Presentation by Elizabeth Collett (Director of Migration Policy Institute - Europe and Senior Advisor to MPI’s Transatlantic Council on Migration) on the occasion of the conference on Immigration – a source of wealth and duties for Europe organised by the EESC, the Council of Europe and the French Economic, Social and Environmental Council in Brussels on 15 March 2013.

1. EESC Conference
Elizabeth Collett – presentation notes
Immigration as an opportunity- the transatlantic experience
Thank you for the opportunity to speak here today.
MPI Europe is a Brussels-based independent thinktank that that aims to provide a better
understanding of migration in Europe and thus promote effective policymaking. To do so, MPI
Europe builds on the resources of MPI, headquartered in Washington DC, and one of the flagship
projects of MPI is the Transatlantic Council on Migration. As such, my remarks today will focus
upon the transatlantic experiences of, and attitudes toward, immigration, and the kinds of
‘wealths’ that immigration has delivered.
In Europe, a great deal of energy has been expended upon quantifying the economic ‘costs and
benefits’ of immigration across the continent. Such studies can, on the whole, determine the
outcomes through their methodology. In the UK alone one can find studies highlighting greater
benefits as well as those highlighting greater costs.
The implication of these studies is that immigration is only a public good, and an opportunity, if it
conveys significant economic benefits, as this is the only way it can balance out a widespread
assumptive belief that immigration is socially costly for Europeans.
For the smaller cabal of immigration experts, the concept of opportunity is far broader than the
purely economic, and extends towards the contribution to the labour market and Europe’s skills
pool, the possibility of ameliorating demographic decline, and the cultural contributions that a
diverse society can bring.
However, this does not necessarily reverberate with European publics, and majorities of nationals
across Europe express scepticism towards the benefits of immigration and believe it presents more
of a problem than an opportunity.
In this regard, it is interesting to assess the experience across the Atlantic, and correlate it with the
current political debates in Europe. The remainder of my remarks will draw heavily from two
papers commissioned by MPI for a meeting of the Transatlantic Council on Migration that focused
the interplay between immigration, identity formation and society:
- Irene Bloemraad – Understanding Canadian Exceptionalism
- Michael Jones-Correa – Contested Ground
For those of you interested, these papers can be found on MPI’s website, along with a set of
corresponding papers for the UK, Germany, Spain, France.
First, the US:
The United States has historically always perceived itself as a country of immigration – the
proverbial ‘melting pot’. However, this does not mean that immigration has been seen as a
positive development, as successive prejudices towards waves of immigrants to the US – whether
Italian, Polish, or Mexican – may attest.
Despite high numbers of immigrants in the US (40m of 309m immigrant in 2010), and the
dominance of immigrant background within the US population as a whole, the overall attitude to
immigration is ambivalent, coloured by anxiety over levels of unauthorised migration from Central
America (and particularly Mexico). Such ambivalence tends to be conceptual in practice: individual

2. immigrants who arrive and work hard are celebrated; it is the whole of ‘immigration’ that causes
anxiety.
However, the perception from this side of the Atlantic is that, regardless of national attitudes of US
citizens towards immigration, the US as a whole is realising the value (the opportunity) of
immigration in a way that Europe is not.
This is perhaps because, economically at least, this is the case:
- Immigrants benefit native incomes: An MPI study on the impact of immigration on overall
wages levels found that between 1990 and 2006, there was a 2.9% increase in real wages for
the average US worker.
- Immigrants create businesses: immigrants are 30% more likely to be entrepreneurs, and 18%
of all US businesses are immigrant owned.
- Immigrants create jobs: immigrant businesses employed 4.7 people in 2007;
This suggests that the idea of immigration as an opportunity is taken as a given for the US. It is
understood as a positive thing, and the current debate in the US on Comprehensive Immigration
Reform reflects this: that regularisation of unauthorised workers would be economically and
socially positive is implicit within the debate and the central question is whether they should also
be allowed access to permanent residence and citizenship, and on what basis.
Turning to Canada, the experience is very different:
Canadian citizens have overwhelmingly positive attitudes towards immigration, at levels that have
remained stable since the 1970s. This is despite the fact that the immigrant population in Canada is
far higher than that in most European countries – around 20% compared to around 12% in other
major countries of immigration in Europe.
Why is this? Some posit that it is Canada’s points system – which rigorously selects new
immigrants, and perceived control of the system, supported by the fact that Canada is remotely
located, and far from major countries of origin, unlike the US and the EU.
But Bloemraad highlights that Canada’s points system and geography are insufficient to explain
this positive opinion, which holds even for groups typically sceptical of immigration, such as the
unemployed. (80% of the country thinks immigration is positive for the economy, including 68% of
the unemployed).
Rather, for Canadians, their exceptionalism is found in the fact that immigration is seen as a part of
nation-building, and integral to national identity. Research in Canada found that the more patriotic
a citizen, the more likely they were to support immigration and multiculturalism. For Canadian’s
the idea that immigration is an opportunity for the nation is hardwired – or mainstreamed – into
public opinion.
There are questions about whether this positive approach will be sustainable in an era of more
diverse immigration, and emerging inequalities for those with immigrant or minority background.
What can Europe learn from this?
- First, that you do not need to regard immigration as an opportunity to realise its benefits….
But it helps. While a lot can be learned from the Canadian experience, the idea of replanting
the ideas comprised within the long-term nation-building process
- Second, that the opportunities presented by immigration are substantially reduced in a
context of persistent inequality, or whether social mobility is stymied by discrimination.

3. - Third, the opportunities can be squandered by poor policy-making, and failure to capitalise on
the value presented by immigrants in terms of recognising skills, and encouraging social and
political participation.
For Europeans, there is a significant risk that viewing immigration as a risk rather than an
opportunity will become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Policies currently assume the spirit of minimising
risk, rather than maximising opportunity – from short-term work permits, integration conditions
for immigrants, and limiting access to citizenship – which can limit the potential that is presented
by immigrants and their families.