Iceland

This report examines naturalisation procedures for immigrants in Iceland

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.

MIPEX is a unique tool to compare and evaluate governments’ integration policies in all EU Member States and several non-EU countries (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 useful tool to evaluate and compare what governments are doing to promote the integration of migrants in all the countries analysed.

The project aims to: Identify and analyse social, cultural and economic strategies used by Polish migrants as responses to economic crisis in Iceland; Enhance theoretical and empirical understanding of Polish migrants’ formal and/or informal adaptation to contemporary conditions of Icelandic labour market; Investigate the relations between mobile and/or immobile livelihood strategies in crisis aftermath; Enhance and/or develop a scientific approach for analysing the impact of global forces and connections on migrants emplaced practices. The project will develop the discipline and proposed subject matter by: Providing anthropological perspective to migration scholarship, which continues to be dominated by economists, demographers and sociologists. This is particularly true in Poland where the premier centres of migration studies are located within disciplines favouring analyses of quantitative data and are preoccupied with migration flows on large scale. Introducing multi-sited ethnography and novel research idea that moves beyond the binary thinking about migration and stasis by introducing both of these concepts as interconnected and interdependent. While mobility per se has already been studied, migration scholars have not yet explored its effects on different social domains and localities on a micro scale. In other words, the contemporary concern with mobility, while necessary, has made some scholars lose sight of the continued importance of place-based practices and relations between mobile and immobile subjects. Filling the empirical gap on Polish post-accession migration which is chiefly focused on the UK, Holland or Germany to the detriment of studying new destinations such as Iceland. Contributing to a wider scientific debate on the proposed subject matter as a comparative case study enriched with ethnographic details and deep analysis of the interdependencies between migration patterns and economic crisis.

The book illustrates the results of the new edition of the Migrant Integration Policy Index (MIPEX). MIPEX is a unique tool which measures policies to integrate migrants in countries across five continents, including all EU Member States (including the UK), other European countries (Albania, Iceland, North Macedonia, Moldova, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine), Asian countries (China, India, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, and South Korea), North American countries (Canada, Mexico and US), South American countries (Argentina, Brazil, Chile), and Australia and New Zealand in Oceania. MIPEX analyses integration policies in the following eight areas of integration: Labour market mobility; Family reunification; Education; Political participation; Permanent residence; Access to nationality; Anti-discrimination; and Health. To cite: Solano, Giacomo & Huddleston, Thomas (2020). Migrant Integration Policy Index 2020. Barcelona/ Brussels: CIDOB and MPG. ISBN: 978-84-92511-83-9

Operational management of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) which entered into operation on 09 April 2013 replacing SIS1. SIS II, the largest information system for public security in Europe, allows information exchanges between national border control, customs and police authorities ensuring that the free movement of people within the EU can take place in a safe environment. It also contains alerts on missing persons, in particular children, as well as information on certain property, such as banknotes, cars, vans, firearms and identity documents that may have been stolen, misappropriated or lost. Currently SIS II is used by 29 countries (25 EU MS + 4 Associated Countries). 25 EU: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Associated Countries connected to SIS II are: Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland. Statistics are available to the public as analyses presented in studies on annual basis. **Statistics of interest:** Refusals of entry -> statistics on alerts art 24 SIS II Regulation “refused entry or stay in the Schengen area when the authorities had already made a decision that they should not enter”

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.

