Search

Begin New Search Topic Resettlement Political Geography Europe

1. The Long‐​Run Effects of Immigration: Evidence across a Barrier to Refugee Settlement

Author:
Antonio Ciccone and Jan Nimczik
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
Some 280 million people around the world are first‐​generation immigrants; in Organisation for Economic Co‐​operation and Development countries, first‐​generation immigrants make up around 14 percent of the population. The economic effects of immigration have become better understood in recent decades. A new focus of research on the effects of immigration is its long‐​run impact on productivity, wages, and income. We contribute to this research by examining the long‐​run economic effects of the arrival of refugees in what would become West Germany after the end of World War II (WWII) in 1945. This period was characterized by one of the largest population movements in modern times. Between 1945 and 1949, millions of people from Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and eastern parts of prewar Germany were displaced westward. When the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) was founded in 1949, these refugees made up around 15 percent of the country’s population.
Topic:
History, Immigration, Refugees, Resettlement, and World War II
Political Geography:
Europe, France, Germany, and United States of America

2. Attracting, Retaining, and Diversifying Sponsors for Refugees in Community Sponsorship Programs

Author:
Maria Belen Zanzuchi, Nadja Dumann, Florian Tissot, and Admir Skodo
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Migration Policy Institute (MPI)
Abstract:
More countries in Europe and elsewhere are exploring the potential of sponsorship programs to open up another pathway for refugee protection and integration. This reflects recognition of both the staggering scale of unmet protection needs globally and the value of involving receiving communities more directly in welcoming and supporting refugee newcomers. The strength of these community sponsorship programs—and their ability to be sustained and scaled up over time—hinges on recruiting community members to volunteer their time and often some personal resources to support arriving refugees. This report examines the challenges sponsorship programs have faced to recruiting, retaining, and diversifying the sponsors involved in these efforts, as well as strategies that programs could and in some cases already use to overcome these obstacles. It highlights findings from surveys and interviews conducted in three case-study countries (Belgium, Germany, and Ireland) as well as evidence from other countries that operate sponsorship programs. This MPI Europe study is part of the Building Capacity for Private Sponsorship in the European Union (CAPS-EU) Project, which aims to build the capacity of European, national, and local governments and nongovernmental stakeholders to design, implement, sustain, and scale up community sponsorship programs for refugees.
Topic:
Refugees, Resettlement, Asylum, Integration, and Social Cohesion
Political Geography:
Europe and Global Focus

3. What Role Could Digital Technologies Play in the New EU Pact on Migration and Asylum?

Author:
Lucía Salgado and Hanne Beirens
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Migration Policy Institute (MPI)
Abstract:
Pressure on EU migration and asylum systems has grown considerably in recent years, with rising arrivals of asylum seekers and migrants and the level of asylum applications approaching those that threw the European Union into disarray in 2015–16. The arrival of more than 4 million displaced Ukrainians, meanwhile, has challenged already strained reception and integration systems. And across Europe, migration has become a flashpoint for political tensions and dominated electoral debates. Many policymakers and other stakeholders have pinned their hopes on the New Pact on Migration and Asylum to help Europe address these challenges. The pact, which was announced by the European Commission in 2020 and has recently entered the final stages of negotiation, is a series of legislative proposals aimed at revamping EU migration and asylum systems. Yet even if the pact is finalized, it has to pass another test before policymakers can claim victory: translating a complex legal construct into something that works in practice and can withstand spikes in arrivals and other challenges. This policy brief explores how digital technologies—already increasingly being used in European migration and asylum systems—could be leveraged to support the implementation of the pact and where caution is merited. It examines the role new digital tools could play in three key areas: decision-making at the border, relocation of asylum seekers/refugees among Member States, and return and reintegration. It also discusses the broader implications of digitalization in migration and asylum systems and reflects on how policymakers can set appropriate governance models and safeguards to ensure responsible use of new technologies.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Governance, Border Control, European Union, Refugees, Resettlement, Asylum, and Digitalization
Political Geography:
Europe

