Migrant Integration Policy Index 2015 Presentation by Thomas Huddleston, Migration Policy Group

1. MIGRANT INTEGRATION
POLICY INDEX 2015
MIPEX – How does a country become the best in the world on integration?
You must remain ambitious to become effective at the process of integration
THOMAS HUDDLESTON, MIGRATION POLICY GROUP

2. LATEST POLICY COMPARISONS:
What are the trends and differences in integration policies in eight areas across
Europe and the developed world?
MONITORING STATISTICS:
Which integration outcomes can and do different integration policies affect? Which
immigrants can and do benefit from these policies?
ROBUST EVALUATIONS:
Which countries have robust evaluations of their policies’ effects on integration?
Which policies are found to be most effective for improving integration outcomes?
Bringing a new level of maturity and evidence to the often politicised debate about the
successes and failures of integration policy

3. ROBUST EVALUATIONS
•Few robust causal impact evaluations
•Mostly in labour market & education
•Promote standards for evaluation of
integration policy effects

4. LINKS BETWEEN POLICIES, OUTCOMES & PUBLIC OPINION

5. ALL EU MEMBER STATES
ICELAND;
NORWAY;
SWITZERLAND;
TURKEY;
JAPAN;
KOREA;
AUSTRALIA;
CANADA;
NEW ZEALAND;
UNITED STATES
and more…

6. LABOUR MARKET MOBILITY
FAMILY REUNION
EDUCATION OF CHILDREN
POLITICAL PARTICIPATION
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
ACCESS TO NATIONALITY
ANTI-DISCRIMINATION
AND NOW HEALTH
(in partnership with IOM and the COST/ADAPT research network).

7. KEY FINDINGS FOR SWEDEN
COMMON NEEDS ACROSS EUROPE
● Separated families, esp. vulnerable groups unable to reunite
● Many non-EU citizens settled or likely to settle long-term
● Few accessing training, benefits, degrees or recognition
● Concentration of immigrants in disadvantaged areas/schools
● Discrimination victims not reporting incidents
CONTEXT IN SWEDEN
● Longstanding destination but now major increase in humanitarian & family
newcomers
● One of highest employment rates in developed world & many effective
education, employment & social policies
● Some of most positive public attitudes towards immigrants like Nordics &
traditional destinations
● Mainstream political and public consensus so far…

8. KEY FINDINGS FOR SWEDEN
Internationally, SE’s integration policies tend to be the most:
● Ambitious (Ranked 1st
on policies, like FI, NO, CA, NZ)
● Responsive (Similar needs across Northern Europe)
● Evidence-based (One of few using pilots, experiments & robust evaluations to design &
change integration policy)
● Well-supported (Favourable economic & political context & general policies in many but
not all areas)
● Effective (Reaching more residents in need, with clear outcomes in certain areas and
investments in others in programmes proving most effective in evaluations)
● Closely watched (trend-setting as countries slowly move in SE’s direction in many areas of
integration…)

9. LABOUR MARKET MOBILITY
● Most countries opening equal access & general
support to non-EU newcomers and increasing their
investment in targeted support
● Sweden is piloting & investing in the policies
proven most effective for boosting immigrants’
employment by few available robust studies:
● Long-term pay-offs of flexible language
training to level needed for high vs. low-
skilled sectors, esp. work-specific/based
● Programmes to recognise foreign
qualifications, give domestic work
experience and provide bridging/new
domestic qualifications
● Start-up support for entrepreneurs
Strength of targeted labour market mobility policies, MIPEX 2015

10. LABOUR MARKET MOBILITY
● Labour market integration happens over time (especially in
Sweden leading to one of highest long-term employment rates)
● Long-term challenge is getting immigrants into equal quality
jobs using their skills & providing a living wage (also in SE)

11. LABOUR MARKET MOBILITY
● Labour market integration happens over time especially
for family migrants & refugees, with Sweden obtaining some
of highest long-term employment rates in Europe)

12. LABOUR MARKET MOBILITY
● Education & language skills are key factors driving
employment rates: rates for low-educated in Sweden are
among highest in EU & improve from 1st
to 2nd
generation

13. LABOUR MARKET MOBILITY
● Education & language skills are key factors driving
employment rates: rates for tertiary-educated in Sweden
are among highest in EU & improve from 1st
to 2nd
generation

14. LABOUR MARKET MOBILITY
● Uptake of lifelong learning among non-EU citizens in Sweden is highest in EU & increasing
Uptake of lifelong learning among working-age non-EU citizens in 2011/2

15. LABOUR MARKET MOBILITY
Uptake of language courses among working-age foreign-born, 2014 EU LFS ad hoc module
● One of highest uptakes in EU of language courses among working-age foreign-born

16. ANTI-DISCRIMINATION
● Challenge for anti-discrimination law across EU is enforcement
but Sweden is far ahead like others with long-established &
strong laws, bodies & bodies
● The stronger the law, the public is better informed about
discrimination over time and, as a result, more likely to report
witnessing discrimination and less likely to identify as a
discriminated group (Ziller 2014); also greater trust in justice
system by immigrants (Roder & Muhlau 2012)
Complaints to equality bodies per self-perceived victims of racial, ethnic & religious discrimination
Strength of anti-discrimination law, MIPEX 2015