et advies ‘Nederlanderschap in een onbegrensde wereld; een advies over het Nederlandse beleid inzake meervoudige nationaliteit’ is aangekondigd bij het verschijnen van de ‘Verkenning meervoudige nationaliteit, de feiten op een rij’ die door de Adviescommissie voor Vreemdelingenzaken (ACVZ) is uitgebracht op 31 maart 2008. Voor het advies, dat aanbevelingen doet over de wijze waarop door Nederland zou moeten worden omgegaan met het vraagstuk van meervoudige, meestal dubbele, nationaliteit is gekozen voor een brede benadering. Daartoe zijn in opdracht van de ACVZ twee voorstudies verricht. De eerste betreft ‘Meervoudige nationaliteit in Europees perspectief’ van prof. mr. G.R. de Groot en dr. M.P. Vink van de Universiteit van Maastricht, waarin onder meer de situatie ten aanzien van meervoudige nationaliteit in een aantal Europese landen met elkaar is vergeleken (Nederland, België, Denemarken, Duitsland, Finland, Frankrijk, Griekenland, Ierland, IJsland, Italië, Luxemburg, Noorwegen, Oostenrijk, Portugal, Spanje, Verenigd Koninkrijk, Zweden en Zwitserland). De tweede voorstudie betreft het rapport ‘Dubbele nationaliteit en integratie’ van dr. J. Dagevos van het Sociaal Cultureel Planbureau (SCP). Ook is gebruik gemaakt van het in 2007 verschenen rapport ‘Identificatie met Nederland’ van de Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid (WRR). De laatste twee rapporten zijn vooral gebruikt om na te gaan in hoeverre meervoudige nationaliteit integratie in de weg staat en zou kunnen leiden tot loyaliteitsconflicten. Aantallen Het aantal Nederlanders met een meervoudige nationaliteit is vanaf 1998 met circa 72 % gestegen. Momenteel zijn er ruim 1 miljoen Nederlanders die ook over één of meer andere nationaliteiten beschikken, waarbij het voor het overgrote deel gaat om Nederlanders met tevens de Turkse of Marokkaanse nationaliteit. Het voorliggende advies richt zich op de vraag hoe Nederland, uitgaande van dit gegeven en tegen de achtergrond van een snel globaliserende wereld, moet omgaan met het verschijnsel meervoudige nationaliteit. Internationale vergelijking De ACVZ komt, mede op grond van de eigen verkenning en het onderzoek van De Groot en Vink, tot de volgende constateringen en overwegingen. Het hebben van een meervoudige nationaliteit wordt internationaal in toenemende mate geaccepteerd. Dat blijkt niet alleen uit het teruglopend aantal landen dat zich gebonden acht aan Europese verdragen die het hebben van een meervoudige nationaliteit tegengaan, maar ook uit de ontwikkeling van het nationale recht van de overgrote meerderheid van de in de voorstudie bestudeerde landen. Nederland is in Europa één van de weinige (zes, met grote onderlinge variaties in het recht) landen die beperking van meervoudige nationaliteit nastreeft met een afstandseis bij naturalisatie. Overigens zorgen de vele uitzonderingen op de afstandseis in de Rijkswet op het Nederlanderschap (RWN) ervoor dat in Nederland de meeste naturalisandi de facto hun oorspronkelijke nationaliteit niet hoeven op te geven. Daarnaast is het een gegeven dat er 17 landen zijn, waaronder Argentinië, Griekenland en Marokko, waarvan het opgeven van de nationaliteit onmogelijk is. Voorts is er een grote verscheidenheid in de uitwerking van de nationaliteitswetgeving in de verschillende Europese landen. Meer eenheid en eenduidigheid in de systematiek van de nationaliteitswetgeving in Europa zou grote voordelen hebben. Pogingen tot het voorbereiden van onderlinge afstemming van de regelgeving zijn door de Europese Unie nog niet ondernomen. Dat is anders binnen de Raad van Europa waar wel (bescheiden) stappen op dit gebied zijn gezet.

The MACIMIDE Global Expatriate Dual Citizenship Dataset charts the rules that existed in near all states of the world since 1960 with regard to the loss or renunciation of citizenship after a citizen of a respective state voluntarily acquires the citizenship of another state. The central variable of the Dataset is the dualcit_cat variable. This is a categorical variable whose values may be used to interpret, in broad lines, the position of a country with regards to the expatriate dual citizenship. The dualcit_cat variable reflects what consequences the legislation and legal practice of a country attaches to the voluntary acquisition of a foreign citizenship. The value of this variable depends on a number of criteria, including whether a citizen of the reference country who voluntarily obtains a foreign citizenship automatically loses – in principle – the citizenship of the origin country, and whether a citizen of the reference country can renounce that citizenship. The value assigned to dualcit_cat reflects the position of the country on the 1st of January of the reference year. Any subsequent changes in legislation will be reflected in the dualcit_cat value of the following year and included in updated versions of the Dataset. The dualcit_binary variable is a recoding of the dualcit_cat variable. This variable can be used for broad comparisons of the dual citizenship positions around the world. The possible values reflect whether the legislation of a country, in a given reference year, provides for the automatic loss of the origin citizenship (1) or not (2). All data have been centrally collected and refer to specific provisions in national law.