4. Using Evidence to Improve Refugee Resettlement: A Monitoring and Evaluation Road Map

Author:
Aliyyah Ahad, Camille Le Coz, and Hanne Beirens
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Migration Policy Institute (MPI)
Abstract:
The refugee resettlement landscape has shifted considerably in recent years. A number of countries in Europe and elsewhere have launched or expanded their resettlement programs, and some have experimented with new models such as community-based or private sponsorship. At the same time, the United States—long the world’s largest resettlement country—has significantly cut its refugee admissions, leaving other countries to take the lead in global efforts to address displacement. For new and longstanding resettlement programs alike, it is vital that policymakers and program designers have the tools to gauge whether resettlement is meeting its objectives, to facilitate continuous learning, and to ensure that funding is being well spent. Robust monitoring and evaluation (M&E) holds the key. Yet many resettlement programs do not have a strong M&E culture. This report examines the added value that M&E can bring to refugee resettlement programs and identifies common obstacles that have kept countries from creating or expanding their M&E operations to date. It then lays out a road map for kickstarting this process—from finding the right “champion” to drive change, to identifying which of a program’s strategic and operational goals to monitor and evaluate, to identifying existing sources of information and designing new data collection tools. These insights are drawn in part from a pilot M&E project conducted by MPI Europe in partnership with resettlement authorities in Ireland, Italy, and the Netherlands under the framework of the European Union Action on Facilitating Resettlement and Refugee Admission through New Knowledge (EU-FRANK) project. This report was written as part of the EU-FRANK project, which is financed by the European Asylum, Migration, and Integration Fund (AMIF) and led by Sweden. Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, and Switzerland are partner countries. More MPI Europe research for the EU-FRANK project can be found on this series page.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Governance, Law, Refugees, Immigrants, Resettlement, Asylum, and Integration
Political Geography:
Europe

5. Building Welcome from the Ground up: European Small and Rural Communities Engaging in Refugee Resettlement

Author:
Liam Patuzzi, Monica Andriescu, and Antonio Pietropolli
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Migration Policy Institute (MPI)
Abstract:
Immigration to EU countries is largely an urban phenomenon, but small and rural communities have in recent years been more active in welcoming newcomers—including resettled refugees. This has sparked considerable interest in the idea of “rural welcoming,” but gaps remain in understanding how to make the most of resettlement to such localities, to the benefit of both refugees and receiving communities. While Europe’s small and rural areas vary considerably in their economic and social characteristics, shaping the context in which resettlement occurs, this study identifies some important commonalities. It draws its findings from interviews with resettled refugees, local officials, public service providers, and representatives of civil society in receiving communities that were selected for their small size, rural nature, and because they are situated within countries with varying levels of resettlement experience (Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, and Sweden). This research sheds light on both opportunities and challenges for small receiving communities and the refugees who are resettled there. For refugees, these can include receiving more individualized support, though specialized services may not always be available, and the potential to form strong relationships with neighbors in what are often tight-knit communities, though these same community networks can sometimes be challenging to become part of. For receiving communities, resettlement may be able to support local businesses and social revitalization, but as the number of refugees they receive is often modest, they may need to fold resettlement into a broader approach to local development to have the desired impact. A number of policy approaches can help countries and communities seize these opportunities and overcome the challenges. These include adjusting the predeparture orientation refugees receive before resettlement to include discussion of what life is like in the destination country's small towns and rural areas as well as its cities; supporting receiving communities as they prepare for refugees’ arrival and refugees as they work toward long-term integration; and weaving resettlement into local development strategies. This report was written as part of the European Union Action on Facilitating Resettlement and Refugee Admission through New Knowledge (EU-FRANK) project, which is financed by the European Asylum, Migration, and Integration Fund (AMIF) and led by Sweden. Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, and Switzerland are partner countries. More MPI Europe research for the EU-FRANK project can be found on this series page.
Topic:
Immigration, Employment, Refugees, Resettlement, and Rural
Political Geography:
Europe

6. The Next Generation of Refugee Resettlement in Europe: Ambitions for the Future and How to Realize Them

Author:
Susan Fratzke and Lena Kainz
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Migration Policy Institute (MPI)
Abstract:
Europe’s role within the global refugee resettlement landscape has changed significantly in recent years. Some EU Member States, such as Germany and Sweden, have expanded their resettlement programs, while others, including Romania and Lithuania, have launched new ones. This growth, coupled with the United States’ dramatic cuts to its refugee admissions, has meant that more than 40 percent of all refugees resettled through the UN High Commissioner for Refugees since 2017 have found a new home in Europe—up from 8 percent in 2007. This report looks at how investments in shared infrastructure at the EU level and growing resettlement experience among Member States offer a strong foundation upon which European resettlement efforts can build. It also explores what ambitious European resettlement policy could accomplish and what steps EU and national leaders would need to take to realize this vision. Among the many questions this report examines are: How can engagement in resettlement be motivated and sustained at the national level? And what elements are needed to build world-class resettlement systems in Europe—from improvements in selection and departure operations, to commitments to robust monitoring and evaluation, to investments in partnerships with first-asylum countries and between central governments and receiving communities in destination countries. This is the final report by the Migration Policy Institute Europe in a multiyear series of studies produced as part of the European Union Action on Facilitating Resettlement and Refugee Admission through New Knowledge (EU-FRANK) project. The EU-FRANK project is financed by the European Asylum, Migration, and Integration Fund (AMIF) and led by Sweden. Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, and Switzerland are partner countries.
Topic:
International Cooperation, European Union, Refugees, and Resettlement
Political Geography:
Europe