17. EDUCATION
● Several schools systems are
reaching low-literacy pupils
● Major progress from 1st
generation to the 2nd
: (near)
parity in several countries

18. EDUCATION
● General consensus on early & equal access to all levels,
individualised support, mixed schools & parental/community
involvement, better trained teachers & role models
● Weakness across Europe: Make schools into a space for
social integration

19. FAMILY REUNION
● Countries diverge significantly on family definitions & requirements
● New trends to delays for BIPs and restrictions with discretionary exemptions
● Countries with these types of requirements are few, challenged as disproportionate, & seem ineffective for
integration outcomes, only limit reunion (Huddleston & Pedersen 2011)
● Delays are negative for children’s and potentially spouses’ education, language and employment outcomes
● Need to better identify & inform/orient skilled non-labour migrants

20. PERMANENT RESIDENCE
● Residence & citizenship policies are key factor, esp. for
vulnerable groups
● Permanent residence is normal part of integration process in SE
and should not be taken for granted for groups most likely to
settle long-term
● Potentially positive effects for labour market integration
(Corrigan 2013) & long-term settlement (De Waard 2013)

21. ● Naturalisation & political rights can boost political
participation for certain groups (Bilgili et al. 2014) &
responsiveness of politicians to local needs (Vernby 2013)
ACCESS TO NATIONALITYPOLITICAL PARTICIPATION

22. ACCESS TO NATIONALITYPOLITICAL PARTICIPATION
● Naturalisation also
boosts labour market
integration (Bilgili et
al), discrimination
protection/reporting
(EU-MIDIS 2008),
mobility (Jauer et al.
2014) & housing/
social outcomes

23. ACCESS TO NATIONALITYPOLITICAL PARTICIPATION

24. .43%
KEY FINDINGS FOR SWEDEN
Integration policies in SE is more ambitious and reaching more immigrants than in
most countries, with investments in programmes proving to be effective for boosting
integration outcomes

25. Beyond the well-known individual and general contextual factors driving integration
outcomes, policies can help immigrants in practice to reunite together, get basic training,
become permanent residents, eligible voters and citizens and help discrimination victims to
know and use their rights
• Employment and education influenced by various factors, but not simply explained by
immigrants’ skills and general policy/context; positive effects of specific policies
• More ambitious policies seem to reach more immigrant adults and children with training
• But immigrants often under-represented in most effective general policies, while targeted
policies may be too new, small-scale or general to improve aggregate outcomes (Bilgili 2015)
• Strong long-standing anti-discrimination laws associated with better informed public opinion,
higher rates of witnessing discrimination, less identification as discriminated groups (Ziller
2014) and greater trust of immigrants in justice system (Roder & Muhlau 2012)
• Integration policies may influence immigrants’ health outcomes/inequalities (Malmusi 2014)
LINKS BETWEEN SPECIFIC INTEGRATION POLICIES & OUTCOMES

26. • Family reunion policies are one of key factors for the small # of transnational non-EU
families, especially vulnerable groups (Strik et al. 2013, Huddleston and Pedersen 2011) and
potentially for boosting labour market outcomes of certain groups (Bisin et al. 2011)
• Path to permanent residence – in interaction with citizenship policies - are likely important
factor determining # of permanent residents and boosting their job quality (Corrigan 2013),
long-term settlement (De Waard 2012) & mobility under certain conditions (EMN 2013)
• Political participation and citizenship policies are key factors boosting the franchise,
participation rates for certain groups/circumstances (Aleksynska 2011) and, potentially,
responsiveness of politicians to local needs (Vernby 2013)
• Citizenship policies are very - if not most - important factor driving naturalisation of
immigrants from developing countries (Vink et al. 2013) and boosting labour market and
political participation for certain groups (Bilgili et al. 2014), discrimination protection/
reporting (EU-MIDIS 2008), mobility, (Jauer et al. 2014) & other outcomes
LINKS BETWEEN SPECIFIC INTEGRATION POLICIES & OUTCOMES

27. INTEGRATION POLICIES: WHO BENEFITS?
Overall, inclusive integration policies are part of the societies that we want to live in…
•Strong link between integration policies & public opinion, even after controlling for the
individual factors determining attitudes (Callens 2015)
•Strong correlations between MIPEX and levels of GDP, Human Development, Global
Competitiveness, Patents, Entrepreneurship & Life Satisfaction (Florida 2011)
•Strong link with high-skilled immigration & inward Foreign Direct Investment (Nowotny
2009, 2013)
•Subjective well-being among immigrants rises to match level for native-born in countries
with inclusive policies, even after controlling for other key factors (Hadjar & Backes 2013)

28. INTEGRATION POLICIES: WHO BENEFITS?

29. INTEGRATION POLICIES: WHO BENEFITS?
CONCLUSIONS
● SE’s high bar for success is blessing for integration, curse for debate
● Integration is ongoing process (not one moment in time)
● Targeted integration policies are also a process and only one key
factor for boosting outcomes over time
● Key challenge is to expand access to most effective programmes
where immigrants are often under-represented
● Remove any practical obstacles to rapid family reunion, permanent
residence & citizenship
● Legal roles for equality NGOs/unions & alternative mechanisms
● Specific migrant health policy to increase intercultural competence
● Structures for dialogue with immigrants & communities
● Communicate the process and the benefits to public