Using EU Indicators of Immigrant Integration - European ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

8effective short-term solution to make availablemore data to measure immigrant integrationwhile it has to be kept in mind that some qualityof data is lost in the process.Showing uncertainty in results: Since resultsbased on sample surveys are inevitably limited dueto sampling errors, the provision of confidence intervalswould increase the visibility of uncertaintyin the estimates. Showing confidence intervalsmight increase the credibility of results based onsmall samples. If minimum sample size requirementswere lowered, results could be published formore countries. Confidence intervals indicate rangesof the estimates, in which the true populationfigures are very likely to be (by convention 95 %confidence intervals). The estimation of these intervalsdepends on the sampling designs in thecountries, which are different across EU countries.Consequently, the confidence intervals for totalpopulation and for immigrants have to be providedby the National Statistical Institutes (NSIs).Harmonise methods of data production:Currently, different parameters for weightingsurvey estimates of the main surveys (especiallythe EU LFS) are employed across EU MemberStates. Some countries include estimates on theforeign born or foreign population to account fornon-response and some countries do not. It isimportant to harmonise weights across countriesaccording to country of birth or citizenship forproviding more reliable comparisons of the estimates.There is a lack of research on weightingmethods and practices by country of birth andcitizenship and its impact on data quality.33. If the previous recommendations were also appliedto other data sources, such as the EuropeanSocial Survey, they could be useful to exploreadditional indicators of migrant integration.34. Data harmonisation and improvement at theinternational level needs good coordination.Eurostat has set priorities for mainstreamingmigration statistics into general data collections.Eurostat should continue to take aleading role in reinforcing and coordinatingresearch on the issues mentioned above inclose cooperation with the NSIs.1.3 Using indicators35. There are three key policy purposes for usingintegration indicators: understanding integrationcontexts and immigrants’ integrationoutcomes, evaluating the results of policies,and mainstreaming integration into generalpolicies. These purposes are not one in thesame. Measuring the situation of immigrantsis a different exercise from the evaluation ofthe results of integration policies. The resultsof these policies cannot all be measured interms of immigrants’ outcomes on integrationindicators. For integration stakeholders,not all Europe 2020 targets are relevant forintegration. For policymakers working in otherfields, many of their policies are not significantlyaffected by the situation of immigrantsor the results of integration policies.36. The EU integration indicators make it easierto understand the integration context in theEU Member States so that policy actors canbetter learn from one other. The results showthe similarities and differences in national contexts,while further analysis reveals what factorsexplain these similarities and differences.Integration outcomes in different countries areoften related to the same key aspects of theimmigrant population, the general context, andnational policies. The more these factors arepresent in a country, the more likely are certainintegration outcomes in that country. Thisanalysis helps policy actors to appreciate theunique combination of factors influencing integrationin their country and other countries.Moreover, the use of indicators over time givespolicy actors a new long-term perspective forpolicy planning. The availability of these indicatorsis therefore a starting-point for more informedmutual learning across the EU.37. Policy actors have various options for usingintegration indicators at various levels, whichcan be implemented and combined in differentways and at different times. The mainoptions are summarised in the chart below.38. A more structured and regular integrationmonitoring at EU level can see the best resultsby building on existing national and Europeandata collection mechanisms. In this way duplicationis avoided. Existing data can be mademore accessible for policy actors and scientistswho can help to demonstrate how datacan be used responsibly and meaningfully.This may also incite further reflection about apossible expansion over time: from a simplerto a more sophisticated system. Experiencesat national, regional and local levels are importantin this respect as well.39. Integration policy makers and practitioners inMember States can learn from each other inhow indicators can be used in policy debates.The NCPI meetings and the European IntegrationForum are platforms for such exchange.