7. Measuring Up? Using Monitoring and Evaluation to Make Good on the Promise of Refugee Sponsorship

Author:
Hanne Beirens and Aliyyah Ahad
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Migration Policy Institute (MPI)
Abstract:
Interest in refugee sponsorship has taken root in a growing number of European countries since the 2015–16 migration crisis. Also called community or private sponsorship, or humanitarian corridors in certain contexts, proponents of engaging private individuals and civil-society groups in refugee resettlement tout this model’s ability to provide refugees with a warm, supportive welcome and to give sponsors a rejuvenated sense of community and purpose. Yet even as sponsorship programs are piloted and implemented in more countries, there is relatively limited evidence of whether they are living up to these high expectations and what program elements are most effective. This issue brief examines how building a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system into sponsorship programs can help answer these and other important questions. It highlights the value M&E can bring—from strengthening political commitment to sponsorship, to increasing accountability and facilitating improvements within a program. It also lays out key challenges policymakers and program designers will need to tackle to get an M&E system off the ground. The pause in humanitarian protection programs forced by the coronavirus pandemic comes at a critical time in the development of many sponsorship schemes. Their relative youth could leave them more fragile as uncertainty looms over whether and when countries will resume their protection operations. Stronger M&E can help give decisionmakers the confidence—and evidence—they need to make smart decisions about launching, managing, or expanding a sponsorship scheme.
Topic:
Refugees, Immigrants, Resettlement, Asylum, and Integration
Political Geography:
Europe

8. Matching Systems for Refugees

Author:
Will Jones and Alexander Teytelboym
Publication Date:
01-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
Design of matching systems between refugees and states or local areas is emerging as one of the most promising solutions to problems in refugee resettlement. We describe the basics of two-sided matching theory used in a number of allocation problems, such as school choice, where both sides need to agree to the match. We then explain how these insights can be applied to international refugee matching in the context of the European Union and examine how refugee matching might work within the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Refugees, and Resettlement
Political Geography:
United States, United Kingdom, Europe, Canada, and North America

9. Resettlement of Ecologically Displaced Persons Solution of a Problem or Creation of a New?

Author:
Tom Trier and Medea Turashvili
Publication Date:
01-2007
Content Type:
Case Study
Institution:
European Centre for Minority Issues (ECMI)
Abstract:
A much overlooked issue of social, political and humanitarian concern in Georgia has been the resettlement of so-called ecological migrants, or eco-migrants, i.e., persons who have been displaced due to natural disasters in their native villages. Resettlement and internal migration is not a new phenomenon in Georgia. Already in the 19th century, Georgians were relocated to populate sparsely inhabited border regions. Later with the Soviet collectivization of the 1930s-1950s, thousands of mountainous people were resettled, forcibly or voluntarily, to lowland parts of the country. In addition, regions that had been emptied of their indigenous populations during Stalin’s mass deportations of the 1940s were then repopulated with Georgians from other regions. In the 1950s and 1960s in particular, much of the population of the mountain regions of Ajara was resettled into other regions, in order to regulate the demographic balance and avoid over-population in the mountains. Since the early 1980s, the process of migration from mountainous regions has been further exacerbated by climate changes, which have had quite a significant impact on the livelihoods of the mountainous populations. Hence, over the past quarter of a century, tens of thousands of people have become homeless as a result of flooding, landslides, and/or avalanches. Various governments have responded to natural disasters in these mountainous regions of Georgia, beginning with the Soviet authorities of the 1980s, to the nationalist regime of Gamsakhurdia, over the leadership of Shevardnadze, and finally to the current Saakashvili government. Each has pursued a different approach. While in the early and mid 1980s, the process of resettlement was quite wellorganised, the late 1980s saw a serious increase in the number of natural disasters in Georgia’s mountain regions, coinciding with the breakdown of Soviet structures and the ensuing corruption. With the coming to power of a nationalist government under the leadership of Zviad Gamsakhurdia, resettlement policies were largely guided by a nationalist agenda designed to repopulate the minorityinhabited and border regions of Georgia with ethnic Georgians. Ecologically displaced persons soon found themselves as tools to advance such policies. During Shevardnadze however, this issue was literally ignored. After the “Rose Revolution” in 2003, the Saakashvili government took steps to address the problems of eco-migrants, although by all appearances consistent policy for addressing such issues is still out of sight.
Topic:
Migration, Minorities, Ethnicity, Displacement, Resettlement, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Europe and Georgia