SOPEMI

OECD

TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

ANNUAL REPORT 1996

1997 EDITION

SOPEMI

TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

Continuous Reporting System on Migration

ANNUAL REPORT 1996

1997 EDITION

ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT

ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT

Pursuant to Article 1 of the Convention signed in Paris on 14th December 1960, and which came into force on 30th September 1961, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shall promote policies designed: to achieve the highest sustainable economic growth and employment and a rising standard of living in Member countries, while maintaining nancial stability, and thus to contribute to the development of the world economy; to contribute to sound economic expansion in Member as well as non-member countries in the process of economic development; and to contribute to the expansion of world trade on a multilateral, non-discriminatory basis in accordance with international obligations. The original Member countries of the OECD are Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The following countries became Members subsequently through accession at the dates indicated hereafter: Japan (28th April 1964), Finland (28th January 1969), Australia (7th June 1971), New Zealand (29th May 1973), Mexico (18th May 1994), the Czech Republic (21st December 1995), Hungary (7th May 1996), Poland (22nd November 1996) and the Republic of Korea (12th December 1996). The Commission of the European Communities takes part in the work of the OECD (Article 13 of the OECD Convention).

THE CENTRE FOR CO-OPERATION WITH THE ECONOMIES IN TRANSITION

The Centre for Co-operation with the European Economies in Transition (CCEET), which serves as the focal point for co-operation between the OECD and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, was created in March 1990. In 1991, the activities of the Centre were expanded to include the New Independent States of the former Soviet Union, and subsequently Mongolia (1992) and Vietnam (1995). In 1993, to take account of its broader geographical focus, the Centre was renamed the Centre for Co-operation with the Economies in Transition (CCET). The Centre operates a number of Special Country Programmes: the Partners in Transition (PIT) Programme, of which the last remaining Partner, the Slovak Republic is negotiating accession to the OECD (the other former Partners the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland have joined the OECD); the Russian Federation Programme; and the country-specic programmes for Bulgaria, Romania and Slovenia.

Publi e en fran cais sous le titre : TENDANCES DES MIGRATIONS INTERNATIONALES

RAPPORT ANNUEL 1996

OECD 1997 Permission to reproduce a portion of this work for non-commercial purposes or classroom use should be obtained through Centre Fran cais dExploitation du Droit de Copie (CFC), 20, rue des Grands-Augustins, 75006 Paris, France, for every country except the United States. In the United States permission should be obtained through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. (CCC). All other applications for permission to reproduce or translate all or part of this book should be made to OECD Publications, 2, rue Andr e-Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, France.

FOREWORD

The twenty-second annual report of the Continuous Reporting System on Migration (known under its French acronym, SOPEMI), published as Trends in International Migration, draws in large part on twenty-nine written contributions from national correspondents, listed at the end of the report, and on the summary of debates at their past two annual meetings (November 1995 and December 1996). Following Denmark, Ireland and Mexico, in 1994, the Slovak Republic joined the SOPEMI network in 1995. The 1997 edition is composed of three parts and a Statistical Annex. Part I describes overall trends in international migration. Focus is on the magnitude, the nature and the direction of recent ows. Special attention is given to changes in the foreign or immigrant population in OECD countries and to the role of immigrants in the labour market or in the various sectors of economic activity. This section also includes an overview of migration polices, in particular those relating to the control of ows, the integration of immigrants in host countries and international co-operation. Part II presents detailed country notes describing recent developments in migration ows and policies in each of the countries addressed. The notes cover twenty-six OECD countries and three non-Member countries (Bulgaria, the Slovak Republic and Romania). Part III is devoted to a topical issue: immigrant and social transfers. The chapter focuses on analytical issues and reviews the results of studies carried out recently in Australia, Canada and the United States. The Statistical Annex at the end of the report is prefaced by a methodological introduction intended to help the reader better understand and use the data included in the tables. This volume is published on the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

GENERAL INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11

Part I MAIN TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION A. MIGRATION, POPULATION AND THE LABOUR MARKET . . . . . . . 1. Trends in migration movements and change in the foreign population 2. Immigration and population growth in OECD countries . . . . . . . . . . 3. Immigrants and the labour market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 13 23 32 44 44 49 52 52 57 64

NEW MIGRATION AREAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Asian migration to OECD countries and between Asian countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Recent migration trends in Central and Eastern Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AN 1. 2. 3. OVERVIEW OF MIGRATION POLICIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Policies for regulating and controlling ows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Policies for integrating immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Migration, international co-operation and economic development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C.

Part II RECENT CHANGES IN MIGRATION MOVEMENTS AND POLICIES (COUNTRY NOTES) Australia . . . . . Austria . . . . . . . Belgium . . . . . . Bulgaria . . . . . . Canada . . . . . . . Czech Republic . Denmark . . . . . Finland . . . . . . France . . . . . . . Germany . . . . . Greece . . . . . . . Hungary . . . . . . Ireland . . . . . . . Italy . . . . . . . . . Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 71 76 81 83 87 91 94 97 103 110 113 116 119 122 Luxembourg . . . Mexico . . . . . . Netherlands . . . Norway . . . . . . Poland . . . . . . . Portugal . . . . . . Romania . . . . . Slovak Republic Spain . . . . . . . . Sweden . . . . . . Switzerland . . . Turkey . . . . . . . United Kingdom United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 128 131 136 139 142 147 150 155 158 161 165 167 172

Part III IMMIGRATION AND SOCIAL TRANSFERS: ANALYTICAL ISSUES AND RECENT RESULTS 1. Measuring the impact of immigration and social transfers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Immigration and social transfers in the United States, Canada and Australia 3. Generational accounting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Annex: An example of the generational accounting approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 . 181 . 189 . 195

STATISTICAL ANNEX A. SOURCES AND METHODS USED IN STATISTICS ON MIGRATION . 1. Basic concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Available sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. The comparability of measures of migration ows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. Nationality and place of birth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. Statistics on workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. Statistics on migration in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe . 7. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. INTRODUCTION TO THE STATISTICAL ANNEX TABLES 1. Presentation of the tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Data sources used in the tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Explanatory notes for the Statistical Annex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 201 202 203 205 206 207 211

. 212 . 212 . 212 . 212 217

C.

TABLES OF THE STATISTICAL ANNEX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

LIST OF SOPEMI CORRESPONDENTS LIST OF CHARTS AND TABLES

Part I MAIN TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION Charts I.1. I.2. I.3. I.4. I.5. I.6. I.7. I.8. I.9. I.10. I.11. I.12. I.13. I.14. Inows of foreigners or immigrants in some OECD countries, 1981-1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Immigration ows into selected OECD countries by main categories in 1990, 1994 and 1995 . . . . . . . Inows of migrants to some OECD countries. The top ten source countries, last available year . . . . . . Inows of asylum seekers per 1 000 foreigners at the beginning of the year in some European OECD countries, 1985-1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Components of total population growth in OECD countries, 1961-1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Natural increase and net migration in OECD countries, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Share of foreign births in total births relative to the share of foreigners in the total population in selected OECD countries, 1980 and 1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stock of foreign residents in European OECD countries and in Japan. The top fteen source countries in 1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foreign-born population in Australia, Canada and the United States. The top fteen source countries in 1991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Change in the share of foreigners in total population, labour force and unemployment, 1984-1994 . . . Employment of foreign or immigrant workers by major industry division in some OECD countries in 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unemployment rate according to age, place of birth and nationality, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Standardised unemployment rate and share of foreign labour force, in total labour force in selected OECD countries, 1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gross immigration ows and unemployment rates in selected OECD countries, 1984-1989 and 1990-1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... 15 17 18 20 24 26 27 33 34 35 36 40 42 43

Tables I.1. I.2. I.3. I.4. I.5A. Inows of temporary skilled workers by main category in selected OECD countries, 1992-1995 Foreign or immigrant population and labour force in selected OECD countries . . . . . . . . . . . . Stock of EU citizens and total foreigners in the OECD European countries, total population and labour force, 1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maghrebian, Turkish and former Yugoslavian residents in selected European OECD countries, total population and labour force, 1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stock of selected Asian nationals in some OECD countries in 1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... 22 29 30 31 46

I.5B. I.6A. I.6B. I.7. I.8.

Stock of immigrants born in an Asian country in Australia, Canada and the United States . . . . . . . . Foreign residents, who are nationals of central and eastern European countries in selected European OECD countries, last available year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Immigrants born in central and eastern European countries residing in Australia, Canada and the United States, last available year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Main regularisation programmes of immigrants in an irregular situation in selected OECD countries, by nationality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The acquisition of nationality in selected OECD countries, 1988-1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

..... ..... ..... ..... .....

46 50 50 58 60

Part II RECENT CHANGES IN MIGRATION MOVEMENTS AND POLICIES (COUNTRY NOTES) Charts II.1. II.2. II.3. II.4. II.5. II.6. II.7. II.8. II.9. II.10. II.11. II.12. II.13. II.14. II.15. II.16. II.17. II.18. II.19. Tables II.1. II.2. II.3. II.4. II.5. II.6. II.7. II.8. II.9. II.10. II.11. II.12. II.13. II.14. II.15. II.16. II.17. II.18. II.19. II.20. Permanent and temporary migration programme outcomes, 1993-1996 and 1997 planning levels for permanent settlers, by category, Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Immigrant landings by type, 1992-1995, Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Employment authorisations issued to temporary workers by category, 1993-1995, Canada . . . . . . . . . . . Permanent migration ows, 1990-1995, Czech Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foreigners who hold a permanent or a long-term residence permit in the Czech Republic by nationality, 1992-1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stock of foreign workers in the Czech Republic by country of origin, 1990-1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of migrants, foreign population and labour force in Denmark . . . . . . Foreign population in Finland by region of origin in 1985, 1990-1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of valid work permits by region of birth, 1993-1995, Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Immigration ows by category and region of origin, 1994 and 1995, France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Job-seekers by nationality and by sex, France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unemployment rates (as dened by the ILO) by region of origin, 1994-1996, France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foreigners admitted to training schemes or participating in certain employment initiatives, by nationality, 1995, France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Residence permits issued to foreigners, by country of origin, 1991-1995, Greece . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of foreign residents in Hungary by nationality and by year of entry, January 1996 . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force in Ireland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on foreign population in Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 73 79 84 85 87 Net migration gain, permanent and long-term movements, Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Components of population change, 1983-1995, Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inows of asylum seekers, 1983-1995, Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Work permits and foreign employment, 1980-1995, Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Components of foreign population change, 1983-1995, Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Migration ows of foreigners, 1960-1995, Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Change in net migration and natural increase, nationals and foreigners, 1970-1995, Germany Annual change in employment, total population and foreigners, 1970-1995, Germany . . . . . Unemployment rates, total and foreign population, 1970-1995, Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Components of population change in intercensal periods, 1871-1996, Ireland . . . . . . . . . . . Migration ows, 1980-1996, Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inows of asylum seekers, 1986-1996, Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Components of foreign population change, 1980-1996, Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foreign labour force by type of residence permit, 1970-1995, Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . Migration ows, 1980-1995, United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Acceptances for settlement by category of acceptance, 1986-1995, United Kingdom . . . . . . Flows of asylum seekers by region of origin, 1984-1995, United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flows of foreign workers, different sources available, 1986-1995, United Kingdom . . . . . . . Inows of permanent settlers by region of birth, 1985-1995, United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 72 74 75 77 103 105 108 109 117 132 134 135 164 170 170 170 170 174

. 88 . 89 . 93 . 96 . 96 . 98 . 101 . 101 102 106 111 115 118 120

.. . . . . . . . . . .

II.21. II.22. II.23. II.24. II.25. II.26. II.27. II.28. II.29. II.30. II.31. II.32. II.33. II.34. II.35. II.36. II.37. II.38. II.39. II.40. II.41. II.42. II.43. II.44. II.45.

Relative share of foreign workers in an illegal situation out of the total number of workers surveyed (excluding EU) by region and industry division, 1995, Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mexican emigration to the United States, 1911-1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inows of North American temporary visitors for business, by category and nationality, 1994-1996, Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force in the Netherlands . . . . . . . . . Foreign-born population by birthplace, 1 January 1995, Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inows of asylum seekers by nationality, 1990-1995, Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Work permits issued by category and by country or region of birth, 1995, Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Permanent immigration and emigration, 1992-1996, Poland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force in Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stock of foreign workers in Portugal by region or country of origin and by professional status, 1990-1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Estimates of emigration, by selected characteristics, 1990-1995, Romania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current migration gures in Romania, 1993-1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Selected geographic, demographic and economic indicators, 1993-1995, Slovak Republic . . . . . . . . . . . Structure of the Slovak population according to declared ethnic afliation, 1991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stock of foreign workers in the Slovak Republic, by country of origin, 1994-1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force in Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foreigners who beneted from the 1991 regularisation programme and whose residence permits were renewed, 1994, Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . Components of change in the foreign population, 1988-1995, Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foreign labour force by industry division, by type of residence permit and by sex, 31 December 1995, Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Turkish workers sent abroad by the National Employment and Placement Ofce, by country or region of destination, 1991-1995, Turkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force in the United Kingdom . . . . . . Non-immigrants admitted by class of admission, scal years 1993-1995, United States . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . 121 . . . 123 . . . 126 . . . 129 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 133 135 137 138 140 143 145 148 149 151 151 154 156

. . . 157 . . . 159 . . . 163 ... 164

. . . 165 . . . 168 . . . 176

Part III IMMIGRATION AND SOCIAL TRANSFERS: ANALYTICAL ISSUES AND RECENT RESULTS Charts III.1. III.2. Tables III.1. III.2. III.3. A summary of US studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182 Taxes and transfers per household in the United States in 1975 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 Initial assumptions of the simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190 The effects of alternative transfer adjustment scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191 The effects of higher fertility and capital dilution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191

STATISTICAL ANNEX Countries where the immigrant population is dened as persons of foreign nationality Cross national tables A.1. A.2. A.3. A.4. A.5. A.6. A.7. Stocks of foreign population, 1985-1995 . . . . . Inows of foreign population, 1985-1995 . . . . Inows of asylum seekers, 1985-1995 . . . . . . . Outows of foreign population, 1985-1995 . . . Stocks of foreign labour, 1985-1995 . . . . . . . . Seasonal and cross-border workers, 1985-1995 Inows of foreign workers, 1985-1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218 219 220 220 221 221 222

Stock of foreign population by nationality B.1. B.1. B.1. B.1. B.1. B.1. B.1. B.1. B.1. B.1. B.1. B.1. B.1. B.1. B.1. Belgium . . . . . . Denmark . . . . . . Finland . . . . . . . France . . . . . . . . Germany . . . . . . Italy . . . . . . . . . Japan . . . . . . . . Luxembourg . . . . Netherlands . . . . Norway . . . . . . . Portugal . . . . . . . Spain . . . . . . . . Sweden . . . . . . . Switzerland . . . . United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237

Stock of foreign labour by nationality B.2. B.2. B.2. B.2. B.2. B.2. B.2. B.2. B.2. B.2. B.2. B.2. B.2. Austria . . . . . . . Belgium . . . . . . Denmark . . . . . . France . . . . . . . . Germany . . . . . . Luxembourg . . . . Netherlands . . . . Norway . . . . . . . Portugal . . . . . . . Spain . . . . . . . . Sweden . . . . . . . Switzerland . . . . United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 245 246 247 248 249

Acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality B.3. B.3. B.3. B.3. B.3. B.3. B.3. B.3. B.3. B.3. B.3. B.3. B.3. B.3. Austria . . . . . . . Belgium . . . . . . Denmark . . . . . . Finland . . . . . . . France . . . . . . . . Germany . . . . . . Japan . . . . . . . . Luxembourg . . . . Netherlands . . . . Norway . . . . . . . Spain . . . . . . . . Sweden . . . . . . . Switzerland . . . . United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250 250 250 251 251 252 253 253 253 254 254 254 255 255

Countries where the immigrant population is dened as foreign-born Immigrant population by place of birth C.1. C.1. C.1. Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257 United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258

Inows of permanent settlers by entry class C.2. C.2. C.2. Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260 United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261 9

Inows of permanent settlers by country or region of origin C.3. C.3. C.3. Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262 Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263 United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264

Inows of temporary residents by country or region of citizenship C.4. C.4. C.4. Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267

Acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality C.5. C.5. C.5. Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268 Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269 United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270

10

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

With the growing liberalisation of trade in goods and services and an increasing number of countries making the transition to a market economy, globalisation has entered a new phase. Will globalisation of the economy be accompanied by a globalisation of migration? In other words, are we seeing today the same complementarity between movements of goods, capital and persons that was observed in many OECD countries during the twentyve years or so following the Second World War? During the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s, there was an upsurge in international migration movements due, in part, to an increase in the numbers of asylum seekers. Moreover, following the political changes which occurred in Central and Eastern Europe and the strong rate of economic growth in several Asian countries, the number of countries involved with migration has grown. Finally, the easier access to transportation and the impact of new communications technology have created favourable conditions for both the intensication and diversication of migration movements. However, recent trends in international migration during the second half of the 1990s conrm the change of direction which began around 1993: stabilisation in legal immigration inows and in certain OECD countries, a decline (see Part I.A). It is too early to judge whether this break in trend will persist over the medium term, as economic and demographic imbalances between developed and developing countries have not disappeared. Any deterioration in the economic or political situation in areas close to OECD countries could lead the latter to accept a higher number of immigrants. In addition, although by denition it is impossible to quantify precisely the numbers of illegal migrants, the persistence of this phenomenon is a clear indication of the difculties encountered by host countries in controlling migration ows. The trend towards the globalisation of migration is witnessed by the emergence of new geographical areas for migration, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe and East and South-east Asia (see Part I.B). However, at the same time, could the recent levelling-off or reduction in legal migration ows be a sign of limits to the globalisation of migration? First, migration plays a role in the structural changes in progress. It can bring a certain economic exibility by responding to increased or reduced labour market needs. However, the high unemployment rates and the difculties many foreign workers have integrating into the labour market in several OECD countries reduce employment opportunities for potential immigrants. The integration of immigrants in host countries (see Part I.C) constitutes one of the main objectives of migration policies, which partly explains the stricter limits imposed on immigration ows. Second, the spread and proliferation of regional trading areas has been an important factor in globalisation. Regional trading areas can contribute to globalisation by fostering greater integration of economies in question. However, at the same time, these areas have legislation in place which either typically excludes free movement and the settlement of persons from countries not party to the regional agreements or limits freedom of movement to very specic categories of people. Finally, although certain links exist between migration and the globalisation of the economy, under current conditions a positive correlation between the two phenomena appears difcult to establish. In the future, however, as OECD countries face an acceleration in the ageing of their populations, they might rely more heavily on immigration in an attempt to slow this trend. Moreover, the integration of countries with large labour surpluses into the globalisation process may prove to be difcult if greater freedom of movement is not made available to their nationals. *** Part II of this report presents detailed descriptions of the particular developments in migration movements and policies for each country considered.
11

Part III deals with the contentious issue of immigration and social transfers. Debate has often focused on whether the impact of immigration on systems of social protection is positive or negative in host countries. The chapter contains a critical review of the results of studies which have sought to quantify this issue in Australia, Canada and the United States. Part III also discusses the key analytical issues which should be taken into account when calculating the impact of immigration on social transfers.

12

Part I

MAIN TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

The following analysis of the main trends in international migration has been divided into three parts. The rst discusses changes in migration movements, in the total and foreign populations of the countries considered and in the situation of foreigners on the labour market. The second part focuses on the widening of the geographical space to be considered in the analysis of migration movements and policies. Two regions are playing key roles in the widening of this area: Asia and Central and Eastern Europe. An overview of migration policies is presented in the third part. Measures to better control and regulate ows and to promote a better integration of immigrants into the host country are examined. Finally, special attention is given to the links between migration and economic development.

A.

MIGRATION, POPULATION AND THE LABOUR MARKET

The analysis of migration movements conrms the stabilisation of legal immigration ows registered in OECD countries over the past four years. The number of requests for asylum declined for the entire OECD area. Immigration for family reasons continues to predominate although temporary migration is gaining in importance. Even with the stabilisation of ows, migration still plays a signicant role in annual population growth. The share of foreign births in total births is high and the foreign or foreign-born population is growing and diversifying. Even though ows have levelled off, the presence in the labour market of foreign or immigrant labour has nonetheless been maintained, and in the majority of OECD countries, is spreading to more sectors of economic activity. Overall, foreigners vulnerability to unemployment has grown in relation to that of nationals with a wide gap between the unemployment rate of foreigners and the unemployment rate of nationals. In several OECD countries, a debate has emerged on the links between immigration and unemployment. Using empirical data, two new approaches are presented to shed light on this debate. 1. Trends in migration movements and change in the foreign population

Recent migration changes in OECD countries seem to conrm two developments which began in 1993. After the increase in immigration ows during the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s, one observes (with the exception of a few countries) a stabilisation in the number of immigrant entries. In addition, a wider use by immigrants of available modes of entry and an increase in the number of nationalities involved continues. At the same time traditional ows persist and the regional character of migration is intensifying. Three additional characteristics of recent migration trends deserve attention, in particular the decline in the number of asylum claims, the predominance of ows for family reunication and the growing share of ows of temporary workers and of highly-skilled workers. a) Stabilisation and decline of legal immigration ows

Throughout the 1980s and at the beginning of the current decade, inows increased in almost all OECD countries (see Statistical Annex, Tables A.2 and C2). For several of them, 1993 marked a turning point: the ows levelled off and in some cases even declined. Thus, while immigration had increased in France, Germany, Norway and Switzerland, Canada and Japan up until 1992, the year 1993 saw a reversal of this trend, with the exception of Canada and Japan. In this last country, the decline in 1993 was followed by a slight increase in 1994 and then a sharp decline in 1995. In Canada ows grew slightly in 1993 and declined only after 1994. In Luxembourg, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, immigration stabilised as of 1994. In the United States ows have decreased each year by roughly 100 000 persons since 1993. In Australia, however, the decline
13

in inows which began in 1992 was followed by increases in 1995 and 1996. However, the level reached in 1996 still remains lower than that in 1992. Germany emerges as the principal immigration country in Europe with inows of about 800 000 foreigners in both 1994 and 1995. However, the size of these inows merits qualication. In fact, these ows include asylum requests (close to 130 000 for each of the two years). In addition, regulations governing entry into population registers in Germany are such that many persons in the country for short periods are entered onto the registers. These two reasons explain, in large part, Germanys high levels of outows which, in 1994 and 1995, numbered 560 000. After Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands and France receive the highest numbers of inows of foreigners in Europe. If inows of foreigners or immigrants are compared to the total population (nationals and foreigners) of a country, four groups of countries are apparent (see Chart I.1). The rst group consists of Japan, France and the United Kingdom, countries where inows of foreigners represent, for the period 1981 to 1995, a very small percentage of the total population, uctuating at around 0.1 per cent depending on the year. In the second group Denmark, the United States, Norway and the Netherlands inows of foreigners or immigrants compared to the total population vary between 0.25 and 0.5 per cent depending on the year. There were sharp annual changes in this percentage in Norway (between 1986 and 1988) and in the United States (between 1989 and 1992) relative to other countries of the same group. For Sweden, Belgium and Canada countries in the third group inows of foreigners or immigrants as a percentage of the total population represent around 0.5 per cent over the period. Finally, the remaining countries listed in the two charts form the fourth group and share the common characteristic of receiving the highest numbers of immigrants with regard to the total population, ranging from between 0.5 and 1.5 per cent over the past 15 years for the majority and between 2 and 2.5 per cent in the case of Luxembourg. For this last group, although Germany receives the highest numbers of foreigners in absolute terms in Europe, it is in Luxembourg and Switzerland that inows of foreigners when compared to the total population are proportionally the most signicant. The ranking of countries is altered slightly if the foreign or immigrant population is looked at instead of the total population (see Chart I.1). This is notably the case for Japan, Denmark and Norway, countries where the share of foreigners in the total population was relatively small before rapid growth in inows of foreigners occurred between 1984 and 1992. For all three countries, the percentage of foreign inows relative to the foreign population varies widely over the time period. It ranges between 10 and 20 per cent in both Denmark and Norway and reaches a high of 25 per cent in Japan in 1988. For European countries with a long-standing history of immigration and where the percentage of foreigners in the total population is relatively high (Luxembourg, Switzerland, Germany and Sweden) it is only in Germany due to the magnitude of immigration ows between 1987 and 1992 that entries represent a relatively high percentage of the foreign population (between 10 and 20 per cent over the period, with a sharp drop as of 1992). b) Predominance of family immigration

The share of total immigration accounted for by each of the migration categories (workers and accompanying families, family reunication and refugees) differs widely from one country to another. In all countries in Chart I.2 inows related to family reunication and to family members accompanying workers represent the most important component of immigration. Moreover, while worker immigration is relatively low in Sweden (largely because entries of Nordic nationals are not taken into account) and is of a modest level in the United States and the United Kingdom, it represents nearly 40 per cent of immigration ows in Switzerland, 30 per cent in Australia and France and about 20 per cent in Canada. The share of refugee ows in the total amount of inows is the highest for Sweden. The record level of 60 per cent reached in 1994 was followed by a sharp drop in 1995, resulting in a percentage one-third the 1994 level. In Australia and in the United States, the share of refugees is around 20 per cent. This share is close to 10 per cent in France and slightly lower in both Switzerland and the United Kingdom. c) More regions of origin and a continuation of traditional ows

A comparison of permanent migrant entries into certain OECD countries for 1995 by country of origin reveals three trends (see Chart I.3). The rst of these is the conrmation of a new predominance or of an increase in the part played by certain nationalities in recent inows. The importance of immigrant arrivals from Asian countries is a case in point, particularly from the Philippines and China for the United States, Japan and Canada and from India, Pakistan and Vietnam for the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada. The latter country
14

Chart I.1. Inflows of foreigners or immigrants1 in some OECD countries, 1981-1995 Percentages

3.0 A. As a percent of total population 2.5

Luxembourg

3.0

2.5

2.0
Germany

2.0

1.5
Switzerland Australia2

1.5

1.0
Canada2

1.0

0.5
Belgium Sweden

0.5

1981

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

30 B. As a percent of foreign population3 25

Germany

30

25

20

20

15

Sweden

15

10

Switzerland

Luxembourg

10

Belgium

Australia2

1981

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

15

Chart I.1. Inflows of foreigners or immigrants1 in some OECD countries, 1981-1995 (cont.) Percentages

1.5 A. As a percent of total population

1.5

1.0
United States2 Norway Netherlands

1.0

0.5
Denmark

0.5

Japan

France

United Kingdom

0 1981 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95

30 B. As a percent of foreign population 25

Japan

30

25

20
Denmark

20

15

15

10

Netherlands

Norway

10

5
United Kingdom

France

1981

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

1. The data on inflows of foreign population or immigrants are from population registers or registers of foreigners except for Australia, Canada, France and the United States (residence permits) and the United Kingdom (Labour Force Survey). For more details on data, see Table A2 in the Statistical Annex. 2. The data on inflows refer to inflows of permanent settlers. 3. As a percent of total foreign-bom population for Australia. Sources: For inflows and stocks of foreigners (or immigrants): National Statistical Offices; for total population: Eurostat and the United Nations.

