plus, le projet fournit des connaissances centrales aux hommes politiques sur les facteurs qui influencent la stabilité politique et économique.

The goal of the project is to collect and dissiminate best practices in immigrant students education from Czech public and private schools. Preliminary project outcomes were dissiminated in the EU Parliament in 2020 to selected MEP and as conference paper at the 8th World Conference on Peace in Schools in Mexico (virtually). The project is being conducted in two phases: - 2020/2021: Dissimination of Evidence-Based Integration Approaches of Migrant Children Attending Czech Schools (project number 52010441) is with EU stakeholders, international research bodies and practitioners. - 2019/2020: Migrant & Refugee Children in Czech Schools: Assessment of School´s Inclusion Approach from Child´s Perspective/Pedagogy (project id 51910372). The project is co-financed by the Governments of Czechia, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia through Visegrad Grants from International Visegrad Fund. The mission of the fund is to advance ideas for sustainable regional cooperation in Central Europe.

'The REBUILD proposal address immigrant integration through the provision of a toolbox of ICT-based solutions that will improve both the management procedures of the local authorities and the life quality of the migrants. The design approach is user-centered and participated: both target groups (immigrants/refugees and local public services providers) will be part of the user requirement analysis and participants in three 2-days Co-Creation workshops organized in the 3 main piloting countries: Italy, Spain and Greece, chosen also for their being the 'access gates' to Europe for main immigration routes. Users and stakeholders engagement is a key success factor addressed both in the Consortium composition and in its capacity to engage relevant stakeholders external to the project. The key technology solutions proposed are: GDPR-compliant migrants’ integration related background information gathering with user consent and anonymization of personal information; AI-based profile analysis to enable both personalized support and policy making on migration-related issues; AI-based needs matching tool, to match migrant needs and skills with services provided by local authorities in EU countries and labor market needs at local and regional level; a digital companion for migrants enabling personalized two-way communication using chatbots to provide them smart support for easy access to local services (training, health, employment, welfare, etc.) and assessment of the level of integration and understanding of the new society, while providing to local authorities data-driven, easy to use decision supporting tools for enhancing capacities and effectiveness in service provision. Cross-culturality, ethical, accessibility dimensions will be addressed since the very beginning of the project, and validated and assessed in terms of consistency and impact during the project lifespan.'

This report synthesises previous ReSOMA briefs concerning the crackdown on NGOs and volunteers helping refugees and other migrants. Section 1 captures the main issues and controversies in the debate on the policing of humanitarianism and the potential impacts of EU and national anti-migrant smuggling policies on civil society actors. This section has drawn on academic research in this area, and in particular on CEPS expertise in this field. Section 2 provides an overview of the possible policy options to address this phenomenon taking stock of the ongoing policy debate on solutions and alternatives. Section 3 aims to identify and quantify criminal cases of individuals, volunteers and NGOs providing humanitarian assistance to migrants in the European Union. This monitoring exercise has been carried out by MPG through ReSOMA’s collaborative and participatory process involving experts from NGOs, researchers and other stakeholders. Section 4 provides overall summary conclusions and recommendations to end the crackdown on NGOs and to prevent further policing of civil society. The final section proposes approaches to returning responsibility to EU actors, to be further explored by the ReSOMA platform, with a focus on good governance, human rights defenders, and the protection of humanitarian space inside the EU.