Outflows of foreign population from selected OECD countries

CITLAW indicators address citizenship laws (acquisition and loss of citizenship) in Europe. Basic indicator scores are calculated on the basis of a list of substantive and procedural requirements for each mode of acquisition or loss using both additive and weighting formulas. CITLAW indicators are also aggregated at different levels in order to analyse more general features of citizenship laws. The 6 highest level CITLAW indicators that are calculated using all 45 basic indicators are: ius sanguinis, ius soli, residence-based ordinary naturalisation, naturalisation on specific grounds, voluntary renunciation and withdrawal/lapse. CITLAW indicators have been calculated for 42 European states for 2011 and 2016. Coding of CITLAW indicators is based on an assessment of legal provisions in national citizenship laws.

Since the mid-1970s, the World Population Policies Database, last updated in 2015, provides comprehensive and up-to-date information on the population policy situation and trends for all Member States and non-member States of the United Nations. Among several areas, the database shows the evolution of government views and policies with respect to internal and international migration. The migration strand covers internal migration, immigration, emigration, and return. The Database is updated biennially by conducting a detailed country-by-country review of national plans and strategies, programme reports, legislative documents, official statements and various international, Inter-governmental and non-governmental sources, as well as by using official responses to the United Nations Inquiry among Governments on Population and Development.

Ce projet a pour objectif scientifique d’apporter de la connaissance sur la ville avec un angle original, celui de la ville arctique. En particulier, il conviendra de clarifier la question de savoir s’il est légitime de parler de villes arctiques sans plonger dans un déterminisme latitudinal. Autrement dit, peut-on identifier d’autres dénominateurs communs pour légitimer une appellation se référant d’abord aux contraintes zonales ? Ne convient-il pas d’apporter des nuances basées sur le processus d’urbanisation, la mobilité des populations et le degré d’appropriation territoriale ? L’objet de recherche est en soi d’une grande originalité au niveau national et international. Compte tenu des enjeux liés au développement à venir de la zone circumpolaire, le projet offre un grand potentiel d’avancée. La communauté scientifique internationale commence seulement à ressentir le besoin de recherches sur la ville boréale comme objet de recherche (2012, First International Conference on Urbanisation in the Arctic, Groenland). En 2014, un consortium de géographes américains s’est vu attribuer une subvention de la National Science Foundation (NSF) afin de construire un réseau de recherche pour la promotion de la ville durable en Arctique russe. La population boréale, évaluée à près de 4 millions d’habitants, est d’ores et déjà majoritairement urbaine présentant des taux d’urbanisation supérieurs à celui de la planète (52%, source : Banque mondiale) et supérieurs au reste de leurs territoires nationaux. C’est le cas en Russie, pour sept des dix districts fédéraux septentrionaux qui présentent les maxima de la zone polaire (ex : Magadan, 95,6%). On observe une croissance à la fois du nombre de villes arctiques et de leur poids démographique et économique. Cette tendance se renforcera par les effets conjugués de l’accroissement naturel, des migrations régionales et transnationales stimulées par le développement de l’exploitation des ressources naturelles et du trafic maritime, eux-mêmes stimulés par le changement climatique. Cependant, le renouvellement du peuplement, dans un cadre essentiellement urbain, créée-t-il une identité nouvelle ? Un sentiment d’attachement à ces espaces pionniers ? Dans un contexte de faible densité, sommes-nous en présence de l’émergence de villes- îles, mieux reliées au centre national, souvent non polaire, qu’elles ne le sont entre elles ou avec leur espace régional ? Ce projet nécessite de commencer par (ou plutôt revenir à) la définition de la ville. Celle-ci fait bien souvent appel à des critères quantitatifs : seuil de population, continuité du bâti, seuil maximum d’actifs relevant du secteur primaire, pour ne citer que les plus usuels. Ceux-ci sont éventuellement complétés par le profil économique, l’aire d’influence de la ville… Ils sont présents dans la définition issue de la Conférence de Prague (1966) et celles des appareils statistiques nationaux sur lesquelles s’appuie la Banque Mondiale. Cependant, à ceux-ci font écho d’autres critères plus qualitatifs concernant le mode de vie et l’ancrage territorial des habitants. Ces définitions découlent de longs et fructueux travaux menés sous les latitudes moyennes et/ou tropicales. Les hautes latitudes sont le théâtre de la tendance globale forte de l’urbanisation mais celle-ci y est encore très récente et correspond mal à nos modèles usuels – notamment dans la différence entre l’urbain et le rural. Le bassin arctique, de par sa dimension internationale, présente une pluralité de définitions de l’urbain qui constitue en soi un handicap pour une compréhension régionale du phénomène. Le projet partira d’un inventaire des lieux habités pour analyser leur dynamique démographique sur le long terme et aboutir à une réflexion sur l’urbain. L’approche comparative du fait urbain en Arctique permettra d’interroger la ville boréale, de l’échelle du bassin arctique au zoom sur quelques villes-tests. Le projet comporte deux questionnements croisés : a) ville durable et b) mobilité des populations. Thème Ville durable : la ville polaire est-elle soutenable ? Elle est à risque parce que souvent intégrée dans l’espace mondial comme périphérie extractive, son existence au-delà des réserves de la ressource naturelle se pose en termes brûlants. La nouvelle donne climatique l’expose à des risques majeurs (fonte du permafrost, inondation fluviale ou marine). Malgré ce contexte partagé, il existe une inégalité de dynamisme des territoires urbains qui questionne les gouvernances et les déséquilibres spatiaux. Il s’agit ici d’une analyse prospective de l’adaptabilité et de la vulnérabilité des structures urbaines au double enjeu du changement climatique et des mutations sociologiques majeures. Il faut interroger la capacité des Pôles URbains à se maintenir, notamment en diversifiant leur économie et en s’assurant de l’appropriation territoriale de leur population. Les questions d’intégration socio-spatiale des néo-urbains et du « racinement » polaire des résidents, notamment la qualité de vie, la santé et le bien-être en ville polaire constituent les éléments clef de la ville durable. En Arctique, ce thème est désormais une question prioritaire pour les populations, les gouvernements locaux, régionaux et tutélaires. Thème Mobilité & Identité : Considérant l’urbanisation comme la mise en espace de la somme de quêtes individuelles de nouvelles opportunités, la ville s’affiche comme un pré-requis au développement. Il en découle l’hypothèse forte que les villes concentrent des populations jeunes et mobiles, voire « fluides » (on y vient pour travailler mais on ne s’y fixe pas à long terme) laquelle demande à être documentée. Les « transmigrances intrapolaires », les mobilités « Nord-Grands Nords » ainsi que les apports extrapolaires (Sud – (Grands) Nord(s)) forment un volet souvent non traité. Une mobilité à plusieurs échelles intègre les enjeux de la mondialisation dans la question urbaine polaire avec des migrations croisées : infranationales, intra- européennes, eurasiatiques nord-américaines ou mondiales (thaïlandais à Kiruna et Yellowknife, sub- sahariens à Hammerfest, ukrainiens à Noïabrsk, mexicaine à Fairbanks, somaliens à Inuvik…).