In addition, in some countries and in some integrationfields deeper analysis is undertakenfrom which others can learn.40. An annual or multi-annual report on integrationalong the lines of Eurostat’s StatisticalPortrait would be a promising start. This couldbe expanded to include more focused contextualinformation reflecting the specificities ofthe immigration population and the beneficiariesof specific policies in each country aswell as valuable information on integrationoutcomes and policies at national and, wherepossible, regional and local level. A next stagecan be when various types of analyses areused to measure impact.List of Zaragoza indicators and additional indicators to be consideredEmployment Education Social Inclusion Active Citizenship Welcoming SocietyZaragoza indicatorsProposed New IndicatorsEmployment rateHighest educationalattainmentAt-risk-of-poverty(and socialexclusion)Naturalisation rateUnemployment rate Tertiary attainment Income Share of long-termresidenceActivity rate Early school leaving Self-reported healthstatus (controllingfor age)Share of electedrepresentatives(research)*Self-employment Low-achievers (PISA) Property ownership Voter turnout(research)*Over-qualification Language skills ofnon-native speakers(LFS module)**Public sector employmentTemporaryemploymentPart-timeemploymentLong-termunemploymentShare of foreigndiplomasrecognised(survey)**Retention of internationalstudents(research)*Participation in earlychildhood education(SILC/PISA)**Participation in lifelonglearning(LFS, AES)Not in education,employment or training(LFS)Resilient students(PISA)**Concentration in lowperformingschools(PISA)**Child poverty (SILC)Self-reported unmetneed for medicalcare (SILC)Life expectancy(SILC)Healthy life years(SILC)Housing cost overburden(SILC)**Overcrowding (SILC)**In-work poverty-risk(SILC)Persistent povertyrisk(SILC)Participation in voluntaryorganisations(survey)*Membership in tradeunions (survey)*Membership in politicalparties (survey)*Political activity(survey)*Perceived experienceof discrimination(survey)*Trust in public institutions(survey)*Sense of belonging(survey)*Public perception ofracial/ethnic discrimination(Eurobarometer)Public attitudesto political leaderwith ethnic minoritybackground (Eurobarometer)Note: One star (*) marks indicators for which data needs to be collected or migrant sample sizes boosted.Two stars (**) mark indicators for which data is not available every year (ad hoc basis). The authors of this study propose a newcategory of indicators of the ‘welcoming society’. It includes the already proposed Zaragoza indicators ‘perceived discrimination’,‘trust in public institutions’ and ‘sense of belonging’.9
Page 2: Using EU Indicators of Immigrant In
Page 5 and 6: Executive SummaryThis report is bas
Page 7: 24. Immigrants become citizens and
Page 11: Chapter 1:Background on a pilotproj
Page 15 and 16: (education, employment, income, occ
Page 18 and 19: 18Country of origin and language sk
Page 20 and 21: 20Based on the projects’ bivariat
Page 22 and 23: 22tive income of the foreign-born p
Page 24 and 25: 24integration outcomes according to
Page 26 and 27: 3.1The relevance ofEU migrant emplo
Page 28 and 29: an indicator of immigrants’ long-
Page 30 and 31: Indicators of the welcoming society
Page 32 and 33: PART 2: Data assessment 19Chapter 5
Page 34 and 35: EU SILC is an international compara
Page 36 and 37: further the knowledge on issues rel
Page 38 and 39: to compare immigrants across many E
Page 40 and 41: 40Who is missing from statistics?Th
Page 42 and 43: 42of the results. For example, a ne
Page 44 and 45: 44“The function of the indicator
Page 46 and 47: 46tations of the data that can emer
Page 48 and 49: 48A country’s policy may still af
Page 50 and 51: to create general policies that imp
Page 52 and 53: 2. Closing the gap - scenario’ fo
Page 54 and 55: 4. Correlations across all EU migra
Page 56 and 57: 8. Native-born offspring of immigra
Page 58 and 59:
12. Gap in socio-economic position
Page 60 and 61:
16. Female gap in poverty risk rate
Page 62 and 63:
20. Eurostat bivariate correlation
Page 64 and 65:
23. Different elements of national
Page 66:
Social inclusion AT DK FR DE IE NL
Page 69 and 70:
OECD (2012): Settling in. OECD indi
Page 71 and 72:
Foreigner: (non-nationals) A person
show all

Using EU Indicators of Immigrant Integration - European ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?