16

Chart I.2. Immigration flows into selected OECD countries by main categories1 in 1990, 1994 and 1995 Percentages of total inflows
Workers Family members accompanying workers Family reunification Refugees

Switzerland

90 94 95 90/91 94/95 95/96 91 94 95 90 94 95 90 94 95 91/92 93/94 94/95 90 94 95 0 20 40 60 80 100

Australia2

France3

Canada4

United Kingdom5

United States6

Sweden7

1. For Australia, Canada, the United States, Sweden and United Kingdom, data concern acceptances for settlement. For Switzerland and France, entries correspond to residence permits delivered in general for a period longer than one year. 2. Excluding special eligibility programme. 3. Inflows of EU family members have been estimated. 4. Excluding retirees. 5. Excluding admissions on a discretionary basis. 6. Excluding immigrants who obtained a permanent residence permit following the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act. 7. Excluding Nordic citizens. Sources: National Statistical Institutes (for details on sources, see the Introduction to the tables of the Statistical Annex).

received close to 30 000 nationals from Hong Kong in 1995 and although these numbers are lower than those of the past two years, nationals from Hong Kong remain at the top of the list of source countries for new entries. In the case of Germany, Austria and Sweden, East-West ows supply the greater part of the movement, with Poles and Romanians predominating in Germany and nationals of former Yugoslavia in the other two countries. For the rst time the former Soviet Union was ranked second among top source countries for permanent immigration ows to the United States. The second trend is the persistence of traditional migration ows. This is the case in Switzerland where new immigrants come mostly from Southern Europe. In France, nationals from North Africa (Maghreb) represent an important share of ows, although the number is lower than in the previous two years. Entries of Algerians are the most signicant in 1995, followed by Moroccans. In the United Kingdom immigrants from Pakistan, India and Bangladesh have been at the top of the list of source countries for several years. In the case of Japan, the United Kingdom, and France, nationals from the United States are in third position for the rst two countries and in fourth position for France.
17

Chart I.3. Inflows of migrants to some OECD countries The top ten source countries, last available year1 As a per cent of total inflows2

Australia3
New Zealand (12.3) United Kingdom (11.3) China (11.2) Former Yugosl. (7.7) Hong Kong (4.4) India (3.7) Vietnam (3.6) Philippines (3.2) South Africa (3.2) Sri Lanka (2.0) China (38.8) Philippines (30.3) United States (27.0) Rep. of Korea (18.8) Brazil (11.9) Thailand (6.5) United Kingdom (6.4) Chinese Taipei (4.6) Canada (4.1) Germany (3.7)

Japan4

10

15

20

10

15

20

Canada3
Hong Kong (31.7) India (16.2) Philippines (15.1) China (13.3) Sri Lanka (8.9) Chinese Taipei (7.7) Bosnia Herzeg. (6.3) United Kingdom (6.2) United States (5.2) Pakistan (4.0) Algeria (8.4) Morocco (6.6) Turkey (3.6) United States (2.4) Tunisia (1.9) Former Yugosl. (1.6) Haiti (1.4) Japan (1.0) Brazil (0.9) Poland (0.9)

France5

10

15

20

10

15

20

United States3
Mexico (89.9) Former USSR (54.5) Philippines (51.0) Vietnam (41.8) Dominican Rep. (38.5) China (35.5) India (34.7) Cuba (17.9) Jamaica (16.4) Rep. of Korea (16.0) Pakistan (6.3) India (4.9) United States (4.0) Bangladesh (3.3) Nigeria (3.3) Australia (2.0) Japan (1.9) Ghana (1.8) Jamaica (1.4) New Zealand (1.4)

United Kingdom3

10

15

20

10

15

20

25

1. Fiscal year for Australia (July 1995 to June 1996) and the United States (October 1994 to September 1995) and 1995 for the other countries. 2. The figures in brackets are inflows in thousands. 3. Data refer to inflows of permanent settlers. 4. Data cover total inflows of foreigners except temporary visitors (staying in Japan for less than 90 days). 5. Data include inflows of permanent workers, self-employed, refugees, as well as persons admitted under family reunification and other eligible for a residence permit. Nationals of EU countries are not included. Sources: Bureau of Immigration and Population Research (Australia); Statistics Canada; U.S. Department of Justice, 1995 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service; Ministry of Justice, Annual Statistics on Immigration Control (Japan); Office des migrations internationales, Annuaire des migrations 1995 (France); Home Office, Control of Immigration Statistics (United Kingdom).

18

The third and last key trend has already been under way during the last decade, namely a reduction in the relative proportion of ows from Europe to Australia, Canada and the United States (see Statistical Annex, Tables C3). d) Asylum claims continue to decline for the OECD area as a whole

In OECD countries, in principle, the arrival of refugees and that of asylum seekers do not occur in quite the same way. The arrival of refugees is generally organised within the framework of government programmes negotiated either with specialised international organisations or with the countries that are sheltering the refugees. Asylum seekers, on the other hand, most often apply for refugee status, which they do not necessarily obtain, either on arrival at the border or when already present within the country. In addition, OECD countries authorise certain persons, for humanitarian reasons, to remain either temporarily or on a more permanent basis in the country. For example, in a number of OECD countries an ad hoc status was granted to Bosnians, accompanied generally by social assistance and the right of access to the labour market. In France a temporary residence authorisation has been provided to Algerians forced to leave their country. From the middle of the 1980s through the beginning of the 1990s (see Statistical Annex, Table A.3) applications for asylum rose noticeably, sometimes spectacularly (Germany, Austria, Canada, the Netherlands, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States). Chart I.4 illustrates the changes over the last decade in asylum seeker inows to several European OECD countries in relation to the foreign population at the beginning of each year. In Northern Europe, Sweden received the highest numbers of asylum seekers during the entire period, both absolutely and relative to the number of foreigners resident in Sweden at the beginning of each year. In Western Europe, Germany heads the list of the number of requests in absolute numbers. Until 1993 the order of each country in the ranking of the number of requests received relative to the size of the foreign population was stable. After that date however, inows of asylum seekers to the Netherlands in comparison to the foreign population reached close to 70 per 1 000 in 1994 and 40 per 1 000 in 1995 while for Germany the numbers stabilised at 20 per 1 000 in both years, at 30 per 1 000 in 1995 in the United Kingdom and 25 per 1 000 in Denmark. Using this indicator, the highest peak is found for Sweden in 1992. Overall, after 1992 and until 1995, requests for asylum declined, at varying rates, in all the countries considered, except the United Kingdom. The large number of asylum seekers has led OECD countries to speed up procedures for the processing of applications and to introduce certain restrictive measures, among them the extension of visa requirements to a larger number of countries. The majority of countries have also decided to restrict asylum applications, except for special cases, to persons from countries that have not signed the Geneva Convention on refugees and the Convention on Human Rights of the United Nations, provided they have not previously transited through a country that has signed these two conventions. The measures taken to stem the ow of new arrivals (for more details see the section on migration policies), combined with the low rate of acceptance of applications, has led to a sharp drop in the number of asylum seekers beginning in 1993 with the exception of the United States and the United Kingdom (see Statistical Annex, Table A.3). The Netherlands, which had registered continuous growth in ows, saw a substantial drop in 1995. In the United Kingdom, although asylum requests grew in 1994 and 1995, the implementation of new legislative measures has been accompanied by a sharp reduction in requests in 1996. Finally, the fact that several countries of Central and Eastern Europe have signed the Geneva Convention on Refugees and thus can now recognise and accord this status to applicants and the end of the civil war in former Yugoslavia are two factors which have also played a role in the decline observed in requests in the whole of the OECD area. e) Temporary labour migration and the migration of highly-qualied workers

The admission of permanent foreign workers into OECD countries is currently limited, particularly in European countries. However, the demand for temporary foreign workers is growing. The recruitment of temporary foreign workers can provide greater labour market exibility and help alleviate sectoral labour shortages in host countries. Temporary migration also has other advantages, particularly in the short term. In certain cases, particularly during a period of restricted immigration, it may be a means of reducing the employment of foreigners in an irregular situation. Finally, temporary work also promotes the movement of managerial staff and highly skilled workers. Temporary labour migration Most OECD countries accord foreigners the possibility of staying in the country and obtaining a temporary or seasonal work permit within the framework of a contract of employment or according to procedures laid down
19

Chart I.4. Inflows of asylum seekers per 1000 foreigners at the beginning of the year in some European OECD countries, 1985-1995
Per 1000 foreigners Per 1 000 foreigners

200 A. Northern Europe

Sweden (9.0)

200

150
Finland (0.8)

150

100
Denmark (5.1)

100

50

50

Norway (1.5)

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

Per 1000 foreigners

Per 1000 foreigners

80 B. Western Europe
Germany (127.9)

80

60

60

40

40

Netherlands (29.3)

20
United Kingdom (55.0) Switzerland (17.0)

20

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

Note: Figures in parenthesis indicate the total inflows of asylum seekers in 1995 (in thousands). Source: See the introduction to the tables of the Statistical Annex.

20

for trainees. Four main categories are to be found in most of the countries: (highly) skilled workers, seasonal workers, trainees and students. In addition, there are three distinctive cases that are deserving of mention: Working Holiday Makers (Australia and the United Kingdom), entertainers, and teachers and researchers. However, the fact that OECD countries all have a favourable attitude towards temporary workers does not mean that their legislation is identical. Quite the reverse; there is great diversity depending on the country in the conditions imposed on the employment of foreign temporary workers. The amount of time these workers are allowed to stay, for example, varies considerably depending on the category and country concerned. It generally ranges from three months to four years, and in some cases may be renewable. In certain countries, some workers are also entitled to change their status. Australia, Canada and the United States have established special programmes aimed at temporary workers to meet the needs of the labour market in certain areas of economic activity. These programmes also take into account the specic occupational abilities of certain immigrants. Entries of temporary foreign workers are relatively high in these three countries (see Statistical Annex, Tables C4). In Australia in 1996 roughly 286 000 persons entered through the temporary migration programme, of which close to 160 000 held a business visa. In Canada entries of temporary workers was relatively high until 1992 (230 000) and clearly diminished since, dropping from 172 000 in 1994 to 137 000 in 1995. In the United States, the ows of certain categories of temporary workers tripled over the last decade going from 75 000 in 1985 to 220 000 in 1995 (these data exclude the following categories: temporary visitors for business, 3.2 million in 1995; intra-company transferees, 112 000; and treaty traders and investors, 132 000). Programmes for seasonal or temporary workers also exist in Europe, notably in France, Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Switzerland (see Statistical Annex, Table A.6). France has for many years recruited seasonal workers, usually in the framework of bilateral agreements signed with certain Mediterranean countries. The same is true for Switzerland. In this latter country, in 1995 close to 54 000 seasonal workers were employed at the end of August. In France, the numbers were lower (close to 10 000 workers, not including the nationals of the European Union). More recently Germany has recruited seasonal workers from the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. The number of workers involved in Germany grew in 1995 from 155 000 to 193 000. These contracts cannot exceed three months each year. In Australia, the programme for young foreigners aged 18 to 25 years (Working Holiday Makers, WHMs) allowed 35 000 young foreigners to work in 1995. In a similar programme, roughly the same number of workers were admitted to the United Kingdom. In Canada, agricultural workers from the Caribbean and Mexico are recruited for seasonal work. The number reached close to 11 000 in 1995. In the United States, temporary agricultural workers entered formerly under the bracero programmes. These programmes no longer exist. However, visas are delivered to temporary agricultural workers (11 400 in 1995, see Part II, Table II.45) and non agricultural workers (14 200 the same years). During the 1980s, the admission of these latter workers had met with strong protests from trade associations, and the 1990 Immigration Act regulated their entry very stringently and their numbers have fallen sharply. The visa issued is subject to two conditions: not only the workers stay, but the job itself must be temporary, and employers must present a certicate attesting to the fact that no national worker was qualied or available for the job (labor certication). The migration of highly-skilled workers is growing in importance Worker movement, especially between certain OECD countries, applies more and more to skilled labour and over the past few years the migration of highly qualied workers has been growing in importance. These ows are related to the development of internal labour markets within multinational rms and the establishment by governments of an institutional framework to facilitate the international exchange of skills. The movements reect the expansion of world trade, the development of multinational enterprises and the extension to the international level of the activity of certain institutions such as recruitment agencies or government ofces. In addition, it would appear that movements of qualied manpower tend to go hand-in-hand with international investment ows. The category of skilled and highly skilled workers is a relatively heterogeneous category. It most often comprises individuals with university degrees, or extensive experience in a given eld. Overall, the category of highly skilled staff is not always precisely dened. It is divided into a number of sub-categories that may vary from one country to another. For example, the following classications may be considered as belonging to this category: highly skilled specialists, for instance in Switzerland and the United States; independent executives and senior managers (Australia, France, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States); specialised technicians (Australia, France, United Kingdom, United States); researchers (Australia, France, Switzerland); investors (Australia, Canada, United States); physicians (Australia, United States); business people (Australia, Canada, France, United States); keyworkers (staff with specialised skills) in Australia and the United Kingdom and
21

sub-contract workers (Germany). Table I.1 presents the growth in the numbers of foreign workers in some of these categories over the period 1992 to 1995 in several OECD countries. In the United States, ows of skilled workers represent more than 80 per cent of entries of temporary workers (not including intra-company transferees and treaty traders and investors). In Canada and the United Kingdom the share of skilled temporary workers is close to 40 per cent of the total temporary worker entries. This

Table I.1.

Inows of temporary skilled workers by main category in selected OECD countries, 1992-1995
Thousands and percentages
1992 1993 1994 1995

Australia Skilled temporary resident programme1 % of total temporary workers2 Canada3 Workers obliged to validate their job4 Professionals5 Reciprocal employment5, 6 Workers with signicant benets for Canada5 Total for the above four categories of workers % of total temporary workers France Workers on secondment7 Researchers7 Total for the above two categories of workers % of total temporary workers Germany Workers employed under a contract for services8 % of total temporary workers Netherlands9 % of total temporary workers United Kingdom Long-term permits10 % of total temporary workers United States11 Professionals (visa H-1B) North American Free Trade Agreement workers (visa TN)12 Workers of distinguished abilities (visa O) Total for the above three categories of workers % of total temporary workers13

14.6 17.1 66.4 5.3 5.6 4.6 81.8 35.5 0.9 0.9 1.8 10.1 115.1 .. 1.9 26.4 12.7 42.2 110.2 12.5 0.5 123.2 70.1

14.9 20.3 52.0 6.3 5.3 4.6 68.1 37.0 0.9 1.0 1.9 12.6 63.3 25.2 1.8 25.7 12.5 42.7 92.8 16.6 3.1 112.5 64.0

14.2 18.0 43.4 7.4 4.4 5.4 60.6 35.0 0.6 1.4 2.0 14.0 48.4 23.1 2.0 29.4 13.4 44.6 105.9 19.8 5.0 130.7 74.4

14.3 18.4 42.2 7.8 5.0 5.0 59.9 43.7 0.8 1.3 2.2 15.4 56.2 22.1 1.5 27.8 15.0 42.2 117.6 23.9 6.0 147.5 83.9

Note: The categories of temporary workers differ from country to country. Data and percentages are therefore not fully comparable. The gures for total temporary workers refer to the total work permits issued in Canada, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States, to the sum of temporary programmes in Australia (excluding students), to the total provisional work permits issued plus seasonal workers in France and to guest workers, contract workers and seasonal workers in Germany. 1. Data refer to scal years (July to June of the given year) and include accompanying dependants. 2. As a per cent of temporary residents programmes (Skilled Employment, Social/Cultural and International Relations Programmes). 3. Data refer to the number of employment authorisations issued. 4. The list of jobs that can be validated excludes unskilled jobs, those restricted to Canadian citizens and those with a high rate of unemployment. 5. These workers are exempt from validation by an employment service of the Government. The authorisations are usually delivered for 9 months. 6. Concerns professors and researchers admitted under bilateral agreements and some specialists. 7. Holders of a provisional work permit (APT). 8. Workers recruited under bilateral agreements usually for 2 years. 9. Figures include intra-company transferees and managers. Authorisations are usually granted for one year (renewable). 10. Long-term permits (one year or more) are mainly approved for highly skilled and qualied workers. 11. Data refer to scal years (October to September of the given year). Data may be overestimated because they include multiple entries by the same person over the given year. 12. Figures include family members. 13. As a per cent of total temporary workers (excluding intracompany transferees 112 120 in 1995 and treaty traders/investors 131 800 in 1995 including dependants). Sources: Australia: Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (DIEA); Canada: Statistics Canada; France: Ofce des migrations internationales, Annuaire des migrations 1995; Germany: Bundesanstalt f ur Arbeit; Netherlands: Centraal Bureau Arbeidsvoorziening, Rijswijk (Z-H); United Kingdom: Department of Employment; United States: United States Department of Justice, 1995 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

22

percentage is smaller in the Netherlands, Australia and France and depending on the country ranges between 15 and 30 per cent. The heterogeneity in the categories of skilled workers makes comparisons among different countries difcult. However, over the period 1992 to 1995, the share of skilled and highly skilled workers in the total of temporary worker ows has grown in most countries. For several years Germany has also been experimenting with a new form of contract for temporary labour migration. The objective is to associate worker migration and co-operation between national and foreign enterprises. Thus, to meet certain special sectoral or regional needs, national enterprises are allowed recourse to foreign enterprises. A xed project is identied and the conditions under which the services required will be provided are dened. Within the framework of the project, the sub-contracted foreign enterprise recruits workers who emigrate for a limited period (in general 2 years). In 1995 more than 56 000 temporary project workers from central and eastern European countries were posted in Germany, a gure which increased when compared with 1994, but is much lower than the numbers involved in 1992 and 1993 (115 000 and 63 000 respectively). 2. Immigration and population growth in OECD countries

Migration plays a signicant role in the annual population growth of many OECD countries. First, the presence of a foreign or foreign-born population contributes to the natural increase of the population (excess of births over deaths). This contribution is all the more signicant because of the higher fertility of foreign women. Second, when net migration is positive, the population of the host country grows by the same amount. In the following section the contribution of migration will be examined from the perspective of its impact on total population growth. Special attention will then be given to births to foreigners or to persons of foreign origin. Finally, an analysis of changes in the foreign or immigrant population in OECD countries will focus on the growth of this population and its diversication. a) The components of total population growth

In order to explain the respective contributions of net migration and of natural increase to the total population growth of OECD countries, the evolution of these components over the past three decades in the principal OECD geographic regions will be examined before providing a description of the actual situation in Member countries. Main demographic trends: a regional approach Chart I.5 covers the period 1961-1994. It shows the relative contributions of net migration (nationals and foreigners) and of natural increase (excess of births over deaths) to the total population growth of major OECD geographic regions and Japan. This analysis over time illustrates the general trend of slower demographic growth. At the same time, the rates of population growth at the beginning of the period are clearly higher in Oceania and North America compared to Europe and Japan. The result is that demographic decline is much more marked in the two latter regions, despite signs of renewed population growth in Europe, in large part due to a resumption in immigration. In the United States and in Canada, natural increase of the population (for 1 000 inhabitants) represents the principal component of total population growth. The contribution of net migration has hardly changed over the time period studied except between 1979 and 1981 and 1992 and 1993. Natural increase dropped sharply between 1961 and 1973 and has remained, on average, at a level of 7.5 for 1 000 inhabitants over the past two decades. In Oceania, natural increase has been declining over the past three decades but, as in the case of the United States and Canada, it still remains the principal component of total population growth. In Western Europe the situation is more contrasted. At the beginning of the 1960s, the relative share of natural increase in total population growth was larger than net migration. From 1967 on, net migration grew and natural increase declined and until 1987 the two components contributed, in equal shares, to population growth. Between 1987 and 1991, the relative contribution of net migration grew rapidly following an acceleration in migration inows. The trend was then reversed. However, the relative contribution of net migration in Western Europe remains more important than that of natural increase, a key difference in the situation described above for North America and Oceania. A comparison between the Nordic countries and those of Southern Europe reveals points of convergence and divergence. Despite a steady decline in the natural increase of the population for both regions during almost the entire period, this component nevertheless remains more important than net migration. However, in the case of Southern Europe, which registered high levels of emigration between 1961 and 1973, net migration was negative while for the Nordic countries it was slightly positive.
23

Chart I.5. Components1 of total population growth in OECD countries, 1961-1994 Regional groups per 1000 inhabitants at the beginning of the period
Total population growth rate Per 1000 Natural increase rate Net migration rate Per 1 000

25 North America2 20 15 10 5 0 Oceania

25 20 15 10 5 0

61

65

69

73

77

81

85

89

93

61

65

69

73

77

81

85

89

93

Per 1000

Per 1 000

15 Western Europe 10 Japan

15

10

0 61
Per 1000

0 65 69 73 77 81 85 89 93 61 65 69 73 77 81 85 89 93
Per 1 000

10

Southern Europe

Nordic countries

10

5 61 65 69 73 77 81 85 89 93 61 65 69 73 77 81 85 89 93

1. The natural increase rate is the natural increase (total births total deaths) per 1 000 inhabitants at the beginning of the period. The net migration rate is the net migration (inflows outflows) per 1000 inhabitants at the beginning of the period. The total population growth rate is the sum of the two previous rates. 2. Excluding Mexico. Source: Labour Force Statistics, OECD, 1996.

24

In the mid-1970s a change in the relative share of net migration in total population growth occurred in both regions. The Southern European countries gradually became countries of immigration. Although their rate of natural increase declined steadily and was close to zero, net migration gained in importance and has represented the principal component of population growth in this region since 1991. In the Nordic countries, a slight reversal of the natural increase since 1985 was accompanied by growth in the rate of net migration such that both components now contribute in equal shares to total population growth. In Japan net migration hardly contributed to population growth over the entire period. In addition, since 1973 natural increase has continued to decline, pointing to the very marked trend of the ageing of the Japanese population. This situation is similar to what occurred in Southern Europe. This long-term analysis of the changes in the components of population growth in OECD countries illustrates the irregularity of migration movements. In fact, this component of population growth depends largely on migration policy and its development in each country. The analysis also shows to what extent it is problematic to count on the contribution of net migration to brake the demographic decline currently occurring in certain OECD countries. Contrasting situations by country in 1994 Chart I.6 pertains to the year 1994 and ranks OECD countries with respect to the relative contribution of natural increase and net migration to the growth of their populations. Several countries have unique situations. For example, Luxembourg depends mostly on net migration for its population growth. Mexico, due to the importance of emigration ows towards the United States, has registered a strongly negative migration balance. At the same time, Mexicos high fertility rate places it in rst position among OECD countries with respect to rates of natural increase (a rate of 28 per 1 000). Turkey also has a relatively high natural increase rate, with approximately 16 per 1 000, but contrary to the situation in Mexico, net migration in Turkey is slightly positive due to the return of former emigrants. In New Zealand, the United States and Australia and to a lesser extent Canada, the rate of natural increase has become more important than net migration, which nevertheless remains positive. The Czech Republic, Poland, Japan, Ireland and Iceland have negative net migration, which, in the case of the Czech Republic has accumulated to the extent that it has also made the natural increase rate negative. Germany and Italy share a negative natural increase rate although their net migration is positive. Sweden and Switzerland have positive net migration which is larger than the natural increase rate of their populations. Finally, other European OECD countries have weak population growth with only a relative share due to natural increase, more or less important depending on the country. In sum, over the long term, either by region or by country, natural increase is more important in total population growth than net migration in OECD countries. This is true not only in countries which had large emigration ows, such as Ireland, New Zealand, Portugal, Spain, Turkey and Mexico, but also in settlement countries like Canada and the United States and to a lesser extent Australia. This is also the case in other European countries (France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom) where immigrants have tended to prolong their stay and settle and where entries stand at lower levels than in previous decades. The settlement of immigrants and members of their families most likely plays an important role in natural increases dominant share. This longer-term analysis nevertheless highlights the impact of the acceleration of migration movements on the total growth of the population. This is notably the case in Canada, Sweden, Denmark, Italy, Portugal and Spain. The trend is all the more marked when it occurs in countries where fertility rates are low. In the settlement countries, such as Canada, the United States and Australia, which continue to receive substantial numbers of new immigrants each year, it may be that the predominance of family immigration among total inows and the younger age structure of the new arrivals exerts a more rapid effect on the rate of natural increase of the population. b) Foreign births: a brake on demographic ageing

Foreign births or those of foreign origin represent an important percentage of total births in several European OECD countries and this percentage is often higher than that of foreigners in the total population. Foreign births contribute to the natural increase of the population and can act as a brake on demographic ageing. However, this is not an inevitable result and depends essentially on a continuing succession of migration waves. A sustained halt in new immigration could eventually lead to a marked reduction in these benecial effects insofar as the fertility rate of foreign women tends to converge with that of nationals.
25

Chart I.6. Natural increase and net migration in OECD countries,1 1994 Per 1 000 inhabitants as of 1 January 1994
Net migration (per 1 000)

10

Luxembourg

10

Sweden Canada

New Zealand

Germany

Switzerland

United States Australia Italy Greece Denmark Belgium Norway GBR Portugal AUT Netherlands France Finland Spain

Turkey

0
Czech Rep.

Poland

Japan

Ireland Iceland

Mexico2

10

10

15

20

25

30

10

Natural increase (per 1 000) 1. The data for the Republic of Korea and Hungary are not available. The abbreviations AUT and GBR mean Austria and United Kingdom respectively. 2. The data are for 1990. Source: Labour Force Statistics, OECD, 1996.

Measuring foreign births It is difcult to obtain comparable data on foreign births. The term foreign may apply to the child or the parents. When reference is made in the denition to the parents, the number of foreign births will vary according to whether the criterion is the nationality of both parents, of the father or of the mother. Generally, since fertility is studied in relation to women, the nationality of reference is that of the mother. In Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Switzerland foreign births are those of children of foreign nationality. In France and Sweden foreign births are those to mothers of foreign nationality while in the United Kingdom they are those to mothers born outside the country. Births to foreign mothers alone are thus not sufcient to account for all births linked to the presence of the foreign population or that of foreign origin. Moreover, the more or less liberal nature of the legislation on naturalisations can either speed up or slow down the process of absorption of foreigners into the national population and thereby reduce or increase the number of foreign births. Foreign births and the share of foreigners in the total population The foreign share of total births is very high in some countries (see Chart I.7), such as in Luxembourg (nearly 42 per cent in 1995) and Switzerland (24 per cent in 1993). In France, Germany, Sweden and the
26

Chart I.7. Share of foreign births1 in total births relative to the share of foreigners in the total population in selected OECD countries, 1980 and 1995

1980

1995

Share of foreign births in total births (%)

Sweden Increase France Switzerland

10.2 13.0 10.2 10.6 16.2 24.1

United Kingdom2 Netherlands Decrease Germany3 Luxembourg Belgium4

13.3 12.0 7.5 6.9 13.0 14.3 37.1 41.9 15.5 8.2 0 1 2

1. Foreign births are births of children of foreign nationality for Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland. For France and Sweden, foreign births are births to a foreign mother. For England and Wales foreign births refer to those to mothers born outside the United Kingdom. The data for Sweden and Switzerland refer to 1993 instead of 1995. 2. Data refer to England and Wales. Births are relative to the share of the foreign-born in the total population. 3. Data refer to western Germany. If the eastern part were taken into account, the share of foreign births in the total would be 13.0%. Then the ratio would be 1.48 instead of 1.37. 4. Between 1980 and 1995, the drop in the number of foreign births can be explained by changes in nationality laws in 1985 and 1992. Sources: Data on births are from civil registers; data on population are from population registers for all countries except for France (1982 and 1990 censuses), and United Kingdom (Labour Force Survey).