This the Citizenship Regime Inclusiveness Index (CITRIX) mainly builds on selected and partly modified indicators of the Migration and Integration Policy Index (MIPEX) strand on the Access to Nationality. It also uses the citizenship indicators of Fitzgerald et al. (2014) as well as the resources offered by DEMIG and GLOBALCIT as further cornerstones for data collection. Covering a total of 23 OECD countries from 1980 to 2014 (805 country-year observations), CITRIX zooms in on four fundamental components of citizenship regimes relating to the acquisition of nationality by immigrants and their children: (1) the residence duration requirement for ordinary naturalization; (2) the toleration of dual citizenship in naturalization; (3) further naturalization requirements, namely language and citizenship tests as well as economic and criminal record condition; and (4) the strength of jus soli.

The authors created an overall index of migration policies, taking into account 38 countries in the period 1996-2014. They constructed an indicator of the restrictiveness of immigration entry policy across countries as well as a more comprehensive indicator of migration policy that also accounts for staying requirements and regulations to foster integration. Specifically, they estimate a Bayesian-state space model to combine all publicly available data sources that are informative on migration policy. Therefore, starting from some of the previously-created indexes, and from a database of over 250 indicators of migration policy, they created three sub-indexes that correspond to three categories traditionally distinguished in migration policy: (1) entry policies (including family reunification); (2) stay policies (permanent as opposed to temporary migration); and (3) integration policies (including migrant rights). They constructed three different migration policy indexes, MPIE; MPIS and MPII, of respectively entry, stay, and integration policies, that asses the restrictiveness of each of these sub-fields of migration policy, as well as a comprehensive indicator MPIC reflecting the overall stance of migration policy.