United Kingdom (England and Wales only), foreign births in 1995 represented more than a tenth of all births. In Sweden and in France the foreign share of total births grew in 1995, compared with the situation in 1980, whereas the reverse was true for the ve other countries considered. Except for Belgium in 1995, the foreign share of total births is always higher than their share of the total population (more than two times in Sweden, more than one and a half times in France and the United Kingdom and just slightly less in Switzerland, the Netherlands, Germany and Luxembourg (see Chart I.7). Differences over the past 15 years may be the result of various causes, the relative importance of which depends on the country: higher or lower levels of net migration, differences in fertility between nationals and foreigners, the differing distribution by age and sex of the foreign and national populations, and changes to laws concerning the acquisition of nationality.
27

c)

Changes in the foreign or immigrant population in OECD countries

For the European OECD countries and Japan, the most detailed statistics on the foreign population refer to the nationality of residents, whether immigrant or not. Thus people born in the country may be counted among foreigners, while others born abroad (who are therefore immigrants) may have acquired the nationality of the host country and are thus no longer counted in the foreign population. In Australia, Canada and the United States, the criterion is not that of nationality but of country of birth. A distinction is made between those born abroad (foreign-born) and those born in the country (native-born). This approach enables immigrants residing in the country to be accounted for, whatever their nationality. The evolution of the number of immigrants or foreigners varies according to the country and depends on migration policy, on entries and departures, on the demographics of the foreign population and on the number of naturalisations, which tend to reduce the foreign stock. Nonetheless, in nearly all OECD countries the foreign or immigrant population continues to increase. In addition there is a wider range of nationalities represented in the foreign population and a greater dispersion of immigrants of a given nationality across the range of host countries. The foreign or foreign-born population is increasing... Compared with the early 1980s, the share of foreigners and foreign-born in the total population has increased in the majority of OECD countries, with the exception of Belgium and France (largely due to the importance of naturalisations) and also Canada (because of the drop in entries during the 1980s compared with the previous decade, see Statistical Annex, Tables A.1 and C1). In Australia and Canada immigrants represent a high percentage of the resident population: 23 per cent and 16 per cent respectively. In the United States the percentage is approximately 8 (see Table I.2). In the latter country the immigrant population increased by nearly 6 million between the last censuses (1980 and 1990), compared to a little more than a million in Australia and about half a million in Canada. The foreign presence in the total population varies widely among European OECD countries (see Table I.2). It is relatively high in Luxembourg and Switzerland 33 per cent and 19 per cent respectively in 1995. In the other traditional immigration countries the share of foreigners in the total population varies between 3.5 per cent for the United Kingdom and 9.5 per cent for Belgium. In the new immigration countries such as Finland, Italy and Spain, the percentage of foreigners remains small (less than 2 per cent) in spite of a large increase in entries over the last decade. The foreign population has also grown considerably in Germany the country which has experienced the largest increase notably because of the arrival, especially since 1989, of immigrants coming from Central and Eastern Europe. The foreign population has also grown in the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Sweden and Austria. In Japan, the percentage of foreigners in the total population remains low (a little more than 1 per cent), although the foreign stock has increased by about 60 per cent between 1985 and 1995. ... and is becoming diversied In general, the size of immigrant stocks by nationality (see Statistical Annex, Tables B1 and C1) varies across host countries depending on tradition, networks established by migrant communities already in the country, opportunities for employment in the labour market and the geographical proximity of the country of origin. The changes which have occurred over the last decade, notably the liberalisation of population movements in Central and Eastern Europe, have extended the geographical space of international migration. They have led in particular to the emergence of new ows and to a greater diversity in the countries of origin, and have modied both the distribution by nationality of the foreign population within each host country and the spread of migrants of the same origin across different host countries. Within the countries of the European Union, the share of foreigners from non-EU countries has increased and certain nationalities have either appeared or gained in importance compared with others that have been present in the region for a longer period. This is the case in Germany, for example, for nationals of central and eastern European countries and the former Soviet Union, in France for Moroccans and Senegalese, and in the Netherlands for nationals of former Yugoslavia. In the Nordic countries the share of persons from neighbouring countries has diminished in Finland, Norway and Sweden, while newer foreign communities have increased in size: Asians (Pakistanis, Vietnamese, Iranians, Sri Lankans) and Turks in Norway and Sweden; and persons from former Yugoslavia in Finland, Norway and Sweden. These changes reect not only the origins of the ows but also their form (the increase in the number of asylum seekers).
28

Table I.2.

Foreign or immigrant population and labour force in selected OECD countries

Thousands and percentages Foreign population and labour force
Foreign population Thousands 19953
1

Foreign labour force2 % of total population 1995 Thousands 19954 % of total labour force 1995

Austria Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Ireland Italy Japan Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom

3 7 1

1 2

724 910 223 69 597 174 96 991 362 138 728 161 168 500 532 331 060

9.0 9.0 4.2 1.3 6.3 8.8 2.7 1.7 1.1 33.4 5.0 3.7 1.7 1.2 5.2 18.9 3.4

325 335 80 .. 1 573 2 569 42 436 6005 1126 221 527 84 139 220 7298 1 032

10.2 8.1 2.8 .. 6.2 7.4 3.0 1.9 0.9 56.2 4.0 4.5 1.7 0.6 5.1 19.4 3.6

Foreign-born population and labour force9

Foreign population1 Thousands 1991 % of total population 1991 Thousands 1991 Foreign labour force2 % of total labour force 1991

Australia Canada United States

1.

3 753 4 343 19 767

22.3 15.6 7.9

2 139 2 681 11 636

24.0 18.5 9.3

Data are from population registers except for France (Census), Ireland and the United Kingdom (Labour Force Survey), Japan and Switzerland (register of foreigners) and Italy, Portugal and Spain (residence permits). 2. Data include the unemployed except for Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Norway. Data for Belgium, Ireland and the United Kingdom are taken from the Labour Force Surveys. Data for Japan are from register of foreigners and from residence permits for Italy. For the other countries, see details on sources in the introduction to the tables of the Statistical Annex. 3. 1990 for France. 4. 1994 for Belgium, Denmark and the United Kingdom. 5. Data are estimates and do not include permanent workers. 6. Including frontier workers. 7. Excluding the self-employed. 8. Number of foreigners with an annual residence permit or a settlement permit who engage in gainful activity. Seasonal and frontier workers are excluded. 9. Census data (1990 for the United States) except for 1995 labour force in Australia (Labour Force Survey). Sources: Labour Force Survey, Eurostat and National Statistical Institutes (see details on sources in the introduction to the tables of the Statistical Annex).

In the countries of Southern Europe immigration has two facets: there is an important group of immigrants from developing countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America, and another of resident foreigners from Europe and North America. These two types of migration differ in kind. The former, partly clandestine, consists of largely unskilled immigrants, while the latter is linked to the development of foreign investment and multinational rms, together with ows of retired persons. In Portugal, for example, the leading foreign community is African, originating in the former colonies and countries of Portuguese language and culture such as Cape Verde and Angola. The second group consists of nationals of the European Union and the United States. In 1995, among the European countries of the OECD (see Table I.3), those who count the highest percentages of EU (15 members) nationals in their total foreign population and in their foreign labour force, are, by order of importance, Luxembourg (90 per cent), Ireland (75 per cent) and Switzerland (60 per cent). Inversely,
29

Table I.3. Stock of EU citizens and total foreigners in the OECD European countries, total population and labour force, 1995
Thousands and percentages
Total foreign population % of foreign labour force in total labour force2 Of which: European Union % of foreign EU labour force in total foreign labour force2

Thousands1

% of total population

Thousands1

% of total foreign population

Austria Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom
1.

517.7 909.8 222.7 68.6 3 596.6 7 173.9 200.3 96.1 991.4 136.6 757.1 160.8 168.3 499.8 531.8 1 330.6 2 060

6.6 9.0 4.2 1.3 6.3 8.8 1.9 2.7 1.7 34.4 5.0 3.7 1.7 1.2 5.2 18.9 3.4

9.8 8.1 1.7 1.0 6.4 9.0 1.6 2.9 0.6 41.8 4.0 4.5 0.9 0.6 5.1 19.4 3.6

79.4 554.5 57.2 13.7 1 321.5 1 811.7 64.7 73.0 164.0 121.5 193.1 61.6 41.5 235.6 178.9 824.9 902

15.3 61.0 25.7 20.0 36.7 25.3 32.3 76.0 16.5 89.0 25.5 38.3 24.7 47.1 33.6 62.0 43.8

7.0 69.3 42.7 22.9 42.1 33.0 12.1 79.3 14.7 90.3 38.9 .. 24.8 35.0 .. 68.5 45.7

Data for the foreign population are from population registers except for France and Austria (Census), for Ireland, Luxembourg and the United Kingdom (Labour Force Survey) and for Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain (residence permits). Data for population are for 1995 except for France (1990), Austria (1991), Greece (1992), the Netherlands (1994). They cover the 15 EU countries except for Italy. 2. Calculations are based on data from the Labour Force Survey (Eurostat, 1994) and cover only the 12 rst members of the EU. For Austria, Finland and Sweden, data are respectively taken in social security registers, from work permits statistics and in the national Labour Force Survey. Data for Norway and Switzerland are respectively based on population register and register of foreigners. Sources: Community Labour Force Survey, Eurostat, 1994; Statistics on migration, Eurostat, 1995 and National Statistical Institutes (for details on sources, see the introduction to the tables of the Statistical Annex).

Austria is the country in which the percentage of foreign residents from the EU is the lowest in both the total population (15 per cent) and the labour force (7 per cent). In Australia, Canada and the United States, the share of European residents has declined in favour of immigrants from the developing countries (see Statistical Annex, Tables C1). In the United States the number of European residents has dropped while that of immigrants from Asia and the American continent have increased. Between 1980 and 1990 the number of Asian and Central American nationals grew very rapidly. The Mexican community doubled. In Canada the stock of Europeans dropped sharply between 1981 and 1991 while the immigrant population from Asia doubled. The same phenomenon is observable in Australia with a strong growth in immigrants coming from Africa, Asia and New Zealand, while the number of those of European origin was largely unchanged. The dispersion of immigrants of the same origin across the range of host countries Certain immigrant communities have tended to increase in countries where they were not strongly represented previously. The following section will focus on immigrants from certain countries in the Mediterranean Basin (discussion of nationals from the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and Asia will be examined in Part B. The presence in Europe of nationals from the three Maghreb countries, Turkey and former Yugoslavia has changed over the past 15 years (see Statistical Annex, Tables B1). Although France remains the principal host country for North Africans and Algerian immigration is concentrated almost entirely there, Moroccan and Tunisian migrants are going in greater numbers to other host countries. Already present in Belgium and the Netherlands, Moroccans have widened the range of their destinations and now form important communities in Germany, Italy and Spain. In 1995, after France, it is in Italy, followed by Germany, that the most important Tunisian communities are to be found (see Table I.4).
30

Table I.4.

Maghrebian, Turkish and former Yugoslavian residents in selected European OECD countries, total population and labour force, 1995
Thousands and percentages
Foreign population1 Of which: Total foreign population Algeria % Morocco % Tunisia % Turkey % Former Yugoslavia %

Belgium Denmark France Germany Italy Netherlands Norway Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom

909.8 222.7 3 596.6 7 173.9 991.4 757.1 160.8 499.8 531.8 1 330.6 2 060

9.5 .. 614.2 17.7 .. 1.0 .. .. .. .. ..

1.0 .. 17.1 0.2 .. 0.1 .. .. .. .. ..

140.3 3.3 572.7 81.9 94.2 158.7 1.6 74.9 .. .. ..

15.4 1.5 15.9 1.1 9.5 21.0 1.0 15.0 .. .. ..

5.3 .. 206.3 26.4 40.5 2.1 .. .. .. .. ..

0.6 .. 5.7 0.4 4.1 0.3 .. .. .. .. ..

81.7 35.7 197.7 2 014.3 .. 182.1 4.4 .. 20.3 78.6 29

9.0 16.0 5.5 28.1 .. 24.1 2.8 .. 3.8 5.9 1.4

8.1 28.1 52.5 797.72 52.0 29.6 17.6 .. 92.1 294.2 ..

0.9 12.6 1.5 11.1 5.2 3.9 10.9 .. 17.3 22.1 ..

Foreign labour force3 Of which: Total foreign labour force Algeria % Morocco % Tunisia % Turkey % Former Yugoslavia %

Austria4 Belgium France5 Germany6 Netherlands Spain7 Sweden8 Switzerland9 United Kingdom
1.

269.7 335.3 1 573.3 2 569.2 221 138.7 220 728.7 1 031.7

.. 3.1 245.6 .. .. 2.6 .. .. 0.8

.. 0.9 15.6 .. .. 1.9 .. .. 0.1

.. 42.9 197.5 .. 32 51.4 .. .. 1.8

.. 12.8 12.6 .. 14.5 37.0 .. .. 0.2

.. 1.9 81.0 .. .. .. .. .. 1.9

.. 0.6 5.1 .. .. .. .. .. 0.2

55.7 21.0 66.4 752.0 39 .. 7 35.6 13.7

20.7 6.3 4.2 29.3 17.6 .. 3.2 4.9 1.3

146.8 3.0 32.3 468.92 .. .. 15 134.6 8.5

54.4 0.9 2.1 18.3 .. .. 6.8 18.5 0.8

Data are from population registers for all countries except for France (Census), Italy and Spain (residence permits) and the United Kingdom (Labour Force Survey). Data for the Netherlands are for 1994. 2. Data are for Serbia, Montenegro and Bosnia-Herzegovina. 3. Figures include unemployed except for Austria and the Netherlands. Data for Belgium and the United Kingdom are from the Labour Force Survey (Eurostat); for the other countries see the introduction to the tables of the Statistical Annex. 4. Annual average of valid work permits. Unemployed and self-employed are not included. 5. Data are derived from the Labour Force Survey. 6. Data (as of 30 September) refer to salaried workers only. Figures cover only western Germany. 7. Valid work permits. Workers from the European Union are not included in total. 8. Annual average. Data are from the annual Labour Force Survey. 9. Data are counts of the number of foreigners with an annual residence permit or a settlement permit (permanent permit), who engage in gainful activity. Sources: Labour Force Survey, Eurostat and National Statistical Institutes (for details, see the introduction to the tables of the Statistical Annex).

Immigrants from former Yugoslavia, due to the conict in the region, have gone increasingly to new host countries. If Germany remains the country where the greatest number of immigrants from former Yugoslavia is to be found, Italy is now the third host country after Austria, Switzerland, and before France. The Nordic countries are also among the new host countries of immigrants from former Yugoslavia, as well as Greece, Hungary and Bulgaria. Turks, who are most numerous in Germany, are also settled in other European OECD countries, notably, by order of decreasing importance, in France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Austria and Denmark. With numbers slightly higher than 2 million persons, the Turkish community in Germany represents close to 30 per cent of the resident foreign population in that country. Although much lower in absolute terms when compared with the numbers resident in France, in the Netherlands, Turks account for a percentage close to one fourth of the total foreign population in this country compared with less than 6 per cent in France and Switzerland, 9 per cent in Belgium and 16 per cent in Denmark. In Austria, foreign labour of Turkish origin represents close to one-fth of all salaried foreign workers.
31

Foreigners or immigrants of OECD Member or non-member countries residing in the OECD area Among foreign or foreign-born residents in OECD countries, some are from non-member countries while others are nationals of Member countries. In the majority of analyses on migration, focus is rarely on the latter group although their numbers are relatively high. The recent adhesion of several new countries to the OECD has added to these numbers. The Charts I.8 and I.9 rank, by country of origin in OECD and non-OECD areas, the number of foreigners residing in the European countries of the OECD and Japan (Chart I.8) and immigrants settled in Australia, Canada and the United States (Chart I.9). In Europe, in 1995, Turks are at the head of the list of the top 15 sending countries, followed by nationals from former Yugoslavia, Italians and Portuguese. Moroccans are in fth position. The presence of Koreans in sixth place can be explained by Japan having been taken into account in the chart. In this ranking of the top 15 sending countries, only three are not OECD Members. For the immigration settlement countries listed in Chart I.9, the ranking illustrates the numbers of foreigners born in an OECD country: Mexicans, followed by United Kingdom nationals. Italians are in fourth position. For statistical reasons it was not possible to divide the Caribbean by country and as such this region heads the list of non OECD Member residents in OECD countries and is in third position in the overall ranking. Contrary to the situation in Europe and Japan, for settlement countries, a larger number of countries outside the OECD area are included in the top 15 countries of origin. The conclusions that can be drawn from these two charts are, in part, biased by the fact that OECD European countries count foreigners and not foreign-born. In both charts, for each country ranked, a separate column refers to the importance of emigration in relation to the total population of the country of origin of the immigrants. Thus, although the number of Turks residing in OECD European countries and Japan (Chart I.8) is in absolute terms higher than that of Irish or Portuguese, Turks abroad represent only 4.2 per cent of the population of Turkey, compared with 13.4 per cent for the Irish, followed by the Portuguese and nationals from former Yugoslavia. The Chart I.9 shows that immigrants coming from the Caribbean and residing in OECD countries, although less numerous in absolute terms than those from Mexico or the United Kingdom, account for a higher percentage of the total population of this region. 3. Immigrants and the labour market

Over the past fteen years, most OECD countries underwent rst, a period of sustained economic growth until the late 1980s with unemployment nonetheless remaining at high levels in certain countries, and second, at the beginning of the 1990s a decline in economic activity resulting in signicant job loss and an increase in unemployment. The situation improved only slightly after 1993. Migration ows, however, have not followed these cyclical trends. They were rst characterised by a general acceleration in entries (particularly of asylum seekers) in the late 1980s and early 1990s and since 1993, by a levelling off and, in many countries, a decline in immigrant inows. The changing economic conditions in conjunction with the intensication of migration movements and the entry to the labour market of family members of immigrants already settled in the host country, have had signicant repercussions on the employment of foreigners during the past fteen years. The foreign labour force has grown in all OECD countries and its characteristics have changed, although in ways which vary from country to country. The sectoral distribution of foreign employment has also undergone modications. Still, the same structural distribution of the foreign labour force persists in many OECD economies and the growth of employment in the tertiary sector has beneted foreigners even though they have become more vulnerable to unemployment in comparison to the national labour force. a) Labour force characteristics of the foreign population

Generally, from one year to the next, or one period compared to another, the change in the share of foreigners in the labour force is not just the result of migration, but also of changes in participation rates, of naturalisation policies, and of the demographic weight of the new generations of foreigners who enter the labour market. In the preceding publication of Trends in International Migration (1995 Edition) an analysis of the characteristics of participation and unemployment rates of the foreign population was presented which focused on a comparison of the changes in the participation rates of nationals and foreigners by sex and age group. This study showed that the participation rates of foreign women grew less rapidly than those of national women and that the rates for young foreigners followed that of nationals with, in some cases, more marked highs and lows. In addition, the analysis of the comparative change in national and foreign employment between 1983 and 1993
32

Chart I.8. Stock of foreign residents1 in European OECD countries and in Japan The top fifteen source countries in 1995 Thousands
% ot total population in the country of origin

Turkey2 Italy Portugal Republic of Korea Spain Ireland United States United Kingdom Poland Germany Greece France OECD area

4.2 2.7 10.8 1.5 1.4 13.4 0.2 0.8 1.1 0.5 4.2 0.7

Non-OECD area

Former Yugoslavia Morocco Algeria

8.6 3.6 2.4 3 000

500

1 000

1 500

2 000

2 500

1. The data on foreign population by nationality for the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland are not taken into account in the calculations. The figures are from population registers or registers of foreigners except for Austria and France (last census), the United Kingdom and Ireland (Labour Force Survey), Portugal and Spain (residence permits). 2. For example, the total number of Turkish residents living in European OECD countries and in Japan amounts to approximately 2 590 000 which represents 4.2 per cent of the total Turkish population. The 15 countries of origin on this chart (the top fifteen source countries of foreigners living in Europe or in Japan) are ranked and split into OECD and non-OECD areas (as of 31 December 1996). Citizens of those 15 countries represent two-thirds per cent of the total foreign population in all host countries taken into account. Sources: National Statistical Offices and the United Nations.

33

Chart I.9. Foreign-born population in Australia, Canada and the United States The top fifteen source countries in 1991 Thousands
% ot total population in the country of birth

Mexico1 United Kingdom Italy Germany Canada Poland Republic of Korea Greece OECD area

5.0 4.3 2.1 1.3 2.7 1.7 1.3 3.9

Caribbean Philippines Vietnam Non-OECD area China India Former USSR Former Yugoslavia

6.4 1.8 1.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 3.8 0 1 000 2 000 3 000 4 000

1. For example, the total number of Mexican foreign-born residents living in Australia, Canada and in the United States amounts to 4 300 000 which represents 5 per cent of the total population of Mexico. The 15 countries of birth on this chart (the top fifteen countries of birth of immigrants living in Australia, Canada and the United States) are ranked and split into OECD and non-OECD areas (as of 31 December 1996). Immigrants born in one of the 15 countries on this chart represent two-thirds of the total of foreign-born living in Australia, Canada and the United States. Sources: National censuses (1990 for the United States) and the United Nations.

34

Chart I.10. Change in the share of foreigners in total population, labour force and unemployment, 1984-1994 Percentages
Foreign population (as a % of total population) Foreign labour force (as a % of total labour force) Foreign unemployed (as a % of total unemployed)

60 Luxembourg 50 40 30 20 Belgium

22 18 14 10 6

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 84

Netherlands

Germany

16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 93 94

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

14 12 10 8 6 4 2 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 France United Kingdom

14 12 10 8 6 4 2

14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 Austria1 Denmark

14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

1. Figures on labour force are from social security records and exclude the unemployed. Figures on unemployed are from the register of unemployed (national definition). Sources: Labour Force Survey, Eurostat except for Austria (sterreichisches Statistisches Zentralamt).

35

Chart I.11. Employment of foreign or immigrant workers by major industry division in some OECD countries in 19941 Percentages

Denmark
D M-Q A,B J,K I G,H F L C E J,K G,H D M-Q F C I A,B L E

Ireland
D G,H J,K A,B I C M-Q L F E

Netherlands

10
%

10
%

10
%

United Kingdom
M-Q J,K G,H I C F D L E A,B C-E G,H L-Q I F J,K A,B

Sweden2
F G,H J,K D C M-Q A,B I L E

France

0
A,B C D E F G,H

10
%

10
%

10

15

20
%

Agriculture, hunting, forestry and fishing Mining and quarrying Manufacturing Electricity, gas and water supplya Construction Trade, hotels and restaurantsb For Canada and the United States, this category is included in industry division I. Restaurants and hotels for Australia and Canada and hotels for the United States are in division M-Q (Other community service activities).

I Transport, storage and communication J,K Financial intermediation, real estate, renting and business activitesc L Public administration and defence; compulsory social security M-Q Other community service activitiesd

a) b)

c) d)

Business services are in division M-Q (Other community services activities) for Canada. Sanitary services are in division I for United States.

showed that the structural changes which occurred in the labour market have led to a reduction in sectoral differences with respect to the use of foreign or immigrant labour. This reduction occurred even in countries where the average annual growth of foreign employment in foreign sectors (sectors with a high concentration of foreigners) was greater than that of national employment. Foreign labour is thus spreading progressively throughout all sectors of economic activity, even if there still exist sectors where the foreign presence is either relatively strong or weak. In the present report focus is on recent trends in the foreign labour force, its sectoral distribution and foreigners vulnerability to unemployment. During the last decade the share of foreigners or foreign-born in the total labour force increased signicantly in several OECD countries, notably in Luxembourg, Austria, Germany, Australia, Canada and the United States (see Chart I.10 and Table I.2). By contrast, in France and the United Kingdom the share of foreigners in the total
36

Chart I.11. Employment of foreign or immigrant workers by major industry division in some OECD countries in 19941 (cont.) Percentages

Belgium
F G,H D J,K C I M-Q A,B E L C D G,H F I M-Q A,B J,K E L

Germany
F G,H J,K C M-Q D I A,B E L

Luxembourg

10

15

20
%

10

15

20
%

20

40

60

80
%

Australia2
D,E F J,K I M-Q G,H C L E A,B D J,K M-Q F G,H I L A,B C

Canada2
A,B D G,H F J,K M-Q I L C

United States

10

20

30

40
%

10

20

30

40
%

10

20

30

40
%

1. Percentages of foreigners or immigrants (for Australia, Canada and the United States) in total employment in each major industry division. For EU countries data are classified under the revised NACE classification, for other countries, national classifications have been used with some adjustments. The industry divisions are presented above. The dotted lines indicate the share of foreigners in total employment. 2. Data refer to 1993 for Australia, 1991 for Canada, 1992 for Sweden and 1990 for the United States. Sources: For EU, Labour Force Survey, Eurostat. For other countries: Statistics Sweden (Labour Force Survey); Australian Bureau of Statistics (Labour Force Survey); Statistics Canada (1991 Census); U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau (1990 Census).

labour force declined slightly over the same period. Three groups of countries can be distinguished, depending on the importance of the foreign or foreign-born share of total employment. The rst group (listed by smallest to largest share) includes Canada, Australia and Luxembourg, countries for which the share varies between 20 per cent and 40 per cent. The second group is composed of countries where the percentage is at a much lower level, between 5 per cent and 10 per cent, Sweden, France, Germany, Belgium, the United States and Austria (listed by smallest to largest share). Finally, the third group consists of countries where the foreign share of total employment is less than 5 per cent, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Denmark, Ireland, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Norway (listed by smallest to largest share). b) The foreign share of employment in the various sectors of economic activity in 1994

Chart I.11 shows for the year 1994 the foreign share of total employment in each major sector of economic activity compared to the total number (nationals and foreigners) in the sector. The sectoral classications used for the chart vary somewhat from country to country. The general classication retained for the purposes of the
37

analysis aims at both a harmonisation of the national classications and a consolidation of the branches into 10 sectors. Foreign labour is concentrated in certain sectors of economic activity... The dispersion of the foreign shares of employment in the various sectors of activity about the foreign share of total employment is large and indicates that foreign labour is concentrated in certain sectors (for example mining and quarrying and manufacturing in Germany, manufacturing in Australia and Canada, construction in France and in Luxembourg, and a few service sectors in the United Kingdom). The concentration is not of the same magnitude in all countries. For the year 1994, in Germany, Luxembourg, and France, four sectors employ an above average proportion of foreigners, as opposed to three in the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Belgium, Australia and Canada. The sector in which the share of foreigners or of immigrants is highest is Luxembourg, followed at a distance by Australia, Canada and France. ... and is spreading to services (excluding public administration) In most of the countries examined, the proportion of foreigners working in public administration is the lowest of any sector, largely because of the nature of the jobs on offer, which are generally only open to nationals. However, in Australia and the United Kingdom the lowest share of foreigners is found in agriculture and in Canada and the United States, in mining and quarrying. The heterogeneous character of the presence of foreigners in the various economic activities and of their share of employment in these is, for each country considered, the product of a number of factors, in particular, the history of migration, the functioning of the productive apparatus, the legislation governing the access of foreigners to the labour market, and the working conditions and wages on offer in each sector. Despite the contrasts which exist among the sectors, it is evident that foreign or immigrant workers have penetrated all sectors, and in particular the service sector (excluding public administration), thus showing the same general evolution as total employment over the past decade. In conclusion, based on data by economic sector, analysis has shown that foreign or foreign-born labour is not distributed in the same way as native or native-born labour across the sectors of economic activity, but tends to be concentrated in certain sectors which, however, vary by country. c) Foreigners are more vulnerable to unemployment than are nationals

In general, foreigners are more vulnerable to unemployment than nationals and a multitude of reasons can explain this greater vulnerability. In almost all OECD countries, the foreign or immigrant worker share of unemployment is greater than their share of the labour force. This trend was highlighted in the last edition of the publication Trends in International Migration. In the settlement countries (Canada, Australia, the United States), the difference between the unemployment rate of persons born abroad and that of those born in the country is signicantly less than that observed between foreigners and nationals in European countries. The following paragraphs will rst focus on the changes in the share of unemployment of foreigners in total unemployment and then on the multitude of factors which can explain this phenomenon. Second, a new analysis will provide information on unemployment rates for the year 1994, by age, place of birth and nationality. Finally, given that in several OECD countries unemployment remains high and that a debate has emerged on the links between immigration and unemployment, the last section contains empirical information which claries certain issues in this debate. During the last decade (see Chart I.10), the share of foreigners in total unemployment has grown in Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and more recently in Austria, Sweden and Switzerland. This share has stabilised at a relatively high level over the same period in Germany, France, and to a lesser extent, Denmark. The share declined slightly in the United Kingdom. The differences between the unemployment rates of foreigners and nationals and the variability in these rates among foreigners by nationality are the consequence of a whole series of factors. Indeed, unemployment among foreigners can be affected by numerous causes, related to current economic conditions and the nature of jobs held, the demographic composition and the age of different migration waves in the host country, and the individual prole of the foreign worker. In this respect, sex, age, nationality, qualications, knowledge of the host country language, and length of stay in the country all play a key role in determining a greater or less vulnerability to unemployment.
38

The foreign male labour force in many countries is concentrated in sectors that are declining or undergoing restructuring, in particular mining and manufacturing, or in activities that are especially subject to the ups-anddowns of the business cycle (building or public works). In many countries (for example, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Sweden and the United Kingdom), the recent recession has had particularly adverse effects on the foreign male labour force. Laid-off foreign workers, often older and having held for many years manual and unskilled jobs in the sectors cited above, have little chance of being re-employed. The recent arrival of many immigrants also contributes to swelling the numbers of unemployed foreigners, especially since labour market conditions are not very favourable in many OECD countries, particularly for unskilled workers. In addition, a period of adaptation is sometimes necessary before new arrivals can successfully enter the labour market of the host country, because of the need to acquire a mastery of the language and of administrative formalities, to learn the modes of entry into the labour market (job search techniques) and to adapt to working conditions. All of these factors are important for nding and keeping a job. Young foreigners encounter the same problems as young nationals when looking for work. However, although the schooling of migrant children is approaching that of young nationals, the convergence is gradual and is far from complete for the second generation. Unemployment being inversely associated with educational attainment, young foreigners are more vulnerable to unemployment than are young nationals. In addition to differences in educational attainment and in qualications, discriminatory practices aggravate their vulnerability and increase the difculties they encounter in the transition to work. At the same time it is difcult to measure the magnitude of this discrimination and above all to clearly determine if the qualities of the foreigners or the young person of foreign origin play a determinant role in the unemployment situation. In the case of the European countries, until 1992, available data from the Employment Survey carried out in European Union countries under the auspices of Eurostat, did not include questions related to place of birth or nationality. In 1992, this question was introduced in the survey and it is now possible to distinguish between foreigners and nationals by place of birth. An analysis of this data for six European countries provides key information, notably on unemployment rates. Chart I.12 looks at France, Belgium, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Germany and Luxembourg. It presents the unemployment rate of persons aged between 15 and 24 years and those aged between 25 and 54 years by place of birth and nationality. Overall, one observes that the fact of being born in the country gives the national a better chance of being integrated into the labour market, compared with nationals born abroad. The latter, in all the countries considered, with the exception of Luxembourg, are in fact more affected by unemployment than nationals born in the country. This vulnerability is clearly more marked in the Netherlands, for both age groups considered and more accentuated in Belgium, in France, and in the United Kingdom for the young (15 to 24 years). In Germany, for the 25 to 54 age group, nationals born abroad are not only more affected by unemployment than their counterparts born in the country, but also more than foreigners, whatever their place of birth. This phenomenon can be explained without a doubt, by the importance of the number of immigrants of German ethnic origin (Aussiedler) who have arrived since the end of the 1980s to Germany and who have experienced difculties integrating into the labour market. These immigrants have Germany nationality. If the unemployment rate of nationals born in the country is compared with that of foreigners born in the country, it is only in Luxembourg, for the age group 25 to 54 that the latter are less vulnerable to unemployment. In the ve other countries, the situation is inversed with very large gaps between nationals and foreigners, except in Germany where the gap is very small. The simple fact of being born in the host country does not necessarily make foreigners less vulnerable to unemployment when compared with foreigners born abroad. This is the case in Belgium, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom not only for persons 25 to 54 years old, but also for young persons 15 to 24 years old (except in France and the Netherlands). In the case of young foreigners, this observation reveals the seriousness of the situation vis-` a-vis their integration into the labour market. It shows that contrary to conclusions that could be drawn by looking at the current situation in the non-European OECD countries, birth in the host country (and thus better knowledge of the host country language) is not necessarily an advantage to a foreigner compared to an immigrant. An exception is Germany where foreigners born in the country have better chances of nding a job than their counterparts born abroad. In this country the gap between the unemployment rate of foreigners born in the country and that of nationals born in the country is the smallest when compared with all the countries in this analysis. d) Using empirical data to clarify issues in the immigration and unemployment debate

In several OECD countries, unemployment remains high. Due to the fact that in the middle of the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s, immigration ows grew rapidly in the OECD area, a debate has emerged on the links
39

Chart I.12. Unemployment rate according to age, place of birth and nationality, 19941 As a per cent of total labour force
Foreigners born abroad Nationals born abroad Foreigners born in the host country Nationals born in the host country

Persons aged 15-24

40

40

30

30

20

20

10

10

France

Belgium

Netherlands

United Kingdom

Germany

Luxembourg

Persons aged 25-54 25 25

20

20

15

15

10

10

France

Belgium

Netherlands

United Kingdom

Germany

Luxembourg

1. Data for Germany are for 1992. Source: Labour Force Survey, Eurostat.

40

between immigration and unemployment. In the 1994 edition of the publication, Trends in International Migration, a special chapter was devoted to the macroeconomic impact of immigration in host countries. The links between immigration and the labour market were explored and in particular the substitution and complementarity between national and foreign workers. In addition, the impact of a 10 per cent increase in immigration ows on wages of natives was studied. The chapter concluded that not only is the complementarity between foreign and national labour strong but also that an increase of 10 per cent of immigration ows had practically an insignicant effect (whether positive or negative, depending on the country) on the wages of natives or immigrants already resident in the country. The following section provides two new approaches, both using empirical data, to explore the issue of immigration and unemployment. The rst attempts to respond to the following question: is it possible to establish links between the level of unemployment rates and the numbers of foreign workers in the labour force in the host country? The second approach looks at the relationship between gross immigration ows over two ve-year periods and the change in the unemployment rates in the host country. Presence of foreigners in the labour force and the overall unemployment rate Chart I.13 presents the share of foreigners in the total population (in percentages) on the x axis and the unemployment rate (nationals and foreigners) on the y axis. Reading this chart leads to several observations: countries with the highest numbers of foreigners in their labour force (Switzerland and Luxembourg) are among those countries with the lowest unemployment rates; Spain and Finland, two countries with very high unemployment rates in 1995 (23 per cent and close to 17 per cent respectively) are countries where the share of foreign workers in the total labour force is very small, particularly in Spain (less than 1 per cent). Another group of countries, in which the unemployment rate is greater than 12 per cent, includes Italy, Ireland, the Netherlands and France. In these countries, the share of foreign workers varies between 1 and 6 per cent. In other countries such as Belgium, Germany and Austria, where the foreigners in the labour market oscillates between 8 and 10 per cent, the unemployment rate is between 6.5 and 9.5 per cent. In Italy, in Portugal and in Japan, countries where the numbers of foreign workers in the total labour force are relatively small (around 1 per cent), the unemployment rate varies between 3 and 12 per cent. Based on this evidence, any empirical relationship between foreign workers and the unemployment rate is weak, in large part (for most countries), due to the fact that the share of foreign workers in the total labour force is relatively small. These results are based on an static analysis. Would an approach which takes into account immigration ows allow for a more direct correlation with changes in unemployment rates? Gross immigration ows and changes in unemployment rates The Chart I.14 compares the gross inows of foreigners or immigrants and unemployment rates for eight OECD countries. The gures for both inows and unemployment rates were calculated as annual averages for each of the two periods (1984-1989 and 1990-1995) considered. The extent of the variation between the unemployment rates differs widely by country and by period studied. For example, in France and Germany during the rst period although the unemployment rate was at 10 per cent and 7.6 per cent respectively, the rates varied between 9.3 per cent and 10.5 per cent for France and 6.9 per cent and 8 per cent for Germany. The difference is even more signicant in the second time period, 8.9 to 12.3 per cent in France and 6.2 to 9.6 per cent in Germany. A comparison of the two time periods (covering the last ten years) for the same country shows that when annual inows of foreigners grew rapidly, the unemployment rate remained stable (United States and Japan) or grew only slightly (France, Germany). In the United Kingdom, the small increase in entries during the second time period was accompanied by a drop in unemployment. In Norway, inows declined slightly during the rst half of the 1990s and the unemployment rate grew strongly when compared with the period 1984-1989. An analysis of the change in growth in inows (between the two periods) in relation to the total foreign population (at the beginning of the rst period) provides an indication of the relative importance of changes in inows. This indicator, by weighting the change in inows in relation to the importance of the total foreign population in each country, allows comparisons across countries. In Japan, for example (see Chart I.14), where immigration is a relatively new phenomenon, this indicator reaches close to 7 per cent although the average entries of foreigners grew by 30 per cent between the two periods. In this country, recent immigration ows represent a relatively signicant factor when compared with the number of foreigners resident in the country in 1984. In France, this indicator reaches only 1.3 per cent, although average inows more than doubled. This
41

Chart I.13. Standardised unemployment rate and share of foreign labour force,1 in total labour force in selected OECD countries, 1995 Percentages
Unemployment rate (as a % of total labour force)

25
Spain

25

20
Finland

20

15
Ireland Italy France

15

10

Denmark Sweden

Belgium Germany Austria

10

United Kingdom Portugal

Netherlands Norway4

5
Japan2

5
Switzerland
5

Luxembourg3

10

20

30

40

Share of foreign labour force in total labour force (%) 1. Standardised unemployment rate except for Austria, Denmark, Germany, Luxembourg for which figures represent national definition of unemployment. Data on labour force are from Labour Force Survey (1994) except for Austria, Germany and Luxembourg (for which data are from social security records), Denmark, Japan, Norway and Switzerland (register of population or register of foreigners), Portugal and Spain (residence permits and work permits respectively). 2. The stock of foreign workers is estimated and excludes permanent workers. 3. The stock of foreign workers excludes cross-border workers. 4. The stock of foreign workers excludes unemployed and self-employed. 5. The stock of foreign workers excludes seasonal and cross-border workers. Sources: For foreign and total labour force: National Statistical Institutes (see details in the introduction to the Statistical Annex) and Labour Force Survey, Eurostat, 1994; for unemployment rates: Employment Outlook, OECD, 1996 and National Statistical Institutes.

difference with Japan results from the fact that France is a long-standing immigration country and that the foreign population is larger, relatively speaking. In Germany, the indicator is close to 9 per cent. The gap with France can only be explained by the dramatic acceleration and the high levels of inows to Germany since the end of the 1980s. The fact that only gross ows have been considered (in Germany outows are particularly large) accentuates the gap observed between the two countries. If one compares the indicator of average growth of inows in relation to the foreign population with the difference in the annual unemployment rates between the two time periods (see Chart I.14), one observes that in countries where the indicator reaches the highest levels (Germany and Japan), unemployment grew only slightly, or, in the case of Japan, even stagnated. When the indicator shows a slight increase (United Kingdom and Norway) in the rst country unemployment dropped by close to one point, while in the second, unemployment grew by 2.5 points. In the United States and in Switzerland, where the indicator is practically at the same level, (3.2 and 3.5 per cent respectively), for the rst country a stable unemployment rate is observed while in the second it grew more than 2 points.
42

Chart I.14. Gross immigration flows and unemployment rates in selected OECD countries, 1984-1989 and 1990-1995
Gross immigration flows1 (Average of annual flows over each period) Unemployment rates2 (Average of annual rates over each period) Increase of inflows relative to the total foreign population3 Difference in annual unemployment rates between the two periods Difference in points

Inflows in thousands 1984-1989 1990-1995

United States

675.2 1 128.0 520.0 920.0 183.0 238.5 68.8 101.1 44.9 92.4 49.8 54.2 18.4 17.6 7.3 9.5

6.4 6.4 7.6 8.1 2.6 2.5 0.7 2.9 10.0 10.7 8.6 9.4 3.0 5.5 1.6 2.0 +2.3 +0.4 0.8 +2.5 +0.3 +0.8 +1.3 +0.7 +3.5 +2.2 +6.6 0.1 +9.2 +0.5 +3.2 0.0

Germany4

Japan

Switzerland

France

United Kingdom

Norway

Luxembourg

1. These are gross inflows because no precise information is available on outflows for most of the selected countries. Figures are calculated on the basis of data from population registers (or registers of foreigners) except for the United States and France (residence permits) and the United Kingdom (acceptances for settlement). Countries are listed in order of decreasing importance of inflows over the period 1990-1995. 2. Unemployment figures are based on national definitions. 3. Difference between average of annual inflows for the two periods expressed as a percentage of the total foreign population (foreign-bom population for the United States) in 1984 (1982 for France and 1980 for the United States). 4. Western Germany until 1990 and Germany as a whole since 1991. Sources: National Statistical Institutes (for details, see the Introduction to the tables of the Statistical Annex); Labour Force Statistics, 1974-1994, OECD, 1996.

43

In sum, there appears to be no direct correlation between growth in entries of foreigners to a country and changes in the unemployment rate. In addition, the idea that the rate of unemployment would decline if immigration were halted or sharply reduced, is not conrmed by available data. Evidently, other factors are more determinant than immigration in changes in unemployment.

B.

NEW MIGRATION AREAS

The second part of this synthesis of major trends in international migration focuses on the widening of the geographical space considered in the analysis of migration movements and policies. There are two regions that contribute to the widening of this space: Asia and Central and Eastern Europe. Both regions exemplify the globalisation and regionalisation of migration movements, characterised by a diversication of the nationalities involved and the growing importance of ows between neighbouring countries sharing common historical, economic and cultural traditions. Asia and Central and Eastern Europe are regions of emigration, in particular to OECD countries, but they are also experiencing extensive intra-regional migration. In Asia, regional migration occurs within a context of economic growth, increasing trade and capital ows, and regional economic integration. In Central and Eastern Europe, the determining factors behind population movements are the recent political and economic changes as well as social and ethnic tensions. However, the economic imbalances in the central and eastern European countries (CEECs) as well as in the countries on their borders also play an important role in recent migration trends in the region. 1. Asian migration to OECD countries and between Asian countries

Asia has seen the highest rate of economic growth of any region over the last decade. This growth has been accompanied by an increase in capital ows, trade and international migration. Asia is presently one of the largest sending regions (both settlement and labour migration) as well as a source of refugees and displaced persons. Asia also contains numerous immigration countries. On the whole, Asian migration to OECD countries continues to increase and diversify. At the same time, intra-Asian migration has also developed due to rapid economic growth, regional integration and the structural changes occurring in the labour markets of the region. a) Asian migration to OECD countries continues to increase and diversify

Several OECD countries, in particular the United States, Canada, Australia, France and the United Kingdom, have for many years received ows of immigrants or refugees from Asia. Since the early 1960s, these ows have increased continuously in the United States, Canada and Australia, and have gradually replaced migrants coming from Europe. Recent Asian migration to OECD countries is characterised by two main trends which correspond to the general evolution of the process of migration: on the one hand, a strengthening of traditional ties, and on the other, a widening of the range of immigrant nationalities, destination countries and entry categories involved. This diversication of ows has been accompanied by a process of regionalisation. The 1995 edition of Trends in International Migration, contains a detailed discussion of emigration from Asia to OECD countries since the end of the Second World War. In the present report focus is placed on the analysis of recent Asian immigration to OECD countries and on key changes in Asia with regard to intra-regional migration and the labour market. Asian immigration surpasses European immigration Since the early 1980s, ows from Asia to the United States, Canada, Australia and several European countries have intensied. In North America and in Australia, the development of these ows has gone hand in hand with the reduction in the numbers of those coming from Europe. In Australia, residents born in Asia represented in 1971, close to 6 per cent of the total foreign-born population, whereas persons born in Europe accounted for 85 per cent of this population. During the 1980s, the population born in Asia (including the Middle East) more than doubled from close to 400 000 to more than 800 000 persons. Overall the foreign-born population from Europe was still in the majority with close to two thirds of the total foreign-born, while the Asian-born population stood at more than 20 per cent in 1991 (see Statistical Annex, Tables C1). The growth in the relative share accounted for by Asians is also evident in the composition of the ows. Whereas in 1982/83, around 30 per cent of immigrants authorised to settle in Australia were Asians, they were 50 per cent in 1991/92. This upward trend has been attenuated in the last two years as a result of the increased
44

ows from Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. However, in 1995 six Asian countries are still among the top ten sending countries for new entries, notably, China, Hong Kong, India and the Philippines (see Chart I.3). In Canada, Asian immigration has also increased. In 1981, the number of immigrants born in an Asian country (including the Middle East) stood at close to 540 000 persons, or 14 per cent of the total immigrant population. In 1991, they represented 25 per cent of the total (see Statistical Annex, Tables C1). Since 1993, more than half of immigrant entries have been from Asian countries and seven Asian countries (of which Hong Kong, India, the Philippines, China and Sri Lanka) have been among the top ten source countries for permanent immigration to Canada. This trend has continued in 1995 (see Chart I.3). The increase has been to the detriment of ows from Europe and the United States. The same phenomenon a decline in European migration and an increase in ows from Asia is clearly in evidence in the United States, where the number of residents born in Asia (including the Middle East) reached 5 million in 1990, double the number in 1980 (see Statistical Annex, Tables C1). In 1995, ve Asian countries were among the top ten source countries for permanent immigrants to the United States (the Philippines, Vietnam, China, India and the Republic of Korea). However, it should be noted that 1995 data on inows for Australia, Canada and the United States show, overall, lower levels of permanent immigrant entries (see Statistical Annex, Tables C3). In particular, ows coming from the Philippines and Vietnam decreased in 1994 and 1995 for all three countries. A notable exception is for immigration from China in 1995, which grew slightly in Canada and tripled in Australia compared to 1994. Despite an emergence of new nationalities (discussed below) the main Asian groups are the same in the United States, Canada, and Australia: China, India, the Philippines, and Vietnam for all three countries; Korea and Japan for the United States; and nationals from Hong Kong for Australia and Canada. The persistence of traditional ows from Asia is also apparent in the United Kingdom and France. In the latter country, the share of Asian residents has increased between the two censuses of 1982 and 1990, growing from 4 to 6 per cent of the total foreign population. Cambodia, Vietnam and Laos represent the principal sending countries. In addition, the number of Asians who have acquired French nationality doubled during the same time period. The increasing number of Asians applies to entries as well. Whereas in 1981, not a single Asian country appeared among the top ten source countries for immigrants, both Vietnam and China are ranked in the top ten in 1995 (see Chart I.3). In the United Kingdom, despite the stabilisation, or even decrease in ows from South Asia, Indians continue to be the second largest group of foreigners after the Irish. The Bangladeshi and Pakistani communities remain sizeable. In 1995, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and Hong Kong are among the top ten sending countries for entries of new immigrants. The diversication of Asian migration ows Alongside the continuation of traditional ows from Asia, one observes a tendency towards the diversication of countries of origin, a widening of the range of receiving countries and a greater diversity in the means of entry. The emergence of new nationalities...

In the United States during the 1980s, immigrant ows from Cambodia and Laos declined, while those from Thailand, Indonesia and Chinese Taipei have remained relatively stable. Those from Malaysia, Hong Kong, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka have increased. Total ows, however, are limited to a few thousand for each of these countries. In Canada, in 1995, Sri Lanka and Chinese Taipei were in the top ten source countries for permanent immigration, a list which also included (in order of importance) Hong Kong, India, the Philippines, China and Pakistan (see Chart I.3). Immigrants from Vietnam, Malaysia and Singapore were also numerous. In Australia, Asian sending countries have become increasingly diverse with the arrival of nationals from Malaysia, Sri Lanka and Indonesia (in 1991 Malaysians numbered more than 70 000 and those from Sri Lanka and Indonesia roughly 30 000 each), from Japan and Korea (20 to 30 000 each) and nally, from Thailand, Chinese Taipei, Cambodia and Laos (10 000 to 15 000 residents each) (see Table I.5). The diversity in the means of entry is characteristic as well of the evolution of recent Asian migration to the United States, Canada and Australia. The desire on the part of these three countries to increase the number of entries of qualied and highly qualied migrants has contributed to this diversity, by offering entry opportunities other than family reunication, such as employment-related permanent migration as well as entry for temporary work or study.
45

Table I.5. A.

Stock of selected Asian nationals1 in some OECD countries in 1995

Thousands and percentages
Japan
2

Denmark % 1 000 %

Finland 1 000 %

France 1 000 %

Germany 1 000 % 1 000

Italy %

1 000

Total foreigners Of which: Bangladesh China India Indonesia Rep. of Korea Pakistan Philippines Sri Lanka Vietnam Total for the above nine countries

1 362.4 4.9 223.0 5.5 7.0 666.4 4.8 74.3 .. 9.1 994.9

100.0 0.4 16.4 0.4 0.5 48.9 0.3 5.5 .. 0.7 73.0

222.7 .. .. .. .. .. 6.6 1.8 5.7 5.0 19.1

100.0 .. .. .. .. .. 2.9 0.8 2.6 2.2 8.6

68.6 .. 1.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.1 3.5

100.0 .. 2.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 3.1 5.1

3 596.6 .. 14.1 4.6 1.3 4.3 9.8 1.9 10.3 33.7 80.0

100.0 .. 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.9 2.2

7 173.9 .. .. 34.7 .. 21.2 .. .. 54.6 96.0 206.5

100.0 .. .. 0.5 .. 0.3 .. .. 0.8 1.3 2.9

991.4 .. 21.5 14.6 .. .. .. 43.4 20.3 .. 99.8

100.0 .. 2.2 1.5 .. .. .. 4.4 2.0 .. 10.1

Netherlands 1 000 %

Norway 1 000 %

Spain 1 000 %

Sweden 1 000 %

Switzerland 1 000 %

United Kingdom 1 000 %

Total foreigners Of which: Bangladesh China India Indonesia Rep. of Korea Pakistan Philippines Sri Lanka Vietnam Total for the above nine countries

757.1 .. 7.7 2.9 8.4 .. 4.0 2.3 3.2 4.3 32.8

100.0 .. 1.1 0.5 1.2 .. 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.6 4.6

160.8 .. .. 2.7 .. 0.3 9.7 2.0 5.1 5.9 25.6

100.0 .. .. 1.7 .. 0.2 6.0 1.2 3.2 3.6 15.9

499.8 .. 9.2 6.2 .. .. .. 9.7 .. .. 25.0

100.0 .. 1.8 1.2 .. .. .. 1.9 .. .. 5.0

499.1 1.2 2.8 1.7 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.7 1.3 4.0 14.6

100.0 0.2 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.8 2.9

1 243.6 0.3 3.4 4.4 0.9 0.8 1.2 3.0 7.0 7.4 28.4

100.0 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.6 2.3

2 060 53 18 114 .. .. 81 16 20 10 312.0

100.0 2.6 0.9 5.5 .. .. 3.9 0.8 1.0 .. 14.7

B.

Stock of immigrants born in an Asian country3 in Australia, Canada and the United States
Thousands and percentages
Australia (1991) 1 000 % Canada (1991) 1 000 % United States (1990) 1 000 %

Total foreign-born Of which: China Hong Kong India Indonesia Japan Rep. of Korea Malaysia Pakistan Philippines Sri Lanka Chinese Taipei Vietnam Total for the above twelve countries
1.

3 753.3 78.8 59.0 61.6 33.3 26.0 20.9 72.6 6.0 73.7 37.3 13.0 122.3 604.4

100.0 2.1 1.6 1.6 0.9 0.7 0.6 1.9 0.2 2.0 1.0 0.3 3.3 16.1

4 342.9 157.4 152.5 173.7 .. .. .. .. .. 123.3 .. 17.8 113.6 738.3

100.0 3.6 3.5 4.0 .. .. .. .. .. 2.8 .. 0.4 2.6 17.0

19 767.3 529.8 147.1 450.4 .. 290.1 568.4 .. .. 912.7 .. 244.1 543.3 3 685.9

100.0 2.7 0.7 2.3 .. 1.5 2.9 .. .. 4.6 .. 1.2 2.7 18.6

Data are from population registers (or registers of foreigners) except for France (census), Italy and Spain (residence permits), the United Kingdom (Labour Force Survey). Figures are for 1990 for France, 1992 for Sweden and Switzerland and 1994 for the Netherlands. 2. Data for China include Chinese Taipei. 3. Census data. Sources: Statistics on migration, 1995, Eurostat; National Statistical Institutes (for details, see the Introduction to the tables of the Statistical Annex).