DEMIG POLICY tracks more than 6,500 migration policy changes enacted by 45 countries around the world mostly in the 1945-2013 period. The policy measures are coded according to the policy area and migrant group targeted, as well as the change in restrictiveness they introduce in the existing legal system. The database allows for both quantitative and qualitative research on the long-term evolution and effectiveness of migration policies. DEMIG POLICY was compiled between 2010 and 2014 as part of the DEMIG project (Determinants of International Migration: A Theoretical and Empirical Assessment of Policy, Origin and Destination Effects). It tracks 6,500 migration policy changes (both immigration and emigration) in 45 countries, most of them enacted in the 1945-2013 period. DEMIG POLICY assesses for each policy measure whether it represents a change towards more restrictiveness (coded +1) or less restrictiveness (coded -1) within the existing legal system. Besides this main assessment of change in restrictiveness, every policy change is also coded according to the policy area (border control, legal entry, integration, exit), policy tool (recruitment agreements, work permit, expulsion, quota, regularization, resettlement, carrier sanctions, etc.), migrant group (low- and high-skilled workers, family members, refugees, irregular migrants, students etc.) and migrant origin (all foreign nationalities, EU citizens, specific nationalities etc.) targeted. The database has been compiled by the DEMIG team, in particular by Katharina Natter, Simona Vezzoli and Hein de Haas, and reviewed by national migration policy experts.

EUDO Citizenship Implementation Indicators measure on a 0 to 1 scale the formal aspects of naturalisation procedures: promotion activities, documentation requirements, administrative discretion, bureaucratic procedures, and review and appeal options. CITIMP indicators allow for comparisons of the specific steps in the procedure across countries. CITIMP indicators have been calculated for 35 European states, as well as for three German federal provinces. CITIMP indicators are an output of the research project 'Access to Citizenship and its Impact on Immigrant Integration (ACIT). = The project was financially supported by the European Fund for the Integration of Third Country Nationals, administered by DG Home Affairs. CITIMP indicators were computed on the grounds of self-collected information: questionnaires on implementation of citizenship policies were filled out by country experts.

The Immigration Policies in Comparison (IMPIC) database includes data on migration policies for 33 OECD countries and the period 1980-2010. The IMPIC defines immigration policy as “government’s statements of what it intends to do or not do (incl. laws, regulations, decisions, or orders) in regards to the selection, admission, settlement and deportation of foreign citizens residing in the country”. The index covers: 1) labour migration; 2) family reunification; 3) refugees and asylum; 4) co-ethnics (e.g., easy access to co-ethics -e.g., children of emigrants). A total of 69 indicators are identified for the four policies fields. Indicators are coded between 0 (more liberal policies) and 1 (more restrictive polices) capturing the extent to which ‘a regulation limits or liberalises the rights and freedoms of immigrants.

The Inquiry gathers critically important data for monitoring the implementation of the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development and other international agreements, including the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The Inquiry, mandated by the General Assembly in its resolution 1838 (XVII) of 18 December 1962, has been conducted by the Secretary-General at regular intervals since 1963. The Twelfth Inquiry consists of multiple-choice questions, organized in three thematic modules: Module I on population ageing and urbanization; Module II on fertility, family planning and reproductive health; and Module III on international migration. In 1994, Member States attending the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo agreed that “population-related goals and policies are integral parts of cultural, economic and social development” and recommended that actions be taken “to measure, assess, monitor and evaluate progress towards meeting the goals of its Programme of Action”. The year 2019 will mark the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Cairo conference and adoption of the ICPD Programme of Action, which continues to provide crucial guidance for addressing the fundamental development challenges facing the world today. Population issues are also at the core of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development adopted in 2015. The United Nations Inquiry among Governments on Population and Development (the “Inquiry”) gathers critically important data for monitoring the implementation of the ICPD Programme of Action and other international agreements, including the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The Inquiry, mandated by the General Assembly in its resolution 1838 (XVII) of 18 December 1962, has been conducted by the Secretary-General at regular intervals since 1963. The most recent Inquiry, the Eleventh, was implemented in 2014.

The index is based on three types of entry visa restrictions: visa required, visa not required for short stays and visa not required. The author identifies country pairs which changed their visa regime during 1998–2010. This immigration policy index is constructed for all countries and territories in the world for both March 1998 and November 2009. This index is heterogeneous across destination and origin countries as well as over time.