46

... and a widening of the range of receiving countries

The diversication in Asian migration ows is illustrated as well by a broadening of destination areas which now include a wider range of European countries (southern as well as northern) and Japan. Whereas intraEuropean migration, notably from Spain, Italy, Greece and Portugal, has declined since the 1970s, ows from Asia have increased. Thus, Germany, in addition to France and the United Kingdom, has received a large number of refugees from Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. In 1995, of 7.1 million foreigners residing in Germany, 96 000 were from Vietnam, 55 000 from Sri Lanka, 35 000 from India and roughly the same from Pakistan (see Table I.5). The recent increase in the number of refugees in Germany has resulted in a decrease in the share of Asians, but not in an absolute decrease. In the Netherlands during the 1980s, the number of immigrants from Pakistan and Sri Lanka accepted into the country increased. In 1995, despite the fact that the large majority of Indonesians have Dutch nationality, Indonesians remain the largest Asian community in the Netherlands, followed by Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Pakistanis and Sri Lankans. Asian immigration to the Nordic countries, negligible until the 1970s, increased signicantly during the second half of the 1980s, largely through asylum seeking. In Denmark, this immigration is primarily from Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Vietnam; in Finland, from Malaysia, India, China, Vietnam and Bangladesh. Immigration from Pakistan and Sri Lanka has also developed in Norway. In Sweden, immigration from Asia largely involves Vietnamese, Chinese, Indians and Filipinos (see Table I.5). In Southern Europe, Asian immigration is mainly from the Philippines. In Italy and Spain, migration is linked to the development of the domestic service and health sectors and the migrants are largely women. In 1986 in Italy, there were 65 000 foreign residents from Asia (including the Middle East). By 1995, this number had more than doubled and the most numerous nationalities, in order of decreasing size, were Filipinos (44 000), Chinese (22 000), Sri Lankans (20 000) and Indians (15 000). In Spain, the most important Asian community consists of Filipinos, followed by Chinese and Indians. Immigration to Japan has increased signicantly since the beginning of the 1980s. Migration movements to Japan are above all regional and involve neighbouring countries even if non-Asian immigration has also grown in importance. In 1980, the large majority (80 per cent) of foreigners present in Japan were Korean. In 1995, Koreans still form the largest group of foreigners, but other nationalities were also present, in particular Chinese, Filipinos, Thais, Vietnamese, Indonesians, Malaysians, Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshi (see Table I.5). In addition, illegal immigration in Japan, estimated on the basis of the number of foreign nationals who had not left the territory after the expiration of their visa or work permit, is mostly from Asia (Korea, Thailand, China, the Philippines and Malaysia). Japan now appears to be becoming a regional migration pole. In the ranking of the top ten sending countries to Japan in 1995, ve belong to Asian countries, with the Philippines, China and Korea predominant. b) Intra-Asian migration

Migration between countries of East and South-East Asia if one excludes the movements of refugees, notably to Thailand consists essentially of temporary workers. These ows are largely a development of the 1980s, and have continued to grow in the 1990s, although are still not of the same importance as Asian ows to the oil-producing countries of the Middle East. The extent of these intra-Asian movements are a result of rapid economic growth, regional integration and structural change in labour markets within the region. The experience gained from contract-related migration to the Middle East since the early 1970s can explain in part why Asian migrants and public and private recruiting agencies were able to take advantage of employment opportunities in the fast-growing Asian economies. Several characteristic features of labour migration in Asia Migration is developing in Asia in a context characterised by substantial economic and demographic imbalances between the countries of the region. Data on labour migration in Asia are scarce and not always reliable, which renders international comparisons difcult. In addition, in several countries the estimate of the number of illegal migrants far exceeds ofcial counts of migrants possessing a residence or work permit. This situation largely reects the existence of labour shortages for unskilled workers in the more developed countries of the region. Since these countries restrict the entry of unskilled workers, the number of illegal foreign workers, for the most part staying after the expiry of their permits, is growing. Several countries, including Korea, Malaysia and Singapore and Thailand, have introduced regularisation programmes for these workers. Another characteristic feature of Asian migration, in addition to its temporary nature and the fact that family migration is not encouraged, is the important role of recruitment agencies, whether governmental or private. The
47

labour sending countries have many licensed manpower agencies which recruit and select migrants, arrange their transportation and look after the necessary formalities associated with the work contract. For example, it is estimated that 97 per cent of labour migrants from the Philippines and Thailand and 60 per cent of those from Bangladesh were placed by this type of agency. The control of migration ows in Asia is complicated in particular by the role played by private agencies as intermediaries between immigrants and their eventual employers. Finally, remittances play an important economic and social role in the emigration countries of the region. In the Philippines, according to recent estimates, 20 per cent of households receive remittances from family members working abroad. The remittances, estimated at 5 billion dollars in 1993, accounted for 20 per cent of the value of Filipino exports in the same year. For several South Asian countries, the percentage is much higher stood at about 60 per cent on average during the 1980s for both Pakistan and Bangladesh. For some sending countries, labour deployment abroad has in some instances been treated as part of a medium-term development strategy. For example, the ve-year development plans of Indonesia contain yearly deployment targets as well as projections of expected remittances. Recent trends in labour migration Several developing South-East Asian countries have emerged as both sending and receiving countries for skilled and unskilled workers. China, which is experiencing shortages of highly skilled labour and which is now receiving important inows of foreign direct investment, counted roughly 80 000 foreign workers in 1995, one third of whom were from Japan, 20 per cent from the United States and 13 per cent from Germany. In Korea, an OECD Member country since 1996, the number of foreign workers has grown over the past ve years. According to certain estimates, they reach close to 200 000, of which 61 000 are trainees. The most important countries of origin are China, Thailand, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Malaysia is a source of labour for Singapore, each day close to 200 000 Malaysian workers cross the border to Singapore. At the same time Malaysia receives a signicant number of foreign workers, more than 1.5 million according to ofcial estimates. The majority are employed (legally and illegally) in the plantation sector, manufacturing, construction and public works. They come from neighbouring countries such as Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand. In the case of Indonesia, Sri Lanka and the Philippines, women represent an important share of the labour force working abroad, over two thirds for the rst two countries and half for the third. Most work as domestic helpers, nurses or in the recreation sector. China, which has supplied labour to other countries in the region for centuries, now possesses large overseas communities and seeks to export a greater number of workers, notably to Japan, Korea and Singapore. The authorities responsible for the regulation and control of Chinese workers abroad declared the number of workers to be 265 000, of which 70 per cent are in Asia, notably in Hong Kong. The number of foreigners residing in Hong Kong doubled between 1981 and 1991 and is around 320 000. At the same time, the number of emigrants on an annual average has grown from 20 000 persons at the beginning of the 1980s to 66 000 each year during the following decade. In Singapore, the number of foreign workers is now more than 10 per cent of the labour force. This immigration has allowed employers to preserve manufacturing jobs not only for immigrants, but also for those nationals who are limited in their professional mobility and who would lose their jobs if manufacturing activities were relocated abroad. The movements of workers will continue to grow in the future Current and future concerns about international migration in the rapidly developing Asian region are similar to those expressed over the years in OECD countries and which are still of concern to them with the year 2000 on the horizon, namely, the need to monitor and control migration movements; to combat illegal migration; to regulate migration ows according to both labour market requirements and the capacity to receive and integrate new migrants; and the need to give a more important role to the movement of temporary skilled labour. A framework of co-operation has developed between sending and receiving countries, with respect to the status of immigrants in receiving countries, the control of migration movements, trade liberalisation and foreign direct investment. This co-operation also seeks to promote the implementation of development strategies and of institutional reforms, geared to foster employment creation in sending countries and thus reduce the incentive to emigrate in Asian developing countries.
48

2.

Recent migration trends in Central and Eastern Europe

Since 1989, Central and Eastern Europe has become a new migration area. Due to the importance of ows between neighbouring countries sharing common historical cultural and economic traditions, the regionalisation of movements now predominates. This regionalisation has been reinforced by social and ethnic tensions, which are also determining factors behind population movements. Contrary to certain alarmist forecasts, the opening of national borders in Central and Eastern Europe and the political changes which have occurred in this region have not yet resulted in massive population movements towards OECD countries. Although emigration to these countries, and in particular to Germany, is far from negligible, these ows have declined markedly since 1993, even if temporary labour migration has been increasing. The free movement of people has been facilitated by the fact that most OECD countries do not require entry visas for nationals of CEECs wishing to stay less than three months. Recent migration developments in Central and Eastern Europe reect two additional trends, namely, a reversal in the net migration balance in certain countries such as the Czech Republic and Hungary, (or if not, at least the beginnings of foreign immigration) and the increasing importance of intra-regional movements. An important part of these movements concerns the migration of ethnic minorities. Such ows were already important for Germany and have grown during the 1980s. These movements essentially involve ethnic Germans (in Poland, Hungary, Romania and the former Soviet Union), Hungarians (in Romania and the Slovak Republic), Poles (in the Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Siberia), Russians (in the Baltic States), Greeks (in the Pontian region of the former Soviet Union) and, nally, Turks (in Bulgaria). Another trend involves transit migration towards western European countries. This type of migration for the large part consists of migrants from either other CEECs, other eastern European countries, Asia or Africa, who for the majority enter in one of the CEECs legally, hoping to rapidly reach a western European country. This phenomenon has led central and eastern European countries to implement policies for controlling ows, most often in the context of an extension of international co-operation at the regional level as well as with OECD countries. a) Important inows and outows since the opening of borders

The changes that have taken place in Central and Eastern Europe have led to an increase in migratory movements not only from East to West but also between countries in the region. Since 1989, the liberalisation of laws on the freedom of movement has completely changed the conditions under which people circulate in the region. The diversity of the channels used by migrants (labour and family migration, legal and illegal, temporary, seasonal, cross-border migration, asylum seeking, return of former emigrants and ethnic minority movements) is one of the characteristics of East-West migration since 1989. Outows can be explained by a number of reasons, as much economic or ethnic as political. Two other aspects of recent East-West migration should be highlighted. These new ows are occurring in the context of the migration trends already observed in the past. Polish emigrants, followed by those from Romania, were the two most important groups of migrants between 1989 and 1992, with the exception of nationals of the former Yugoslavia and emigration ows, most often ethnic minorities, from the former Soviet Union. Germany remains the main receiving country for migrants from Central and Eastern Europe. The tradition of emigrating to the West is not uniform for all the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. In the past, Poland and Romania were the origin for the most intense ows to certain OECD countries and the orientation, nature and magnitude of these ows since 1989 can be, in part, explained by the links built with their communities abroad. Other East-West migration, and notably the ows of seasonal and border workers, developed after 1989 and largely correspond to the process of regional integration. These movements are limited to the border regions and occur within the framework of bilateral agreements (for example between Germany and Poland or the Czech Republic, or between Austria and Hungary). At the beginning of the 1990s, nearly all the OECD countries counted immigrants from central and eastern European countries in their populations. In Australia, Canada and the United States, available statistics refer to the foreign-born (see Table I.6). The Poles are the most numerous in Canada and Australia. In the United States they are slightly preceded by nationals from the former Soviet Union. OECD European countries count foreigners in their populations according to nationality. In 1995, Germany is the main receiving country for nationals from all CEECs. Austria receives mainly Romanians, Polish, followed by nationals from the former Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and Hungarians. France receives mostly Poles (47 000 according to the 1990 Census), and Italy, Romanians and Poles (25 000 and 22 000 respectively for each nationality). In Sweden, the Polish are the largest group (about 16 000) and the same is true for Finland, although the numbers are very small (less than a thousand). The largest Polish
49

Table I.6.

A.

Foreign residents, who are nationals of central and eastern European countries in selected European OECD countries, last available year
Thousands
Austria 1991 Belgium 1995 Finland 1995 France 1990 Germany 1995 Italy 1995 Netherlands 1994 Sweden 1995 Switzerland 1995

Bulgaria Former CSFR Hungary Poland Romania Former USSR Total foreigners

3.6 11.3 10.6 18.3 18.5 2.1 517.7

0.6 0.7 0.9 5.4 2.0 2.1 909.8

.. .. .. 0.7 .. 15.9 68.6

0.8 2.0 2.9 46.3 5.7 4.3 3 596.6

38.8 34.1 56.7 276.8 56.7 58.3 7 173.9

.. .. .. 22.0 24.5 .. 991.4

.. .. 1.1 5.8 1.6 2.1 757.1

.. .. 3.0 16.0 4.2 .. 531.8

.. 5.0 3.8 4.8 .. .. 1 330.6

B.

Immigrants born in central and eastern European countries residing in Australia, Canada and the United States, last available year
Thousands
Australia 1991 Canada 1991 United States 1990

Former CSFR Hungary Poland Romania Former USSR Total of foreign-born

17.8 27.2 68.9 11.3 44.3 3 753.3

42.6 57.0 184.7 .. 99.4 4 342.9

87.0 110.3 388.3 91.1 389.9 19 767.3

Sources: Census for Austria, France, Australia, Canada and the United States and registers of population for the other countries (for details, see the introduction to the tables of the Statistical Annex).

and Romanian communities abroad, after the United States, are found in Germany (227 000 and 60 000 persons respectively). Among OECD European countries, Germany receives the majority of the foreign workers from central and eastern European countries. In 1995, Poles were the most numerous (approximately 70 000), not including subcontract workers and seasonal workers, followed by Romanians (25 000). In Austria, the number of Polish foreign workers in 1995 (close to 9 600) is just slightly more than those from Hungary or Romania (8 600 for each nationality). b) From permanent to temporary migration

After having developed rapidly from 1989, emigration to western countries, has slowed down. For example, the total number of entries of Polish immigrants, as a per cent of the total immigration ows, has decreased since 1991 in Denmark, France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Sweden. In Germany since 1993, the net migration entries of Romanian migrants has been largely negative. The emigration to Turkey of Bulgarians of Turkish origin has also decreased since 1993. In spite of this decline, the presence of many ethnic minorities in central and eastern European countries represents a signicant migration potential for some OECD countries. The number of refugees and asylum seekers originating from central and eastern European countries has also declined. OECD countries now consider all these countries as safe countries, whose citizens should not be requesting asylum. Moreover, the introduction of visas for the citizens of former Yugoslavia since 1992 in several European OECD countries led to a reduction in the number of asylum seekers from that region, offset, however, by an increase in the number of persons who were granted temporary resident status on humanitarian grounds. Whereas permanent emigration to OECD countries is declining, temporary migration of workers for seasonal, cross-border, individual or contract-based employment is developing from East to West and between central and eastern European countries themselves. Temporary labour migration is dominated by Polish citizens, predominately in Germany and Austria, but also in France, the Czech Republic and Sweden. In Germany, in 1995 the majority of Poles in temporary employment fall under inter-governmental agreements for seasonal work and subcontract employment. In Austria, for the same year, nationals of the former Czech and Slovak Federal
50

Republic are the most numerous among the short term or limited duration (two years) permit holders, followed by Polish, Romanians or Hungarians. Nationals from central and eastern European countries represent roughly one fth of the total of foreign workers in Austria with a short-term permit, but barely 4 per cent of those with a permanent permit. c) Central and Eastern Europe: a regional migratory pole

The political changes in Central and Eastern Europe since 1989 have led the majority of these countries to liberalise the movement of persons (abolishment of exit visas, removal of restrictions on the issuing of passports). These countries have also modied their nationality laws, in particular to allow expatriates who had been deprived of their citizenship to recover it. A second set of changes has concerned the development of short and long-term residence permits for foreigners; adherence to the Geneva Convention on refugees; the abolition of visa requirements for citizens of most OECD countries; and the development of a framework for short-term labour migration to Western countries for the purpose of gaining language skills and professional experience. Immigration is growing in some central and eastern European countries, as well as in Russia and probably exceeds the number of emigrants. Unfortunately, ofcial data available do not allow for an accurate measurement of the magnitude of immigration.* On the basis of partial information concerning the numbers of foreigners in the CEECs, it seems as if the Czech Republic and Hungary are the two countries which receive the most foreigners with a permit of permanent resident or of residence superior to one year. In addition, both rst-time registration and renewal of short-term permits show the importance of temporary migration in these countries. In 1995, roughly 71 000 foreigners held a permit for a stay of less than one year in the Czech Republic. The majority were from the former Soviet Union, the Slovak Republic, Vietnam and Poland. In the same year, Hungary authorised more than 50 000 short-term permits, most often for the reason of a long visit, an asylum claim or employment. Nationals of Romania, the former Yugoslavia and the former Soviet Union were the most numerous. The net migration balance of the Czech Republic, which was negative from 1989 on, became positive in 1991 (even when permanent migration of Slovak nationals is excluded), due to the decline of emigration and the onset of immigration. Available statistics on the number of foreign workers show that in the Czech Republic an important number of Ukrainians and Poles are registered. This is in addition to Slovak workers who benet from free access to the labour market. In Hungary, at present, Romanian workers represent close to half of the valid working permit holders. Immigration is also developing in Poland and Bulgaria. Immigration ows, which are in large part regional and mostly concern ethnic minorities, also originate from more distant regions such as Asia (e.g. Vietnam, China) or the Middle East. Overall, the statistical data available on the number of foreigners appear to conrm the increased importance of immigration, which has developed because of the emergence of inows from developing countries, the arrival of skilled workers from OECD countries, the return migration of former emigrants and especially, regional population movements. Economic imbalances persist in the CEECs, and in certain cases, the existence of ethnic minorities explain the migration movements between the countries and the predominance of the ows from the Slovak Republic to the Czech Republic and from Romania to Hungary. In addition, the opening of national borders, the economic changes related to the transition towards a market economy and the dissolution of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia are the principal causes of the growth in regional migration. Certain countries are now both sending and receiving countries. Overall, the main sending regions are the former Soviet Union (notably the Ukraine and Belarus), Romania, Poland, and Bulgaria, to which former Yugoslavia and the Baltic States must be added. Geopolitical factors contribute as well to explaining migration ow patterns, particularly wars or ethnic conicts in areas such as former Yugoslavia, Armenia or Georgia. The number of refugees from former Yugoslavia in central and eastern European countries is relatively high. The countries of Central and Eastern Europe have also become an area of transit, an intermediate and temporary stop-over for potential immigrants who hope to reach Western Europe or North America. The majority of these migrants enter as tourists, business persons, or students and illegally extend their stay. The countries most affected are Poland and the Czech Republic due to their common borders with Germany. Hungary and Bulgaria also receive transit migrants seeking to reach Austria and Greece, respectively. Following the reinforcement of border controls at the Austro-Hungarian border, certain transit migrants have changed itinerary and attempt to reach Germany via the more permeable borders of the Slovak Republic. Transit migration
* The present situation of migration statistics in the CEECs does not allow for a precise account of migration movements and the numbers of foreigners in the population and foreign workers for these countries. For a detailed discussion of the concepts and available data on migration in the CEECs, see the Annex in this publication.

51

also concerns the Baltic States and involves citizens of the former Soviet Union (Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarussians) and from Middle Eastern countries who use this route as a means of reaching the Nordic countries, mainly Sweden. Transit migration has given rise to illegal immigration and employment in several central and eastern European countries. The transit migrants come from neighbouring countries such as Turkey, Albania or former Yugoslavia, but also from Bangladesh, India and Iran. Illegal employment among overstayers has increased, particularly since the informal economy in these countries is ourishing. Furthermore, many nationals and legally resident foreigners work in the informal sector while receiving unemployment benets or holding a second declared job which gives them social security coverage. Poland and the Czech Republic are the main poles of attraction, largely as a result of their relatively higher average wages, the convertibility of both currencies and the low unemployment in the Czech Republic. The majority of transit migrants to the Czech Republic come from former Yugoslavia; those to Poland are largely from Bosnia-Herzegovina and the former Soviet republics. Gypsy migrants come mainly from Romania and Bulgaria. The latter countries in turn serve as transit countries for migrants, most of whom come from the former Soviet Union and seek to enter Greece or Turkey in the south and the Slovak and Czech Republics to the north. Only a certain number of transit migrants actually succeed in emigrating to the West (mainly to Germany, Austria and the Nordic countries), while many remain in the country of transit or return to their country of origin. Although this circular migration contributes to the development of clandestine migration and illegal employment it also gives rise to commerce and to regional economic exchange. Central and eastern European countries, faced with migration in all its diversity, are seeking to adopt policies to better control the ows. Various forms of cooperation with OECD countries have been established in order to develop such policies. Meanwhile, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe have begun to co-operate and co-ordinate among themselves in order to better dene the rules for the movement of persons within a broadened European migration space. Four main themes result from this overview of the recent migration trends in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. First, East-West migration ows continue and show a predominance of certain nationalities, and of the importance of these ows for certain host countries. Second, the East-West ows are currently at levels lower than those registered between 1989 and 1992, which illustrates the desire on the part of OECD countries to control East-West ows but not to totally close their borders to all migration form the CEECs. Third, the changes which occurred in Central and Eastern Europe have led to limited growth in regional migration movements between the CEECs and to stronger growth between the latter and neighbouring eastern and southern countries (NIS and former Yugoslavia). Finally, in general, immigration ows to the CEECs, are growing.

C.

AN OVERVIEW OF MIGRATION POLICIES

Migration policies in OECD countries can be grouped into three broad areas. The rst consists of measures adopted nationally to strengthen the control of ows (including those of asylum seekers) and to ght more effectively against illegal immigration. The second covers all measures that aim to ensure a better integration of migrants in the host country. The third concerns international co-operative measures taken by countries to improve the management of migration ows on a bilateral or regional level in a context of both an expansion in the modes of entry used by migrants and the widening of the geographical space in the origins of migration ows. 1. Policies for regulating and controlling ows

The various facets of policies that aim for a better control of ows concern essentially the redenition of the conditions of entry and stay for foreigners, the revision of legislation and procedures related to the right of asylum, and the reinforcement of control systems at the border and within the country to prevent and combat illegal migration. a) The regulation of ows and the implementation of new legislation

Recent trends show that OECD countries are adopting a more restrictive attitude towards the entry and stay of new immigrants. Several countries have introduced signicant changes to their legislation. The changes all aim to tighten requirements for family reunication and to strengthen measures for the selection of immigrants. For many OECD European countries, where unemployment levels remain high, the wish to place stricter limits on immigration ows (while still permitting family reunication and refugee movements) is in part due to the
52

necessity of meeting new requirements imposed by adherence to the Schengen Agreement and the European Union (EU). In Luxembourg the Act of 18 August 1995 comprised a number of texts updating the basic migration legislation (1972) with respect to the entry, stay, medical examination and labour market access of foreigners. In particular, this new legislation took into account the entry into force of the Schengen Agreement as well as the provisions applicable to the member countries of the European Union and the European Economic Area (EEA). In Belgium the legislation of 10 and 15 July 1996 amends the Act of 15 December 1980 on the entry, residence, settlement and deportation of foreigners with the aim of tightening immigration controls in order to limit the entry and settlement of nationals from non-European Union countries. The Act also contains provisions placing greater responsibility on transport operators, conferring on them the duty to check not only the entry papers required by certain categories of foreigners but also that passengers have the means to support themselves during their stay in Belgium. Foreign students must prove that they have sufcient funds to live on and any person prolonging their studies excessively can be refused permission to stay. Also, family members of students may receive orders to leave the territory if their income and living conditions are not satisfactory. In Austria, quotas on the number of residence permits issued have been reduced in 1996. Austrias membership of the European Economic Area in 1994 and full membership of the European Union in 1995 has led to two important policy changes in order to conform to EU regulations: citizens of EU member countries are no longer included in the quotas set on residence visas and Austria must comply with special agreements made between the EU and non-EU countries, for example Turkey, regarding the free movement of workers from these countries and their dependants. In addition, supplementary child benets for children abroad have been withdrawn from October 1996 onwards. Parents who want to bring their children into Austria as a consequence are prohibited to do so due to the limits provided by the family reunion quota. In the Netherlands, on 1 September 1995 the Aliens Employment Act replaced the Foreign Workers Employment Act with the goal of better regulating the employment of non-EEA foreigners on the Dutch labour market. In Switzerland, since 19 October 1994, under an Act on the entry of seasonal workers, seasonal permits have been limited to the nationals of traditional recruitment countries from the European Union and EFTA and only in special cases to nationals of other traditional recruitment countries (before, only new work permits had been subject to this rule). In Germany recent measures have also been designed to restrict entries of new workers from countries outside the European Union. Canada, Australia and the United States continue to admit immigrants for permanent settlement while reinforcing the control of inows and the selection criteria applied to potential immigrants. In the United States, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act was passed in September 1996 (IIRIRA) and although most provisions concern illegal migration, one provision of the Act increases the legal immigration sponsoring income and strengthens its enforcement. This new legislation will impact, in particular, low-income people who may have difculty meeting the new income-level criteria and thus will no longer be able to legally bring in their non-US citizen relatives, including spouses and children. Other legislation (the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of August 1996) often referred to as the Welfare Act restricts benets for nearly all categories of legal permanent residents to two major Federal assistance programmes (refugees and asylum seekers are exempt from these restrictions). In Canada, regulations have also been tightened to make it more difcult for low-income Canadians to bring their relatives to Canada. Similar discussions are under way in Australia where in 1996 the government made it clear that it intends to tighten rules of entry for immigrants, reduce overall immigration levels and ensure that migrants and their sponsors meet a fair share of initial costs rather than the taxpayer. There has been a reduction in the Australian planned Migration Program intake for 1996/97. In Japan, the eighth Basic Employment Measures Plan in 1995 conrmed that Japanese migration policy will remain focused on the entry of foreigners with technological expertise, skill or knowledge, or who engage in business which requires a knowledge of foreign culture not possessed by Japanese. The criteria for entry under the category of entertainers was tightened against the backdrop that those who come as entertainers are often not fully qualied. The stricter criteria has led to a drop in entries in the category of entertainers. Growing emphasis on priority rule in the labour market Most OECD countries have in place legislation protecting the domestic labour market. This legislation is often referred to as the priority rule or verication that nationals or resident foreigners have been given the opportunity to apply for jobs before permits are issued to newly entering foreigners. Recent trends point to a renewed emphasis on applying the priority rule in both OECD member and non-member countries. In Luxembourg the Grand Ducal Regulation of 17 June 1994 laid down the measures applicable for the employment
53

of foreign workers within the Grand Duchy. Priority is given to citizens of countries that are Member states of the EU and the European Economic Area. In Finland, an amended Aliens Act came into force in March 1994, which implemented a new procedure for issuing work permits to employers. This procedure links the issuing of work permits to foreigners with the local labour market situation. In the Netherlands the new legislation of September 1995 re-afrms the priority rule for the Dutch labour market. In Bulgaria, in 1996 in reaction to the high unemployment and the growing inows of foreigners claiming to be in transit (many of whom, it is suspected, enter the labour market) criteria have been added which require foreigners to have special skills and professional experience with a specic educational background. In addition, employment contracts must be full-time and Bulgarian employers are obliged to rst attempt to hire Bulgarian workers. In Hungary, the employment situation may constitute grounds for refusal to employ any foreigners wishing to work in Hungary. The same has been true for the Slovak Republic since 1995. Facilitating ows of highly skilled Several countries have implemented policies to facilitate the ows of highly skilled immigrants. In France, labour market access and employment eligibility requirements for highly skilled foreigners have been facilitated by new provisions designed to relax the procedures for renewing temporary work and residence. In Switzerland new legislation of October 1995, facilitates the immigration of skilled workers by allowing family members access to the labour market and permits the entry of service providers on a temporary basis. In Australia, an important policy initiative has been the development of mechanisms to encourage both permanent and temporary business migration. One feature is to allow business people who are temporarily in Australia to more easily apply for permanent residence and for those entering to more quickly and successfully establish a business in Australia. Immigration policies in the new receiving countries As in countries of long-standing immigration, countries which have only recently begun to receive immigrants also seek to control the entry of foreigners more effectively. In Portugal, the Act of 3 March 1993 describes conditions for the entry, residence, departure and expulsion of foreigners, with the goal of making all procedures clearer and more effective. Mexico and Guatemala signed on 26 February 1996 a joint declaration on the necessity of establishing a legal framework for Guatemalan temporary agricultural workers in Mexico. In the Czech Republic the 1992 law on the stay of foreigners was amended in both September 1994 and April 1996. The objective of both amendments was to better dene and tighten-up rules concerning foreigners, in particular, for those who violate laws or human rights. In Poland the rst Aliens Law was in approved in 1995 by the Council of Ministers and then submitted to the Parliament for endorsement, where it is still pending. In addition, an Act of 14 December 1994 on Employment and the Prevention of Unemployment addresses several issues concerning the employment of both Poles abroad and foreigners in Poland. Labour ofces now have the authority to enforce compliance with the Act, including the terms of employment of foreign workers in Poland as well to counsel Polish citizens who wish to work abroad for foreign employers. In the Slovak Republic, two new Acts were passed in 1995 and 1996 by the National Council. These Acts lay down the laws and procedures concerning the entry and stay of foreigners in the Slovak Republic and the access of foreigners to the labour market. In Hungary, new legislation on the entry, stay and settlement of aliens international migration in Hungary entered into force in May 1994. It applies to foreigners and immigrants, except for refugees and asylum seekers. The nancial requirements for the entry and settlement of foreigners have been made more stringent. Only foreigners who have resided legally in Hungary for three years are eligible to settle in the country and obtain a permanent permit. In addition, the immigration police have been given more extensive powers to monitor the entry and stay of immigrants. b) Laws and procedures concerning asylum seekers

In all OECD countries, the procedure for granting refugee status is regulated by the Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951 and by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967 which dene the criteria for determining the validity of the asylum request and for according refugee status. In reaction to the strong growth in the number of requests for asylum since the early 1990s, most countries implemented new legislative and administrative procedures, in particular to step up the processing of applications and to deal more quickly with fraudulent requests. The objective of these policies is to prohibit entry to persons whose request is manifestly unfounded and to accelerate processing in order to avoid giving unsuccessful applicants the time to familiarise themselves with the society of the host country and to plan an illegal stay. In addition, many countries introduced the principal of safe countries into their asylum legislation, enabling asylum seekers to be rejected on the basis that they have come from what is considered to be a safe country, whether this is their country of origin or otherwise. Another
54

goal of recent measures is to improve services provided to refugees and to asylum seekers whose request is deemed legitimate. In the United Kingdom in July 1996, a new Asylum and Immigration Act was passed which denies benets to asylum seekers who claimed asylum after entry to the United Kingdom and for those appealing a rejection. In addition, the Act designated safe countries from where asylum applications are now unlikely to be successful and provided for improved use of the asylum fast track decision process. In August 1994, the Dutch Parliament introduced the principal of safe countries, enabling asylum seekers to be rejected on this basis. In addition, new asylum centres were opened at the Belgian and German borders to immediately reject applications coming from any safe country. In Germany, tougher legislation introduced on 1 July 1993 to clarify who is entitled to apply for asylum has drastically reduced the number of justiable requests and increased the recognition rate. In the United States, asylum seekers who make their request from United States territory are no longer authorised immediate access to the labour market, a decision which should reduce the attraction of this entry channel. Also in the United States, the stafng level of the asylum corps was increased. In Denmark, in 1995 several changes were made to the Aliens Act concerning asylum seekers. A procedure was introduced to enable applications to be refused if unfounded or based on insufcient information. This has not only resulted in a decline in the number of asylum seekers since 1994 but also contributed to streamlining the administrative procedure and curtailing the number of applications from countries considered as safe countries. As of January 1995, most of the Bosnian war refugees will be granted residence and entitled to the same integration programmes as recognised refugees (housing, social benets, education and work permits). In Ireland in 1996 a Refugee Act was passed, the rst signicant legislation in this area since 1936. The Act has established an Applications Commissioner who can independently assess applications for asylum as well as an Appeals Board. The 1996 Refugee Act contains provisions which ratify for Ireland the Dublin Convention on the rules for examining asylum applications for EU countries. In Belgium, legislation of 10 and 15 July 1996 extends the period of detention of a foreigner in an illegal situation. During this period, the relevant authorities are responsible for making the necessary arrangements for return to the home country. Another measure introduced by the Act is that all applicants for asylum will now be accommodated in a reception centre. Certain communes in Belgium had been refusing to register applicants for refugee status. Several countries have abolished the temporary protection categories created to handle requests for asylum from nationals of former Yugoslavia. In Sweden, a new immigration law was adopted in November 1996 based on a report submitted by the Parliamentary Refugee Policy Commission. The new law will apply a broader interpretation of the Geneva Convention with regard to providing protection to asylum seekers. However, at the same time, the right to asylum will be restricted to war refugees and the current protection category of de facto refugees will disappear. Moreover, the immigration of relatives will be restricted to married couples, cohabitants and unmarried children under the age of 18. In Belgium the displaced person status, created in 1992 to handle requests for asylum from nationals of former Yugoslavia was abolished. In Norway, according to the White Paper on Refugee Policy debated by Parliament in June 1995, the instrument of collective protection will be used in the case of large-scale refugee ows and Norway will offer temporary protection after consultation with the UNHCR and the affected country. Harmonisation of asylum policy In Spain new legislation on the right of asylum entered into force in June 1994. Its main objective is to bring the legislation into line with international standards. The distinction between asylum seekers and refugees was abolished, while the rights of refugees (as dened by the Geneva Convention) with respect to residence and work were strengthened. The processing of applications has been speeded up in order to eliminate delays. A stronger link between the refusal to grant an application and the expulsion of the individual concerned has been established. In Greece, during the past two years steps have been taken to harmonise Greek legislation in accordance with European Union directives, Council of Europe conventions and the Geneva Convention of July 1951 on refugees (Greece signed in 1959 but with reservations concerning a refugees right to work or circulate freely). Legislation was passed which would allow policies to be developed concerning the procedures for the recognition of political refugees, the treatment of asylum seekers and the procedures for granting a work permit to recognised refugees. Czech policy makers, in January 1994, adopted an amendment of the 1990 Refugee Act to speed up asylum procedures in cases when the application is manifestly unfounded. In April 1996, a second amendment was passed which annulled the former ve-year limit of residence for refugees and made it unlimited. In the Slovak
55

Republic, at the end of 1995, a new Act on refugees was passed by the National Council. The main change was to accord a temporary asylum status for humanitarian reasons to persons who would not normally be eligible for refugee status. The status of refugee, granted by the Ministry of the Interior, is given for a period of ve years. The status is no longer valid if the refugee either obtains a permanent residence permit or acquires Slovak nationality. Refugees have equal rights and duties as Slovak citizens, with the exception of voting rights and military service. Although, relatively few applications for asylum are made to Romania, in 1996, new legislation on asylum seekers was passed which claries procedures for processing applications and for stay. Mexico has not yet ratied the Geneva Convention and as a result, many of the refugees and asylum seekers in Mexico are without a legal status. However, in August 1996 a new programme for Guatemalan refugees was initiated. Refugees will be able to obtain the documents which will allow them to live and work in Mexico legally. The programme also provides for the acquisition of Mexican nationality to refugees with children born in Mexico or those married to Mexicans. c) The ght against illegal migration

Most OECD countries are continuing the ght against illegal immigration by means of stricter border controls, workplace inspections or identity checks inside the country. The goal is to make it more difcult for people to illegally enter the country (with falsied or invalid documents or by illegally crossing the border) and to discourage through spot-checks illegal residence or work, particularly by persons who overstay their visas or residence permits. In 1994 the United Kingdom implemented improved illegal detection procedures which resulted in a higher number of illegal migrants discovered. Generally, once detected, they apply for asylum seeker status. The United States has implemented a new programme along the Mexican-United States border to counter illegal bordercrossing. In Italy, a decree approved by the Government in November 1995 introduces stricter border control and facilitates the expulsion of foreigners for breach of public order, state security reasons, or residing in Italy in an irregular situation. At the same time, the procedures for entry and residence of family members have been relaxed. In the Czech Republic changes were introduced in 1994 to visa policies for some countries of the Balkan Peninsula and the NIS which led to a decline in illegal and transit migration. In Japan, in response to estimates which show that illegal foreign workers make up half the total foreign worker population, authorities have recently reinforced measures against violators, including stricter landing examination and employer sanctions. In the United States there is a growing awareness of the role of visa overstayers which is leading policy makers to begin to re-evaluate the temporary visa programme. Recent measures implemented in OECD countries also address the detection of falsied identity documents and the punishment of those responsible, the extension of the number of workplace inspections, and increases in the amounts of nes imposed in cases of fraud. For example, in the Netherlands legislation on identity controls has been passed in 1994 which makes it more difcult for undocumented immigrants to work. Norway is also considering the question of improved identity controls. In the United Kingdom one provision of the July 1996 Asylum and Immigration Act makes it a criminal offence to employ a person with no right to work but still allows employers a statutory defence if they can prove that they tried to establish the immigration status of their employees. In Canada legislative changes which became effective on 10 July 1995 deny access to the refugee determination system for multiple or fraudulent refugee claimants or criminals. In the United States the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) includes a provision creating a bar on admissibility for a period of time of up to 10 years for individuals who were unlawfully present in the United States. In Mexico, an Orderly and Safe Repatriation Programme has been launched and in February 1995, an agreement was reached with the United States on ways to carry out expulsions in a more orderly manner. Finland reached an agreement with Lettonia and Estonia on the deportation of illegal foreigners. If an illegal foreigner coming from or through these countries is found in Finland, he can now be sent back to the originating country. In many countries specic measures have been carried out or reinforced to prevent the illegal employment of foreigners through sub-contracting. Legislation adopted in France, the Netherlands, Germany and Belgium now allow responsibility to be placed and nes levied on the person hiring the sub-contractor. Several OECD countries, as well as some of the central and eastern European countries have noted growth in organised illegal migration or trafcking. To combat the growth in illegal immigrant smuggling rings, Canada has recently carried out several measures including developing CO detectors for ship containers and enacting legislation to prevent the transportation of fraudulent documents by mail. Illegal migration ows to Greece in many cases involves organised trafcking in migrants. Every few months the Greek authorities intercept and
56

uncover organised illegal entry of groups of illegal migrants. In Mexico a programme has been launched known as Combating Trafcking in Humans to combat the growing number of migrant trafckers in recent years. In Finland regional co-operation between Nordic countries and the Baltic States is currently being reinforced in order to establish effective measures to prevent trafcking in illegal migrants. Regularisation of immigrants in illegal situations Several European OECD countries have launched regularisation programmes, notably Italy, Portugal and Spain in 1996 (see Table I.7). A proposal to carry out a regularisation programme is currently under discussion in Greece. At the end of 1995, the Italian government passed a decree providing for a third programme of regularisation of foreigners in irregular situations (following those of 1986 and 1990). Between November 1995 and March 1996, some 250 000 applications were led. To qualify for this programme applicants had to have been employed (to prove that they had worked at least four out of the previous twelve months) or have a relative they wished to join who had lived in Italy for over two years and had a sufcient income and was able to accommodate them adequately. Self-employed workers were excluded from the programme. According to preliminary data, it appears that nearly all applications are on the grounds of work. In most cases, they are immigrants who previously held a residence and work permit that had not been renewed. Portugal has recently carried out a second exercise to regularise foreigners in irregular situations. It started on 11 June 1996 and lasted for six months. The eligibility requirements were simplied compared with the previous exercise (October 1992-March 1993), in particular concerning the testimony of these foreigners on their economic situation. In addition, the social partners and immigrant associations were widely involved in the regularisation procedures. Foreigners in an irregular situation had to prove that they had entered Portugal before 31 December 1995 (if they were from Angola, Cape Verde, Guinea-Bissau, Mozambique and S ao Tom e and Principe) and before 25 March 1995 if they were from other non-European Union countries. Available results show that roughly 25 000 applications were accepted for processing. In Spain, under the new Aliens Act (February 1996), a programme of regularisation was implemented between April and August 1996. The programme largely beneted foreigners who had not been able to renew their residence or work permit. In fact, one quarter of foreigners participating in the 1991 regularisation programme did not obtain the renewal of their permit in 1994. In France, in 1995 a regularisation programme enabled certain foreigners (from sub-Saharan Africa and Algeria) who were the parents of French children to obtain a temporary residence permit. These foreigners had been illegally resident in France and could not be removed because of their direct relationship with a French resident. In Germany, a programme for legalising the status of asylum seekers who reside in Germany and who requested asylum more than ve years ago, has been in place since end March 1996. In addition to a minimum period of residence, other conditions are required of applicants such as housing and sufcient nancial resources. In Greece, a special committee has been set up to draft Presidential decrees for regularising the situation of illegal foreign workers in Greece. These decrees specify the conditions necessary for illegal migrants to benet from the amnesty as well as the methods and means for their registration in Greece and the procedures for issuing residence cards. It is anticipated that these measures will be combined with stricter border control policies and sanctions for illegal trafcking of migrants and for employers hiring illegal foreign workers. 2. Policies for integrating immigrants

Along with the control of ows, one of the principal objectives of migration policies is the integration of immigrants already settled or who wish to reside in the host country for an extended period. However, the assessment of the success of integration of foreign populations or immigrants in each of the host countries is problematical. In the rst place, models of integration tend to vary by country. Furthermore, migration ows are not everywhere of the same magnitude nor are the cultural traditions of all immigrants the same. Integration sets into play a complex set of social relationships which cannot be reduced to estimates of a few selected indicators (e.g. employment, sector of activity, income level, place of residence, family situation, etc.). In addition, differences between nationals and immigrants with respect to a number of indicators do not necessarily imply inequality between the two groups, nor does a convergence of behavioural patterns necessarily reect a process of integration. It is impossible to describe the full range of processes and current policies likely to increase, in one form or another, the opportunities for immigrants to integrate. The focus in the following section will therefore be on both the difculties faced by todays integration models and two key integration factors: naturalisation and education.
57

Table I.7. Main regularisation programmes of immigrants in an irregular situation in selected OECD countries, by nationality
Thousands
France
1

Italy (1987-88) (1990) (1996)2

(1981-82)

Tunisia Morocco African countries Portugal Algeria Turkey Other Total

Portugal
3

17.3 16.7 15.0 12.7 11.7 8.6 39.1 121.1

Morocco Sri Lanka Philippines Tunisia Senegal Former Yougoslavia Other Total

21.7 10.7 10.7 10.0 8.4 7.1 50.1 118.7

Spain

Morocco Tunisia Senegal Former Yugoslavia Philippines China Other Total

49.9 25.5 17.0 11.3 8.7 8.3 97.1 217.7

Morocco Albania Philippines China Peru Romania Other Total

United States
5

21.7 17.8 15.3 7.6 7.6 5.1 52.3 127.4

(1992-93)

(1985-86)

(1991)

(1996)

(1986)

Angola Guinea-Bissau Cape Verde Brazil S ao Tom e and Principe Senegal Other Total

12.5 6.9 6.8 5.3 1.4 1.4 4.8 39.2

Morocco Portugal Senegal Argentina United Kingdom Philippines Other Total

7.9 3.8 3.6 2.9 2.6 1.9 21.1 43.8

Morocco Argentina Peru Dominican Republic China Poland Other Total

49.2 7.5 5.7 5.5 4.2 3.3 34.7 110.1

Morocco Peru China Argentina Dominican Republic Algeria Other Total

5.4 1.4 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.6 6.7 16.8

Mexico El Salvador Caribbean Guatemala Colombia Philippines Other Total

2 005.0 152.1 110.3 63.9 30.3 25.6 292.8 2 680.0

58

1. Excluding seasonal workers (6 681 persons) and around 1 200 small traders not broken down by nationality. 2. A total of 248 950 applications were received but the provisional results, broken down by nationality, cover only 127 445 applications received from 19 November 1995 to 31 July 1996. 3. A new regularisation programme was carried out from 11 June 1996 during 6 months. Approximately 35 000 applications were examined. 4. Provisional data. The regularisation programme was carried out from 23 April to 23 August 1996. 5. Data refer to all persons granted a permanent residence permit (excluding the dependants) during the period 1989-1995 following the 1986 Immigration and Reform Control Act. Data are broken down by country of birth. Sources: France: OMI; Italy, Portugal and Spain: Ministry of the Interior; United States: INS.

Finally, certain measures recently taken to facilitate the social integration or insertion of immigrants will be presented. a) Models of integration

For many years the changes in the nature of the migration process and in the societies of the host countries have modied the conditions for integrating foreign or immigrant populations. Although they have not been called into question, models of integration have nevertheless become more fragile. In most European OECD countries, immigrants are extending their duration of stay and, when possible, are tending more and more to settle permanently. In some countries a second and even a third generation has resulted from the original immigration wave. Changes are related, in part, to a greater diversity in the geographical origin of migrants and in modes of entry (in particular family reunication and asylum seeking). The economic recession and the persistence of high levels of unemployment (especially in Europe) have magnied the difculties of integration for certain groups of foreigners and of transition into the labour market for the younger generations that are the product of migration. In Australia, Canada, and the United States, the underlying model of integration rests mainly on the absence of any contradiction between the maintenance of cultural and social links with the community of origin or the claim of membership in an ethnic minority and adherence to the ideals and interests of the nation. Since immigration is viewed from the onset as long-term or permanent, the acquisition of the nationality of the host country is relatively easy and ethnic minorities are ofcially recognised. In the United States, for example, the integration of various successive waves of immigrants was carried out under this model. Political and associative networks of immigrants have existed for over a century and ethnic minorities are sometimes concentrated in certain regions or city districts as well as in certain activities and socio-professional categories. These groups often have political representation and have their own media (press, radio and television). At the same time, over the years immigrants have been able to progress on the labour market and to integrate into society, even while maintaining an afliation to an ethnic minority. b) Naturalisations and the social integration of immigrants

The granting of or the acquisition of the nationality of the host country can increase foreigners chances of integrating or can reect the outcome of a gradual process of social or economic integration. The number of naturalisations essentially depends on the magnitude and the age of the various migration waves, the more or less liberal nature of the legislation on the acquisition of nationality and the importance that immigrants attach to obtaining the nationality of the host country. Another key issue involved in the naturalisation of immigrants is whether by acquiring the nationality of the host country, the immigrant stands to lose the nationality of the country of origin or certain rights in the country of origin, such as property rights. The procedures for the acquisition and the granting of nationality based on birthplace and kinship constitute a fundamental element of the concept of the integration of foreigners in the host society and dividing line between foreign and national population. The changes in these procedures, notably the reforms that make it easier for children and grand-children of immigrants to become naturalised, have affected the incidence of naturalisation, as in Belgium, the Netherlands, France or Germany. The modications introduced tend to widen the possibilities for the acquisition of nationality in cases where the law was restrictive, and to introduce limits where the law was more liberal (for more details see the special chapter on the acquisition of nationality in Trends in International Migration, OECD, 1995). The naturalisation rate, or the number of persons acquiring the nationality of the country as a percentage of the stock of the foreign population at the beginning of the year, is also a signicant indicator of integration. Among European OECD countries, the Netherlands, Sweden and Norway have higher naturalisation rates than Germany and France. In 1995 the number of naturalisations rose in almost all OECD countries (see Table I.8). In absolute terms, the number of naturalisations was highest in the United States followed by Germany and Canada. In the United States, it is expected that over 1 million persons will be naturalised in 1996, or three times the annual average since 1990. Three main reasons may explain the sudden increase: more persons are eligible to become citizens due to recent high immigration levels; a new green card replacement program has provided an incentive for legal aliens to become US citizens rather than face the burden of renewing their card; and recently passed legislation denies legal immigrants access to many federally funded social programs, thus increasing the incentive to become a United States citizen. In Germany the number of naturalisations continued to rise sharply due to the amendments of the Aliens Act in July 1993 to facilitate the naturalisation procedure for long-standing foreign residents. The main requirements relate to the legal period of residence: eight years for second-generation young people and 15 years for adults.
59

Table I.8. The acquisition of nationality1 in selected OECD countries, 1988-1995

Number of persons 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 Naturalisation rate2 (%)

Countries where national/foreigner distinction Austria 8 233 8 470 Belgium 8 366 8 797 Denmark 3 744 3 258 3 France 74 000 82 000 Germany4 40 783 68 526 Italy .. .. Japan 5 767 6 089 5 Luxembourg 762 604 Netherlands 9 110 28 730 Norway 3 364 4 622 Spain6 8 137 5 918 Sweden 17 966 17 552 Switzerland 11 356 10 342 United Kingdom 64 600 117 100

is prevalent 9 199 11 8 657 8 3 028 5 88 500 95 101 377 141 .. 4 6 794 7 748 12 790 29 4 757 5 7 033 3 16 770 27 8 658 8 57 300 58

394 457 484 500 630 542 788 582 110 055 752 663 757 600

11 46 5 95 179 4 9 36 5 5 29 11 42

920 368 104 300 904 408 363 609 240 132 280 326 208 200

14 16 5 95 199 6 10 43 5 8 42 12 45

402 376 037 500 443 485 452 678 070 538 412 659 928 800

16 25 5 126 259 6 11 49 8 7 35 13 44

270 787 736 400 170 613 146 739 450 778 802 084 757 000

15 26 5 92 313 7 14 71 11 6 31 16 40

309 109 260 400 606 442 104 802 440 778 751 993 795 500

2.1 2.8 2.7 2.7 4.5 0.8 1.0 0.6 9.2 7.2 1.5 5.9 1.3 2.1 .. .. ..

Countries where native-born/foreign-born distinction is prevalent Australia 81 218 119 140 127 857 118 510 Canada 58 810 87 478 104 267 118 630 United States 242 063 233 777 270 101 308 058
1.

125 158 116 201 240 252

122 085 150 570 314 681

112 186 217 320 407 398

114 757 227 720 445 853

Statistics cover all means of acquiring the nationality of a country, except where otherwise indicated. These include standard naturalisation procedures subject to age, residency, etc. criteria, as well as situations where nationality is acquired through a declaration or by option (following marriage, adoption, or other situations related to residency or descent), recovery of former nationality and other special means of acquiring the nationality of a country. 2. Number of persons acquiring the nationality of the country in the most recent year available as a percentage of the stock of the foreign population at the beginning of the year. 3. Data are estimates and include people automatically acquiring French nationality upon reaching legal majority (this procedure was in effect until 1993) as well as people born in France to foreign parents who declared their intention to become French in accordance with the legislation of 22 July 1993. 4. Statistics include naturalisation claims, which concern essentially ethnic Germans. 5. Minor children acquiring the nationality of Luxembourg as a consequence of the naturalisation of their parents are not included. 6. Persons recovering their former (Spanish) nationality are not included. Sources: National Statistical Institutes (for details on sources, see the introduction to the tables of the Statistical Annex).

There are also special provisions for people whose German origins have been acknowledged and who hence have the right to reside in Germany and obtain German nationality. In Austria, a foreigner may become naturalised after 10 years of stay in Austria, or in some cases after ve years with a valid work permit, however there are moves to further shorten the waiting period for applications. In France, the 1994 naturalisation gures were exceptionally high, mainly because the authorities were processing pending cases quickly before the more restrictive legislation (voted in 1993) came into force in 1995. The new rules take away the automatic right to French nationality to children born in France of Algerian parents, neither of whom has resided in France for more than ve years, and to all children of parents born in the former colonies and overseas territories. The new law also makes conditions for the acquisition of nationality on the basis of marriage more restrictive by increasing the period of cohabitation required to two years, with the aim of discouraging marriages of convenience contracted for the sole purpose of acquiring French nationality. The law also limits the acquisition of nationality for minor children born in France of foreign parents neither of whom was born in France. Henceforth, these minor children cannot become French by declaration before the age of sixteen. In addition, whereas they automatically became French nationals in the past upon reaching legal age, they must now explicitly le a request between the ages of 16 and 21. Failure to make a declaration is considered equivalent to refusing French nationality. In the Netherlands the increase in naturalisations is generally considered to be the result of the recognition of dual nationality which came into effect in 1992. The naturalisation rate reached 9.2 per cent in 1995 and debate in the Dutch Parliament on the high levels of naturalisation may result in more restrictive rules for with regard to the acquisition of Dutch nationality. In 1995, Turkish legislation governing nationality was amended, and now all Turkish nationals who acquire the nationality of another country may continue to own property in Turkey. This change could encourage a larger number of Turks living abroad to choose the nationality of their host country. Similar amendments were recently
60

made to Mexican legislation for Mexicans abroad. In addition, in August 1996 a new programme provides for the acquisition of Mexican nationality to refugees with children born in Mexico or those married to Mexicans. In Spain, the Act of 2 November 1995 amended the legislation regarding the recovery of Spanish nationality. Prior to this Act returning emigrants who wished to recover their Spanish nationality had to obtain an exemption from the ten-year legal residence requirement. This formality is no longer required. c) The schooling of immigrant children and their integration

Education is of vital importance to the integration of immigrants children. Both the level of schooling achieved and the diplomas obtained are determining factors in their success in the labour market and their integration into the society of the host country. With regard to education and integration into the school system, all governments insist on the need for instruction in the host-country language. The current debate concerns rather the issue of teaching the language of the country of origin. In a number of countries such as Germany, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands, immigrant children can receive instruction in the native language of their family either in school or in classes given outside the school system. However, the principle of one school for all is still upheld. In most OECD countries, regardless of the concept of integration and the role of the school in this process, there are support and orientation services available for foreign pupils, particularly for new arrivals who are not immediately able to enter mainstream education. The range of educational and special help facilities available includes introductory classes, remedial classes and extra-curricular activities (through associations or institutions). In Sweden, the National Agency for Education has recently commissioned a research centre at Stockholm University to evaluate the efciency and effectiveness of Swedish language education for foreigners. d) Integration policies and the social integration of immigrants

Integration policies vary according to the country and the nature of integration problems encountered in practice. According to the model of integration, policies are either designed for all immigrants or targeted to particular groups, for assistance to new arrivals or those already settled in the host country. Assistance for new arrivals In Canada and in Australia, assistance to immigrants is provided immediately upon their arrival in the country in the form of support in dealing with administrative procedures and formalities, nancial assistance, and help with language problems (interpreters, translations, language courses). Canada, for instance, has set up a series of assistance programmes to help with initial costs of installation, accommodation and clothing. Other help with initial costs of installation, accommodation and clothing. Other programmes subsidise non-prot associations and organisations involved in assisting immigrants upon arrival. Lastly, language and vocational training programmes are available. In Europe, integration policies are aimed at educating immigrant children, providing vocational training and host-country language instruction, as well as housing assistance and access to health care. Aid is oriented either to specic target groups in the foreign population (ethnic minorities, women, young immigrants or secondgeneration immigrant children) or to the disadvantaged in general, foreign or otherwise. One concern in several OECD countries has been to adapt integration policy to recent changes brought about by the large inows of asylum seekers. In Sweden in April 1996, the Parliamentary Commission on Immigration Policy, appointed by the government in 1994, reported that special integration policy for newcomers should be available for a restricted period of up to ve years. Taking account of the report, a new government Bill on integration will be submitted to Parliament in 1997. In Norway the task of settling over large numbers of refugees and asylum seekers who were granted residence permits has led to a new priority on policies for refugees. The Norwegian Government provides education for immigrants, in particular Norwegian language training for all age groups, assists with access to the labour market and continues its efforts to erase racism and ethnic discrimination. In Finland, at the end of 1995, the government established a commission to discuss future policies regarding immigration and asylum. In June 1994 in Denmark, modications were introduced to improve the situation of refugees from former Yugoslavia. These included more language and other training, better housing, increased employment opportunities and more leisure activities. Parallel to these efforts, some municipalities have introduced limitations on how many refugees or immigrants are allowed to stay in certain urban districts to avoid high concentrations of immigrant groups.
61

In the Netherlands in January 1996 a new phase began in the integration policy for newly arrived immigrants. Under this new phase of the policy, newcomers who receive social welfare benets may have their benets cut if they do not participate in the integration programmes. The programmes themselves are aimed at providing Dutch language skills and other information to help foreigners integrate into Dutch society. In several Southern European countries active policies to facilitate the integration of immigrants are being developed. Migration policy in Portugal has two facets, one applicable to Portuguese residing abroad and the other applicable to immigrants in Portugal. The two aspects of this policy reect the same objectives: the focus on migrants rights, their political and social integration in the host country, and information concerning their contribution to development. In Italy, policies for the integration of immigrants are implemented at the local level, the local authorities having been given the necessary powers and government appropriations by legislation enacted in 1990. Most of the initiatives at municipal level are run by an ofce responsible for the initial reception of immigrants that provides guidance on obtaining access to the various public and private services available. Action and training programmes have been implemented for government employees to make them more aware of issues concerning the integration of immigrants. Many non-governmental organisations are involved in urban initiatives (accommodation, health care and legal assistance, literacy programmes). In Greece, in order to facilitate the re-integration of ethnic Greek and foreign pupils, the Greek Government has established three types of educational institutions: reception classes for ten or more pupils, tutorial sections for three to nine pupils and special schools for the children of returnees from English speaking countries. Albanian pupils constitute the largest group in both reception classes and tutorial sections. The special schools located in Northern Greece (Salonica) have gradually become dominated by the ethnic pupils, mainly Pontians, from the former Soviet Union countries. e) Labour market integration

Vocational training and access to the labour market for young people and the unemployed, including immigrants, is another key component of integration policy. Many programmes have been implemented at both the national and local level. These generally target high-unemployment groups (the older and long-term unemployed, low skilled women, unskilled young school leavers) and offer training and up-grading contracts or government-subsidised jobs in private rms or the public service. The Finnish Government has recently started a four-year (1995-99) project called pathway to employment for the socially excluded nanced by the European Social Fund. This project focuses on specic measures to help those who are at risk of being marginalised and establishes new co-operation between the various authorities and organisations concerned. In April 1995, the Ministry of Labour established a working group to develop measures to help immigrants enter the labour market. In Denmark, a detailed plan of action to dismantle labour market barriers to immigrants and refugees was introduced in Autumn 1994. The German Federal Ministry of Labour has launched schemes to help the second generation immigrants nd employment through increased job training. France has been active over the past few years in implementing a variety of training programmes to assist both French and foreigners, in particular the young, to integrate into the labour market. In Japan, in 1994, reports submitted by employers on foreign workers showed that the difcult employment situation is adversely affecting the employment of foreign workers, particularly those employed in manufacturing or large enterprises. In response, guidelines were set to ensure appropriate working conditions for foreign workers and the Ministry of Labour now provides special services for the employment of foreign workers including supplying interpreters. Many OECD countries have stepped up efforts to combat racism and discrimination, particularly at the workplace. In Belgium, in March 1994, the Chamber passed legislation to amend the 1981 Act and crack down on certain racist or xenophobic acts. Heavier penalties were introduced and anti-discrimination measures were strengthened including creating a centre for equal opportunity and prevention of racism (Centre pour l egalit e des chances et la lutte contre le racisme). Since, this centre has been particularly active on issues of integration policies for immigrants and social exclusion. The Finnish Ministry of Labour has taken action against discrimination in hiring and at the workplace. The amended Criminal Code in September 1995 states that it is against the law to practise discrimination in announcing a job vacancy or in recruitment as well as at the workplace on the basis of race, nationality, ethnic origin, language, sex, age, family relations, religion or political opinion. In Switzerland the objective of social integration resulted in December 1995 in a proposal for full revision of the law on asylum and a partial revision of the law on the residence and settlement of foreigners. In this context, a Federal Anti-Racism Commission was set up in March 1995 to combat policies for integrating immigrants to combat all forms of racial discrimination.
62

f)

Foreigners political participation and other rights

In the context of furthering the integration of immigrants, in several countries the issue of the rights of foreigners has been the object of new policies. In Finland in 1995 the Finnish constitution was amended to extend coverage of fundamental rights to foreign nationals. Both Norway and Sweden have recently re-afrmed the principle that all persons with the right to permanent residence must have equal rights and opportunities, no matter whether they have immigrated to the country or were born in the country. In Luxembourg, the Act of 23 December 1994 constituted a decisive event in the constitutional history of Luxembourg, since it amended a number of articles of the Constitution with a view to allowing non-Luxembourg nationals to exercise certain political rights in particular with regard to local elections. This constitutional amendment was taken into account by the Act of 3 July 1995, which also abolished the requirement that candidates be of Luxembourg nationality in order to stand for elections to occupational chambers. In addition, the Act of 28 January 1994 laid down the procedure for electing representatives of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to the European Parliament and determined the conditions under which resident foreigners from EU countries would be able to participate in elections. In Portugal, in September 1996, Parliament unanimously passed a law enacting the European Union Directive on the participation of nationals of other member states in local elections and granting the same right to other resident foreigners, subject to reciprocity. Other measures adopted in 1996 concern the improvement of housing conditions, extending immigrants entitlement to social security services and the right of immigrant associations to interfere, as assistant parties, in penal procedures in cases of racial and xenophobic crimes. In Austria, in July 1996, a Supreme Court verdict opposed the different treatment of indigenous and foreign persons with regard to means-tested welfare benets. These benets typically cater for the long-term unemployed who have ceased to be eligible for insurance-based unemployment benets. At present, foreign workers only have a right to this benet if they have a permanent work permit and also only have a right to one year of benet, compared to Austrian citizens who have indenite entitlement to such benets. g) Integration of immigrants in urban areas

Emphasis has also been placed on urban policy and access to housing to further the integration of immigrants in some OECD countries. The recession and rising unemployment has exacerbated problems in certain neighbourhoods. In France recent measures have been targeted to improve living and working conditions in distressed urban areas (Pacte de relance pour la ville). The stated objectives are to combat exclusion in urban areas and encourage the occupational, social and cultural integration of people living on high-density housing estates or in distressed areas. The programme is founded on ranking vulnerable areas according to their economic and social problems and on introducing positive discrimination in the areas of the economy, taxation, education and housing. In Belgium, in September 1995 resolutions were adopted by the Interministerial Conference to facilitate the integration of foreigners. The main focus was to concentrate resources on specic projects in large urban areas. In Sweden, a Bill regarding improvements for the living conditions of immigrants and the increasing ethnic segregation in urban areas will be submitted to Parliament in 1997. Urban development and migration The urban dimension of immigrant integration was the topic of a meeting organised for experts and local policy-makers, and held at the OECD in March 1996. The objectives of the meeting were two-fold: i) to provide a better understanding of the relationship between immigration and urban development; and ii) to provide more detailed knowledge of the nature and content of policies being implemented in cities to further immigrant integration. In many OECD countries, immigration to cities has positively contributed to either maintaining the urban population or contributing to its overall growth. Spatially, immigrants may slow the downward drift in some neighbourhoods as they ll the voids left by the middle classes. They can invigorate urban economies and promote economic development through the rehabilitation of housing and the creation of small business enterprises in older neighbourhoods by investing mostly their own capital. In addition, links between immigrants and their country of origin may also encourage and facilitate investment by entrepreneurs in the country of origin to the receiving country, often in urban areas where members of the same ethnic groups are resident. However, faced with a number of scal pressures, debates inevitably arise in cities regarding the infrastructure impacts and costs of social service provisions to immigrants. While these debates are important at the national level, they are particularly relevant at the city level because of the concentration of immigrants in some cities. At the national level, in most countries general policy instruments such as education or language training play a role in integration. Local-level policy, however, is often more innovative with regard to targeting the
63

integration of immigrant groups and often involves working partnerships with the immigrant community. However, in a number of cases, local policies may have only limited success in thwarting the consequences of larger socio-economic developments. They need to be linked structurally to policies developed at regional or national level. The meeting provided a better understanding of the complexity of the challenges and the problems related to the integration of immigrants in cities. It became clear during the discussions that, with regard to the methodology for studying these issues, the concepts used to explore this phenomenon differ from one country to another. In addition, the focus of analysis between experts and local policy-makers also differs, with the former investigating a wider dimension of integration issues and the latter often concentrating on the community dimension. Uncertainty exists as to the target area or type of measure which should be initiated to render integration policies more effective. Many integration policies in cities have not yet been the object of any assessment, quantitative or qualitative. Several common characteristics emerged from the diversity of the cities and neighbourhoods discussed by the participants at the meeting. First, the economic situation in the host country plays a fundamental role in understanding the ease with which integration occurs (or does not occur) and the various paths open to and used by migrants to integrate. Second, there is little homogeneity among immigrant communities: different nationalities manifest different cultural behaviour and several waves of migration can co-exist within the same community. Third, evidence suggests that a neighbourhood cut off geographically, socially and economically from the mainstream is a hindrance to integration. In many neighbourhoods high and persistent unemployment is hindering a smooth path to integration for immigrants and in certain cases, when combined with the phenomenon of social exclusion, is creating the risk of developing an underclass. Among the proposals put forward to improve the integration of immigrants in cities, it was suggested to encourage the development of transportation which was seen as a key structural feature in urban development and which would encourage new settlement and consequently greater social links. Other proposals focused on the necessity of more employment opportunities and a more developed public service sector in disadvantaged neighbourhoods. Finally, emphasis was placed on the importance of associating not only immigrants but also the larger population concerned and key local actors (entrepreneurs, local public service workers) in the denition and implementation of urban development and integration policies. 3. Migration, international co-operation and economic development

Migration raises many challenges. The regionalisation and globalisation of ows has added a geopolitical dimension which necessitates the implementation of effective measures and initiatives in the area of international co-operation. New partnerships among OECD Member countries and between the latter and non-member countries have developed since the early 1990s. Within the framework of international co-operation, these partnerships seek to better control migration ows and to encourage sustainable development in the emigration countries with the goal of reducing, in the long-term, the incentive to emigrate. It is important for Member countries to share their experiences in all of these areas to improve the analysis of migration phenomena and to discuss ways to make migration policies that are presently being formulated or implemented more effective. In the 1995 Edition of Trends in International Migration the importance of international co-operation for a better control of migration ows was given special attention. In this context two topics were discussed at length: the co-ordination of asylum seeker policy and the association of the central and eastern European countries in the control of migration ows. In the present report, after a brief discussion of several new policy developments in the area of controlling ows, focus will turn to exploring the links between migration and development. a) Co-operation in controlling ows

Recent developments in the area of controlling ows involves modication or harmonisation of the legislative framework (see above and see Part II, the country notes for more details), notably in the case of central and eastern European countries which are seeking to gradually align their laws governing the entry, residence and employment of foreigners with those in place in OECD countries, and in particular, those in European Union countries. Other measures have been carried out with the objective of co-ordinating a larger number of Member countries policies to prevent conict in high-risk regions. Moreover, bilateral co-operation remains an active policy area, whether regarding readmission agreements which provide for the return of illegal immigrants apprehended to their country of origin or the country of transit or measures to assist with the return and reintegration of migrants who were temporarily admitted into OECD countries for humanitarian reasons (in
64

particular, nationals from former Yugoslavia). Finally, the number of training exchanges, notably for specialists, are growing. Carried out with a view to international co-operation, these exchanges provide an opportunity to strengthen links between migration and acquiring skills and job experience abroad. They also play a fundamental role in the process of knowledge and technology transfer between developing and developed countries. b) Migration and development

International co-operation to control ows is only a partial response to the intensication of migration movements. It is for this reason that the idea of sustainable development as a means of eventually reducing the incentive to emigrate in countries with high emigration potential is gaining ground among OECD countries. The idea of associating migration and development is not a new one; what is new is the notion that policy makers need to take account more generally of the impact on migration of measures adopted in the context of international economic relations. Among the more important of these measures are trade liberalisation, regional integration and increased foreign direct investment by OECD countries in labour-intensive sectors of developingcountry economies but also in social infrastructure (particularly health care and education) and in the hightechnology sectors. The OECD, following the proposals debated at the Conference on Migration and International Co-operation, held in Madrid in March 1993 at the initiative of the Canadian and Spanish governments, organised two seminars in 1996 on migration, free trade and regional integration: the rst focused on Central and Eastern Europe and the second on the Mediterranean Basin. The main conclusions of the two seminars are presented below. c) Migration, free trade and regional integration in Central and Eastern Europe

The seminar was organised in Vienna (March 1996) with the support of the Austrian Institute of Economic Research (WIFO) and the Austrian Federal Chancellery. The principal conclusions which emerged from this seminar involve, on the one hand, the links between regional integration and migration in a context of free trade and on the other hand, the relationship between economic development and the migration potential in Central and Eastern Europe. The set of issues regarding the links between regional integration and migration has been examined in a context of integrating central and eastern European countries (CEECs) into the European Union (EU). The effects engendered by such an integration are important for the less developed country, notably with regard to the pace of structural transformation, real economic convergence, and technological catching-up. An important aspect is that the discussion involves economies in transition and not underdeveloped economies. The standard models which most often examine the links between international trade, employment and labour migration are based on the relations between a developed country of the North and a country in the process of development in the South. But in the case of the CEECs, there is an existing stock of physical and human capital which although it may be poorly adapted to current circumstances, may be reallocated and rapidly modernised. Direct investment to the CEECs is thus of crucial importance for the modernisation process and for the reallocation of existing capital. Regionalisation could then be seen as facilitating integration at a global level for the CEECs. Two scenarios were presented for the future of migration in the CEECs. The pessimistic scenario considers that if trade is developed based on different factor endowments, it may create a trap for countries where the specialisation remains traditional and involves an intensive use of unskilled labour. These countries would see themselves as locked into their traditional specialisations. This view does not take into account the effects that the process of regionalisation will have in the framework of growing integration of the CEECs with the countries of the European Union. The optimistic scenario views regional integration as a springboard for participation in the globalisation process. The effect of announcing the integration is not negligible and inuences the expectations of rms when deciding to establish production units, to relocate or to undertake joint ventures. If this takes place, the processes of technological catching-up and real and nominal economic convergence may be accelerated. With regard to the future of migration in Central and Eastern Europe, focus was placed on the necessity of reducing structural disequilibria in the labour market, in foreign trade, and investment in the CEECs. These are necessary conditions for the stability of the economies of the CEECs and consequently, that of the movements of their population and labour. Integration depends on the capacity of the CEECs to individually reform their economic systems and restructure their production systems. However, it depends also on their capacity to trade and co-operate among themselves. If these favourable conditions can be achieved, the risks of uncontrolled migration ows both within the CEECs and between them and the EU will be lessened. Finally, the changes which have taken place in Central and Eastern Europe have led to an intensied level of migration movements between the CEECs and their
65

neighbouring countries to the East and the South (the New Independent States, NIS), thus the immigration ows to the CEECs are going to depend on the development of the economic and political situation in the NIS. An improvement in the economic situation in that area would have benecial effects on the CEECs. Foreign trade would grow and the incentive to emigrate from these countries to CEECs would be reduced. d) Migration, free trade and regional integration in the Mediterranean Basin

This seminar was organised in Athens, in November 1996 in co-operation with the Greek Authorities (the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Ministry of the Economy). The seminar permitted an initial assessment of the impact of free trade on some Mediterranean economies, in particular on employment and the incentive to emigrate. Moreover, it highlighted the necessity of accompanying free trade with a major increase in direct foreign investment in order to accelerate the process of regional economic integration and to allow the Mediterranean economies to diversify and upgrade the skills of their labour forces. The modelling work carried out for this seminar suggests that trade liberalisation in goods linked with a major switch in foreign investment patterns could over the long-term, reduce the incentive to emigrate. A number of quantitative assessments, primarily in the form of simulations based on computable general equilibrium models, were made of the impact of free trade on the Tunisian and Moroccan economies. The results of these assessments, which vary only slightly from one country to the other, indicate that there are three sets of factors involved: the conditions prevailing at the time of the signature of agreements; the assumptions on which the assessments are based and the analytical linkages between models. The introduction of free trade leads to a loss of tax revenue due to the abolition of customs duties and to a widening trade decit as a result of imports growing faster than exports. Measures will therefore need to be taken to adjust this situation: at the domestic level this means raising the tax burden, primarily through the introduction of indirect taxes; and at the national level, devaluation of the currency (at least in the case of Morocco) in order to take account of depreciation linked to the worsening trade decit. In reality, however, the medium-term impact of free trade on growth in income and employment in the lessdeveloped countries remains slight. There is no signicant reduction in poverty or unemployment. Above all, given the comparative advantages of Tunisia and Morocco, free trade leads to a greater degree of specialisation in the agricultural sector in response to higher export prices. The results of the simulations do not provide grounds for concluding that free trade will reduce emigration in the medium term. What they do indicate is that the impact observed is one that is unlikely to result in a signicant change, in the desired direction, in the parameters governing the decision to emigrate. Lastly, the convergence of wage levels that should ensue from free trade in products, and the induced attenuation of the propensity to emigrate, are very long-term prospective trends. In the absence of any signicant impact of the opening-up of trade on income and employment in the medium term, two other development paths are possible: in the short term, an increase in private investment, particularly direct investment, and in government aid; and in the longer term, the development of human resources and entrepreneurial capability which could ultimately modify the comparative advantages of Mediterranean economies. Under a more activist approach, the development of the educational system and promotion of entrepreneurship are seen as a more promising course of action to pursue and one that would allow the Mediterranean economies to move towards more diversied specialisation based on a supply of skilled labour. In the long term, there is no other way of breaking out of the agricultural re-specialisation to which free trade has inexorably led under present conditions. However, to ensure that such a strategy has any chance of success will call for both major investment in training and far-reaching societal changes. If the Mediterranean economies could attract large inows of foreign investment and this foreign investment generates large benets to their economies in terms of so-called spillovers e.g. access to greater knowledge and innovation, upgrading of the skills of their work forces, etc. this could lead to signicant gains in well-being and a decline in emigration ows from the less-developed countries of the Mediterranean Basin. Whatever the case may be, the issue of emigration still remains unresolved. While the increase in investment and in human capital should lead to higher rates of economic growth which would absorb surplus labour capacity, the penetration of foreign capital and higher levels of education are likely to encourage migration and new forms of migration in particular.

66

Part II

RECENT CHANGES IN MIGRATION MOVEMENTS AND POLICIES (COUNTRY NOTES)

AUSTRALIA
Introduction Increases in immigration have been recorded since 1993/94. These can be linked to the strong growth in output and more favourable labour market conditions since the early 1990s. In 1995/96 the Australian economy experienced strong GDP growth (4.1 per cent). In 1994/95 unemployment had fallen to the lowest level since 1990 at 8.2 per cent, although 1995/96 indicated no signicant further decline in the unemployment rate. The main policy initiative over the last few years has been the development of mechanisms to encourage both permanent and temporary business migration. In March 1996 a new government was elected part of whose agenda appears to be a tightening of migration policy. Migration and settlement Permanent residence visas are administered by the Australian Migration Program and the Humanitarian Programmes (see Refugees and Asylum Seekers). These programmes account for most of the permanent settlement to Australia. In addition, there are some groups, notably New Zealanders, who are able to take up permanent residence in Australia without a visa requirement. The last few years have seen increases in the number of visas granted under the Migration Program (see Table II.1) with 82 500 issued in 1995/96. This reects stronger domestic labour demand and policy changes seeking to support structural change in the Australian economy through a higher intake of skilled settlers. However, as shown in Table II.1 there is a reduction in the planned intake by about 10 per cent for 1996/97, to 74 000 places. In 1995/96 there was strong growth in demand across all categories of the Migration Program. In order not to exceed the planned quota, special measures were taken to limit numbers in the Independent and Concessional Family member categories. Changes in quotas for these categories are commonly used to accommodate unexpected changes in demand-driven categories such as the Preferential Family category. It should be emphasised that the gures discussed above relate to the number of visas granted and individuals may arrive in a subsequent year to that of visa acquisition or they may in fact never actually take up residence. This accounts for differences between the gures in Table II.1 and Table C2 (Statistical Annex), the latter referring to actual inows to Australia. Refugees and asylum seekers The Humanitarian Program accounts for a relatively small proportion of permanent settlement. In both 1994/95 13 000 visas were granted and in 1995/96 15 000 were granted. The 1995/96 quota was initially set at 13 000 but was subsequently increased in response to an appeal by UNHCR for resettlement of persons from the former Yugoslavia. The planned quota for 1996/97 is 14 000 places with the Middle East and Africa being priority areas in addition to the former Yugoslavia. The number of asylum applications lodged in Australia has fallen substantially from a high of 15 500 in 1990/91 to about 2 800 per annum in the latter part of 1994. At June 1995, there were still about 9 000 undecided applications, with over half from China. A 1994 Amendment to the Migration Act enabled Australia to conclude safe-country agreements and as a result an agreement was nalised with China in January 1995.
67

Table II.1. Permanent and temporary migration programme outcomes, 1993-19961 and 1997 planning levels for permanent settlers, by category, Australia
Actual 1993 1994 1995 1996 Planned 1997

Migration Programme (excluding the Humanitarian Programme) Family Preferential family Concessional family Skill Employer nomination/labour agreements Business skills Special talents Independents Other Special eligibility Humanitarian Programme
2

68 000 45 300 37 600 7 700 21 300 4 800 3 300 200 13 000 1 400 11 800 5 500 6 300 73 400

62 800 43 200 33 800 9 400 18 300 4 000 1 900 200 11 800 400 1 300 12 800 6 800 5 800 100 78 800 14 200 100 3 300 9 100 1 100 600 25 400 38 400 29 600 800 41 500

76 500 44 500 36 800 7 700 30 400 3 300 2 400 100 15 000 9 600 1 600 13 300 7 700 5 600 77 400 14 300 200 3 700 8 500 1 100 800 18 300 44 600 35 400 200 51 400

82 500 56 700 48 700 8 000 24 100 4 600 4 900 200 10 600 3 800 1 700 15 050 8 150 6 900 83 000 15 400 400 4 300 8 500 1 100 1 100 16 900 50 700 40 300 182 500 60 700

74 000 44 700 36 700 8 000 28 000 4 600 7 100 200 15 000 1 100 1 300 12 000 5 500 4 500 2 000

Refugees and special humanitarian Special assistance Other Temporary Resident Programme3 (excluding students) Skilled temporary resident programme Independent executive Executive Specialist University teacher Medical practitioner Social/cultural programme International relations programme Of which: Working Holiday Maker (WHM) Other Temporary Business Programme Student Programme
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
5 4

14 900 2 900 10 100 1 300 600 24 300 34 000 25 600 200 34 700

Data refer to scal years (July to June of the given year). Figures include persons who change status (temporary to permanent). Excluding Temporary Business Programme in 1995/1996. Accompanying dependents are included. Temporary Business Entry (TBE) scheme was introduced in November 1995. Holders of a TBE visa are allowed to come as often as they wish for a stay of 3 months (maximum) during a ve-year period. Source: Department of Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs.

Illegal migration Australia, in common with other OECD countries, is faced with an ongoing problem of illegal migration. Its lack of land borders and its universal visa system mean that most illegal migrants are persons who entered the country legally, then overstayed their visas or entry permits. In recent years estimates of the number of overstayers has declined with an estimated 48 000 overstayers in December 1995 compared to gures of 70 000 in 1994 and 90 000 in 1990. These gures indicate a degree of success in the detection and dissuasion of overstayers. However, some of the recent decline is attributable to legislative changes in September 1994. Individuals making visa applications are no longer counted as overstayers. The principal compliance activities with regard to illegal immigration include: implementing preventive measures to promote voluntary adherence to the law; detecting illegal workers and increasing employer
68

awareness of the work rights of non-citizens; and locating, detaining as necessary and enforcing the departure of illegal entrants who have no unresolved applications to remain in Australia. Temporary migration Temporary immigration visas are issued through the temporary entry residence programme and also to a growing number of foreign students studying in Australia. Australias temporary entry residence programme (excluding student ows) has issued an increasing number of visas since 1992/93 with 83 000 visas in 1995/96 (see Table II.1). This programme seeks to facilitate the entry, on a temporary basis, of people who can contribute to the economic, cultural and social development of Australia. Unlike permanent immigration, no specic quotas are applied to the number of temporary residents although visa issues are governed by a set of detailed regulations which specify the objectives of each visa class and the conditions of entry. These include safeguards to ensure that the employment rights of Australians are protected, labour market testing, employer sponsorship, and varying periods of stay, generally from two to four years. Over half of the permits in 1995/96 were related to the international relations programme (excluding students) and were issued to foreign government staff, persons on exchange, diplomats, occupational trainees and working holiday makers. The skill component accounted for a further 19 per cent of entries (15 200) with permits granted to specialists, executives, education personnel, medical practitioners and independent executives. Dependants in all skilled temporary entry classes have full work rights. The most important countries for the skilled category were the United Kingdom, the United States, Japan and Canada. The balance of entries (20 per cent) falls under the social/cultural category (entertainment and sport). The impact of temporary workers on the labour market of Australia is receiving growing attention. While they represent only a small component of the total labour force, research indicates that they play an important role in meeting short-term labour shortfalls and in facilitating skill transfer to the local workforce. Student visas continue to grow rapidly as Australia develops as a provider of higher education: 61 000 visas were granted in 1995/96 (see Table II.1). The largest groups come from Indonesia, the Republic of Korea and Japan. As of December 1995, students from some countries are able to apply for a visa which covers a series of educational courses rather than a single course. Net migration gain Net migration gain, a statistic based on the intended length of stay of arrivals permanent migration, as well as movements of more than one year (long-term) was about 30 000 persons in 1992/93, nearly 84 000 in 1994/95 and is projected to be 115 000 thousand in 1996/97. These recent rises in migration t into the general pattern of cyclical migration in Australia (see Chart II.1). Changes in both permanent and long-term immigration account for most of the growth in net migration gain, with emigration remaining relatively constant. One general feature of net migration gain in the 1990s is an increase in the importance of long-term migration compared to permanent migration. The foreign-born labour force In August 1996, the overseas-born formed about a quarter of Australias labour force, 44 per cent of whom were from an English-speaking background. The general pattern of overseas born employment across industry is similar to the Australian-born except that there is a relatively small proportion of immigrants in agriculture and a relatively large proportion in manufacturing. Whilst the above gures indicate the importance of the overseas born in the labour force, the overseas born in fact have lower rates of labour force participation compared to those born in Australia and those in the labour force experience higher levels of unemployment. Hence, overall, the proportion of the overseas-born population in employment is lower compared to those born in Australia. The reasons for this are complex and often differ between groups by country of origin, but are generally linked to factors such as English language prociency, length of residence in Australia, age, skill levels and qualications as well as migration category. Evidence from the Longitudinal Survey of Immigrants to Australia, starting in March 1994, provides recent information on this issue. The data conrm the notion that labour force participation tends to rise with duration of residence of migrants, whilst rates of unemployment tend to fall. For example, the data indicate a fall in unemployment rates for migrants from 38 per cent after six months residence in Australia to 21 per cent after 18 months residence and participation rates rise from 57 per cent to 63 per cent. The data also conrm
69

Chart II.1. Net migration gain, permanent and long-term movements,1 Australia Fiscal years 1968/69-1996/97
Thousands Thousands

150

Net migration gain (permanent and long-term movements)

150

100

100

50

Net migration gain (permanent movements) Net migration gain (long-term movements)

50

1969

71

73

75

77

79

81

83

85

87

89

91

93

95

97

1. The classification into permanent, long (and short) term is based on the purpose of travel as stated by the traveller on arrival to or departure from Australia. Permanent movement consists of persons arriving with the stated intention to settle permanently in Australia and of Australian residents departing with the stated intention to reside abroad permanently. Long-term movement consists of the arrival and the departure of persons with the stated intention to stay (in Australia or abroad, respectively) for 12 months or more. The net effect of persons whose travel intentions change (category jumping) is not included. The data for fiscal year 1996/97 are provisional. Source: Department of Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs.

expectations that the points-based categories of the Migration Program tend to perform better in these terms than other groups such as the Preferential Family category and those entering under the Humanitarian Program. One exception seen in these data is that those entering through the Concessional Family category, whose visas are based on a points system, perform only marginally better than those in the Preferential Family category whose visas are granted on the basis of family ties. Policy developments In September 1994 the Migration Reform Act came into effect. This Act claried aspects of the administration of legislation and simplied the legal basis for the administration of entry to and stay in Australia. One legal status the visa replaced three previous travel documents and became the sole legal status for a non-citizen to travel, enter or remain in Australia. The Act also codied the decision-making process on visa applications, and introduced bridging visas giving non-citizens without a visa and waiting for a decision a temporary lawful status. In addition, it provided a simpler regime for the detention and removal of persons who are unlawfully in Australia. Since 1994 there have been a number of initiatives to facilitate the entry of both permanent and temporary business people. The permanent business skills class was expanded based on recommendations by the Business Skills Advisory Panel. The main features are to allow business people who are temporarily in Australia to more
70

easily apply for permanent residence and for those entering through the class to more quickly and successfully establish a business in Australia. This class is expected to continue to grow rapidly. In addition, in September 1995, the Government accepted the key recommendations of the Committee of Inquiry into the Temporary Entry of Business People and Highly Skilled Specialists. The recommendations included the introduction of a single visa class, streamlined procedures for entry and a comprehensive monitoring system to ensure that employers meet their responsibilities under the new scheme. In terms of future policy, the new government elected in March 1996 apparently intends to tighten rules of entry for immigrants, reduce overall immigration levels and ensure that migrants and their sponsors meet a fair share of initial costs rather than the taxpayer. As yet, there is little evidence of these intentions in terms of migration policy changes, except perhaps for the reduction in the planned Migration Program intake for 1996/97.

AUSTRIA
Introduction Having passed through a cyclical trough in 1993, the Austrian economy recovered with a rise in GDP of 3.0 per cent in 1994. Growth in 1995 and 1996 was slower with increases of 1.8 and 1.1 per cent respectively. Unemployment rates published by the Austrian authorities increased slightly between 1994 and 1995 from 6.5 to 6.6 per cent and OECD data show the unemployment rate to have increased further in 1996. The general tone of recent policy is one of reductions in migrant intake. For example, quotas on the number of residence permits issued have been reduced. However, within this context Austria became a full European Union (EU) member in 1995 and also signed the Schengen agreement in 1996, implying a greater freedom of migration to Austria from EU countries, and in certain cases non-EU countries. Migration and settlement Demographic data indicate a continuing fall in net immigration of foreigners from about 90 000 in 1991 to a little under 10 000 in 1995. The net migration of foreigners has now reached levels similar to those in the mid-1980s, before the collapse of the former Soviet Union and the war in the former Yugoslavia. The net emigration of Austrians is showing signs of gradual decline, in 1995 there was an estimated net emigration of only 2 000 (see Chart II.2.A and Table II.2). Both natural increase in the foreign population and naturalisations have, until recently, been steadily increasing (see Chart II.2.B). In the case of naturalisation, the generally upward trend reects the governments objective of furthering the integration of immigrants. Although there was a slight fall in naturalisations in 1995 to about 14 000, there are likely to be increases in naturalisations in future data due to the large inows of immigrants between 1989 and 1993. At present, a foreigner may become naturalised after 10 years of stay in Austria, or in some cases after ve years of stay with a valid work permit, however there are moves to further shorten the waiting period for applications. Inows of citizens from non-EU member states are regulated by a system of quotas which are decided jointly by the governors of the federal states and the Ministry of Domestic Affairs. The quotas apply to the issue of various categories of residence permit, including foreign workers, family reunication, foreign students and refugees. The administration of the residence permits takes place at the state level, rather than the federal level, leading to some differences in the treatment of applications. Comprehensive accounts on residence permits only became available in 1993 following the establishment of a centralised alien register. The data show that about half of the residence permits issued per year are related to employment, however, this proportion is declining. Family reunication is gaining in importance accounting for 32 per cent of permits in 1993 and 42 per cent in 1995 (see Table II.2). Refugees and asylum seekers With political changes in Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, substantial numbers of persons sought asylum in Austria. By the end of 1991, there were approximately 27 300 asylum seekers registered (see Chart II.3). This led the government to reform asylum legislation in 1992. The legislative reform, undertaken with intergovernmental co-operation among EU member countries, focused on harmonising aspects
71

Chart II.2. Components of population change,1 1983-1995, Austria Thousands

100 A. Net migration and total change in population 80

Total change (foreign population)

100

80

60

60

40
Net migration (foreign population)

40

20

Total change (Austrian population)

20

0
Net migration (Austrian population)

-20

1983

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

-20

20 B. Natural increase and naturalisations 15

Acquisition of Austrian nationality

20

15

10
Natural increase (foreign population)

10

-5

Natural increase (Austrian population)

-5

-10

1983

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

-10

1. Estimates are based on the results of the censuses. Components of total population change are: natural increase and net migration. Source: Austrian Central Statistical Office.

72

Table II.2. Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Austria
All gures in thousands unless otherwise indicated
1993 1994 1995 1993 1994 1995 1993 1994 1995

Components of population change1 Total population Population (annual average) Population increase from beginning to end of year Of which: Natural increase Net migration Austrians Population (annual average) Population increase from beginning to end of year Of which: Natural increase Net migration Naturalisations Foreigners Population (annual average) Population increase from beginning to end of year Of which: Natural increase Net migration Naturalisations
1. 2.

7 991.5 8 029.7 8 046.5 53.0 24.8 14.9 12.7 40.3 11.7 13.1 7.5 7.4

7 301.9 7 316.2 7 323.1 12.0 10.3 9.5 1.7 3.8 14.1 1.0 6.0 15.3 2.8 2.0 14.4

Residence permits issued, by category2 Dependent employment (%) Self employment (%) Own account (%) Student (%) Retirement (%) Family reunication with foreigner (%) Family reunication with Austrian (%) Others (%) Total Asylum seekers and refugees Asylum seekers Outows of refugees

280.5 276.9 308.6 52.3 49.5 48.8 2.1 1.9 1.8 2.9 2.2 1.6 3.1 3.0 3.5 1.0 0.8 1.2 30.7 33.5 37.7 0.9 3.4 4.1 Total of employed workers, by category of permit4 7.0 5.7 1.2 Short-term work permits 100.0 100.0 100.0 Work entitlements Permanent licences 4.7 1.4 5.1 1.8

Stocks of foreign workers, by region or country of origin3 Former Yugoslavia (%) Turkey (%) EU (%) Other (%) Share of foreign employment in total employment (%)

276.0 291.0 300.3 50.7 48.9 49.2 19.6 18.6 18.2 6.9 6.3 7.0 22.8 26.2 25.6 9.0 9.5 9.8 277.5 268.8 269.7 112.4 78.4 58.8 68.0 97.9 109.1 97.1 92.6 101.9 211.9 143.8 131.7 96.7 75.9 56.1 100.7 58.2 48.6 14.5 9.7 27.0 6.8 8.9 6.5 8.0 6.6 7.7

689.6 41.0 11.0 44.1 14.1

713.5 14.6 10.7 19.1 15.3

Legal measures taken against foreigners Total rejections at border 723.5 Removals to home country 5.4 Refusals of residence Expulsions from Austria 10.3 Total 9.4 14.4

142.4 4.1 11.2 15.5 173.2

5.9 Work permits issued to foreigners, by category 1.2 Initial permits issued Extensions issued Permanent licences issued 134.7 3.9 Unemployment rate, total5 12.7 Unemployment rate, foreigners 17.9 169.2 Employment of Austrians abroad6 Austrian employees in Federal Republic of Germany Austrian employees in Switzerland

93.2 15.8

88.7 14.9

83.6 14.4

73

Results are based on the 1991 census. The naturalisations refer to persons residing in Austria. Figures include all types of residence permits. A rst residence permit is usually granted for 6 months maximum (renewable once). Then a 2-year permit (renewable) can be granted. After ve years working in Austria, a permanent residence permit can be issued. Data refer to July through June of the given year. 3. Annual average. Employment of foreigners based on social security data records. 4. Data given as an annual average. The data exclude the unemployed and self-employed, and from 1994 on, citizens of the European Economic Area (EEA). Several types of permits are issued: Short-term permits: granted to an enterprise for a maximum duration of one year (renewable) and for a specic activity. Data include persons entering the labour market for the rst time, seasonal workers, those who are changing jobs or taking up activity after a period of unemployment of at least six months and holders of provisional permits (when the application process takes more than four weeks). Extensions of permits are also included. Work entitlements: granted for a maximum duration of two years (renewable). May be obtained after one year of work in Austria. Permanent licences: granted after ve years of work and valid for ve years (renewable). 5. Data are based on the unemployment register. 6. Data as of June for Germany, August for Switzerland. Sources: Central Alien Register; Central Statistical Ofce; Ministry of the Interior.

Chart II.3. Inflows of asylum seekers, 1983-1995, Austria Thousands

30

30

25

25

20

20

15

15

10

10

1983

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

Source: Austrian Central Statistical Office.

of admission policies for foreign migrants in general and for asylum seekers in particular. This resulted in a substantial reduction in the number of asylum seekers in 1992 and 1993 to about 5 000. Since then there have only been slight signs of increase with a total of 5 900 asylum seekers in 1995 (see Table II.2 and Chart II.3). In addition to those requesting asylum, since April 1992, it is estimated that 100 000 refugees from former Yugoslavia have ed to Austria, of which 84 000 have received shelter or nancial support. Of this number 51 000 received a long-term residence permit and 20 500 are currently supported by the government. As the duration of stay of this group has become longer, the government has increasingly allowed them to work and facilitated the schooling of their children. By September 1995, 27 800 work permits had been issued and by September 1996 this number had risen to 30 500. In the past asylum seekers and refugees (the majority from Central and Eastern Europe) used Austria as a stepping stone for emigration to the more traditional immigration countries overseas. However, as the countries bordering Austria to the East become safe countries for asylum seekers, they are taking on the role of Austria in the past. Labour migration Over the course of time, a highly differentiated system of work permits for foreigners has developed in Austria. The work permits fall into two groups, those which allow work only with a specic employer and more exible permits which allow for changes in employer. There are three types of employer-specic work permits; rst entry permits (Erstantrag), re-entry permits (Neuantrag) and extensions. In all cases the permit is granted to the employer for a particular job, initially allowing up to one year of employment. The rst entry permits are issued for those entering employment for the rst time. The re-entry permits are issued for those re-entering employment after a period of unemployment exceeding six months or those changing their place of work. The extensions enable continuation of employment beyond one year. After a period of one year of work, the permit may be transformed into a work entitlement (Arbeitserlaubnis), issued to the person rather than the rm, which allows free movement of labour within regional state
74

boundaries. After ve years of work a permanent license may be issued which allows free movement in the labour market in Austria. The work entitlements were introduced in 1989 and it seems that they have acted both as a substitute for extensions to Initial and Re-entry permits and have also served to further increase the stock of foreign workers. In the past, the stock of foreign employment correlated strongly with the issue of Initial and Re-entry permits. However, since the early 1990s there have been falls in the number of Initial and Re-entry work permits but continuing growth in the stock of foreign employees (see Chart II.4). This divergence between the series is thought to be driven by two factors. First, the introduction of the work entitlements enables foreign workers to remain longer in Austria under less stringent permit conditions. Second, the immigrants from the former Yugoslavia are probably less likely to return to their homeland purely on the basis of economic conditions and have furthermore been given favourable treatment in terms of labour market access. The rising stock of foreign workers has resulted in the proportion of foreign employment reaching unprecedented levels, in 1995 the share was 9.8 per cent of total employment. This is placing increased pressure for reductions in work permits in order to remain within the quota of no more than 9 per cent of foreigners of thirdcountry origin in the labour force. Those from former Yugoslavia continued to constitute roughly half of foreign employment, followed by Turks (18 per cent). Foreign employment remains relatively concentrated in agriculture, clothing, tourism and cleaning services.

Chart II.4. Work permits1 and foreign employment, 1980-1995, Austria Thousands

300

300

250

250

200
Initial permits issued Total foreign employment2

200

150

150

100

Extensions issued

100

50
Work entitlements Permanent licences

50

1980

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

1. Data on work permits are given as an annual average (except for short-term permits which relate to the number of permits issued in the given year). Figures exclude the unemployed and the self-employed and from 1994 on, citizens of the European Economic Area (EEA). See Table II.2 for details on types of work permits. 2. Figures are given as an annual average and are based on Social Security records. Source: Ministry of Labour.

75

The integration of Austria into the European Economic area (EEA) and subsequent European Union membership has meant that only non-EEA citizens need a work permit in Austria. This further contributed to the fall in initial and re-entry work permits between 1993 and 1994. Whilst the total unemployment rate increased slightly between 1994 and 1995 from 6.5 to 6.6 per cent, the rate for foreigners fell from 8 per cent to 7.7 per cent. This is most likely a consequence of loss of eligibility for unemployment benets by foreigners as well as changing registration practices of employment ofces in order to keep the labour supply of foreigners below quota limits. Foreign workers from the main source countries, Turkey and the former Yugoslavia, have unemployment rates of 9 per cent and 8 per cent respectively.

Policy developments Membership of the European Economic Area in 1994 and full membership of the European Union in 1995 has a number of implications for Austrian migration policy. The main changes that have been made in order to conform to EU regulations are as follows: Citizens of EU member countries are no longer included in the quotas set on residence visas. Austria must comply with special agreements made between the EU and non-EU countries. In particular, the EU has an agreement with Turkey regarding the free movement of workers from these countries and their dependents. In order to conform to this agreement, it is planned to adjust the calculation with regard to the quota of 9 per cent foreign workers, so that Turkish residents could be removed from the calculation if the quota appears to be exceeded. In December 1996, Austria signed the Schengen agreement and this is due to be fully implemented by October 1997. This will result in fewer controls on movements of individuals between Austria and the other countries participating in the agreement, but more severe controls at the border to non-Schengen countries. Austria will also participate in the co-ordinated approach to border control which forms part of the agreement. The government has been co-operating with the German authorities with regard to reinforcement of Czech and Slovak border control. There have also been some changes with regard to the residence permit system. First, there are moves towards a more uniform application of the residence permit system across the state authorities. Second, since the second half of 1996 there has been a great deal of debate between government, employers and trade unions about the residence quotas. This has resulted in reduced quotas across all categories of residence permits, except those for highly skilled workers and students. Further signs of a more restrictive stance towards immigrants is also evidenced by the withdrawal of supplementary child benets for children abroad from October 1996 onwards. Parents who want to bring their children into Austria as a consequence are prohibited to do so due to the limits provided by the family reunion quota. One aspect of the differential treatment of foreigners with regard to social transfers has been the subject of notable criticism. In July 1996 a Supreme Court verdict opposed the different treatment of indigenous and foreign persons with regard to means-tested welfare benets. These benets typically cater for the long-term unemployed who have ceased to be eligible for insurance-based unemployment benets. At present, foreign workers only have a right to this benet if they have a permanent work permit and also only have a right to one year of benet, compared to Austrian citizens who have indenite entitlement to such benets.

BELGIUM

Introduction The total population in Belgium stood at 10.1 million on 1 January 1996. This represents an increase of nearly 30 000 for 1994 and 12 000 for 1995. The contribution of foreigners to the growth of the population in Belgium over the last ten years represents 75 per cent of total growth, if nationality changes and statistical corrections are not taken into account. The foreign population represents 9 per cent of the total population, with around 60 per cent coming from European Union countries. Belgium has recently introduced legislation to tighten entry controls and amend residence, settlement and deportation rules.
76

Characteristics of the foreign population The proportion of foreigners in the total population has remained relatively stable over the last ten years at between 8.6 and 9.1 per cent. The main reason for this has not been a decline in inows, which have tended to rise, but rather an increase in the number of foreigners obtaining Belgian nationality. The effect of the 1985 and 1992 legislation which made it easier to obtain Belgian nationality has been to increase the population of Belgian nationals and reduce the foreign population in at least the same proportions (see Chart II.5). On some estimates, about 92 000 people beneted directly or indirectly from the provisions of the 1992 Wathelet Act during the period 1992-1995. In 1992, nearly 50 per cent of newly naturalised Belgians were Italians, although it is not possible to assess what proportion of these were naturalised as a result of the provisions of the new Act (see Statistical Annex, Table B3). Although the net migration of foreigners is positive, the pattern has been mixed since 1990. However, the downward trend that began in 1992 was conrmed in following years, particularly in 1995. By way of contrast, the net migration of Belgian nationals is negative, but this trend has become more marked since 1992 and although the overall net migration of the population of Belgium is positive, it has been steadily decreasing (see Chart II.5). Without the contribution of the natural increase in the foreign population and of the net migration of foreigners, the population of Belgium would fall. In total, in 1995 the natural increase in the number of foreigners was 4 200. This gure is in decline compared to previous years and can be explained mainly by the fact that those born of foreign parents in Belgium, formerly counted as foreigners, are now considered Belgian at birth. The net

Chart II.5. Components of foreign population change, 1983-1995, Belgium Thousands and percentages
Acquisition of Belgian nationality (Thousands) Thousands Natural increase (Thousands) Net migration (Thousands) Foreigners (% of total population) Percentage

40

20

6 -20 5 -40 4 -60 1983

Note:

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

The data are residual estimates and do not include statistical adjustment. In 1985 and 1992, the significant increase in the number of acquisitions of Belgian nationality is due to changes in nationality law. Sources: Institut national de statistique and Registre national de population.

77

migration was 20 000 in 1995, 2 000 less than in 1994. Also, 26 200 foreigners were granted Belgian nationality. One-third of these were Moroccan, roughly one quarter Turkish and 8 per cent Italian. As of 31 December 1995, close to 910 000 foreigners were on the national population register, or 9 per cent of the total population (see Table II.3). This gure was nearly 1.4 per cent down on the previous year (but the 1995 statistics do not include about 11 000 foreigners who were removed from the population register and placed on a waiting list for asylum seekers). The foreign population has a large European component: European Union nationalities account for eight of the ten largest foreign communities. In 1995, European Union nationals represented over 60 per cent of the foreign population. After a period of steep decline, the number of mixed marriages has been stable since 1992. As the total number of marriages in Belgium is falling, the proportion of mixed marriages (about 12 per cent in 1995) has actually been increasing since 1989 (See Table II.3). There is still a fertility differential between foreign women and Belgian women. In 1992, foreign women had an average of 2.2 children compared with 1.6 for Belgian women. But the gap is narrowing each year. The behaviour of foreign women is fairly different in Wallonia, a region with a long history of immigration where the fertility rate is very close to the fertility rate for Belgian women. In Flanders, on the other hand, where immigration is more recent, the fertility differential between foreign women and Belgian women is substantially higher. Work permits, the labour force and unemployment All foreigners wishing to work in Belgium require a work permit, with the exception of nationals from European Union countries. There are two types of permit, one issued to new immigrants entering the labour market, the other to foreigners already living in Belgium who are entering the labour market for the rst time. Since 1992, the number of permits issued to new immigrants has been steadily declining to 4 100 in 1994 and 3 000 in 1995. The distribution of permits by nationality reects the changes that have occurred in the origin of population ows. The number of permits issued to Europeans has decreased while up until 1994 the number issued to Africans and Asians rose markedly. The sharp decline in the number of permits issued to new immigrants observed between 1994 and 1995 affected all nationalities (see Table II.3). The downward trend in the issue of work permits to resident immigrants was greater than that for permits issued to new immigrants. In 1995, the main recipients of new permits were Moroccans and Turks, followed by Africans and Asians. Belgium does not count the movements of cross-border workers by nationality but by country of origin for inows or country of destination for outows. The point to note in these movements is that not all cross-border workers are necessarily nationals of the country in which they live. Cross-border worker movements have always been negative in Belgium and this trend has continued for the last ve years. However, the gures vary according to country of origin. The number of cross-border workers entering Belgium each year from France is higher than the number leaving Belgium to go and work in France. Conversely, the balance with the Netherlands, Germany and Luxembourg has always been negative. The negative balance with Luxembourg is growing rapidly. The data available on the foreign labour force come from two sources: the census and the annual labour force survey. At the last census (in March 1991), the number of foreign workers stood at 327 000, of whom 80 000 were unemployed. The labour force survey indicated a large increase in the number of foreign workers since the beginning of the 1990s. However, the rate of increase has slowed since 1993. The foreign labour force stood at 335 000 in 1994, including 232 000 European Union nationals. The very marked growth in unemployment since the beginning of the 1990s has affected all nationalities, but particularly foreign workers from nonEuropean Union countries. The number of unemployed people on benet continued to rise until 1994 but has declined since, although this decline has not affected foreign workers from non-European Union countries (see Table II.3). The activity and unemployment rates are very different for the national population and the foreign population, depending on whether or not they are European Union. Although it has been rising since 1992, the activity rate of non-European Union foreign nationals is lower than that of nationals and European Union nationals. Conversely, non-European Union foreign nationals are far more vulnerable to unemployment than nationals, with rates over twice as high. Asylum seekers The years 1994 and 1995 saw a very sharp decline in applications for asylum from the 1993 peak of nearly 27 000. The number of applications made during the months of June and August 1993 reached 3 000, whereas the 1995 monthly gures were well below the thousand mark. However, the number of requests for asylum did increase slightly in 1996, particularly in the second half. The largest group of asylum seekers were nationals of former Yugoslavia, followed by nationals of the former Soviet Union and Zaireans. Any refugee who wishes to
78

Table II.3. Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Belgium
All gures in thousands unless otherwise indicated
1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

Components of population change Total population Population (31 of December of the years indicated) Population increase from beginning to end of year of which: Natural increase Net migration Statistical adjustment Nationals Population (31 of December of the years indicated) Population increase from beginning to end of year of which: Natural increase Net migration Acquisitions of nationality Statistical adjustment Foreigners Population (31 of December of the years indicated)1 Population increase from beginning to end of year of which: Natural increase Net migration Acquisitions of nationality Statistical adjustment Inows of foreigners by region of origin EU Other European countries Asia Africa America Oceania Region not specied Asylum seekers Mixed marriages % of total marriages Marriages with a EU citizen

10 068.3 46.3 20.4 25.4 0.5

10 100.6 32.3 13.2 18.9 0.1

10 130.6 29.9 11.8 17.6 0.5

10 143.0 12.5 9.6 13.4 10.5

9 159.1 59.6 15.0 1.5 46.4 0.2

9 180.1 21.0 7.8 2.9 16.4 0.2

9 208.2 28.2 6.8 4.2 25.8 0.1

9 233.3 25.0 5.4 6.6 26.1 0.1

Initial work permits by kind of permits and region of origin2 Permits with immigration Europe Africa America Asia Oceania Region not specied Permits without immigration Europe Africa America Asia Oceania Region not specied Migration ows of cross-border workers by country of origin/destination Inows by country of origin France Netherlands Outows by country of destination Luxembourg Netherlands France Labour force (March 1991 Census) by country or region of origin3 Employed labour force Belgium EU Morocco Turkey Others Unemployed Belgium EU Morocco Turkey Others Recipients of unemployment benet by country or region of origin Belgium EU Of which: Italy Morocco Turkey Others

13.5 4.4 0.9 1.2 0.8 1.4 0.1 9.1 0.4 4.7 0.2 2.9 0.8

13.4 4.2 0.9 1.2 0.8 1.4 9.2 0.4 4.6 0.2 3.1 0.9

13.2 4.1 0.7 1.2 0.7 1.4 9.1 0.4 4.5 0.2 3.1 0.9

8.5 3.0 0.5 0.9 0.6 0.9 5.5 0.3 2.5 0.1 1.6 0.9

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

909.3 13.3 5.5 26.9 46.4 0.6 55.1 27.1 5.2 7.4 10.0 4.9 0.2 0.3 17.7 8.7 11.4 3.9

920.6 11.3 5.4 21.8 16.4 0.4 53.0 26.4 4.8 7.6 9.3 4.4 0.2 0.3 26.7 8.3 11.8 3.7

922.3 1.7 5.0 21.9 25.8 0.6 56.0 27.0 4.1 8.4 10.9 4.8 0.1 0.7 14.3 8.1 12.0 3.5

909.8 12.6 4.2 20.0 26.1 10.7 53.1 26.6 6.9 6.6 7.4 4.9 0.2 0.6 11.4 7.9 12.2 3.4

15.0 10.1 4.4 43.6 14.3 15.1 6.5

16.0 11.0 4.4 43.7 15.1 14.4 6.3

15.7 11.0 4.3 44.9 16.2 14.0 6.4

15.7 10.0 4.2 44.7 17.2 13.3 5.8

.. .. .. .. .. .. ..

79

3 651.7 3 404.3 185.5 22.0 13.7 26.2 521.4 442.1 45.4 13.0 9.8 11.2 394.7 330.5 37.8 22.2 12.0 8.8 5.5 461.2 386.8 43.3 24.9 14.3 10.4 6.5 496.5 419.1 44.9 25.3 15.3 10.7 6.6 490.3 413.1 44.5 25.1 15.5 10.7 6.6 465.0 390.2 42.0 23.8 15.4 10.8 6.6

Note: Figures on European Union include the 12 rst members of the Union. 1. In 1992, following changes in nationality laws which granted Belgian nationality to a signicant number of foreigners, the stock of foreign population dropped sharply. The decrease in 1995 can be explained both by the continuation of the effects of the change in nationality laws and the removal from the register of almost 11 000 asylum seekers awaiting a decision. 2. Work permits are issued either for unlimited periods (A permits) or for limited periods (B permits). EU citizens do not need a work permit. 3. Note that on the March 1991 Census a total of about 250 000 persons did not state their employment status. Sources: Institut national de la statistique and Registre national de la population; minist` ere de lEmploi et du Travail; Ofce des e trangers; recensement (March 1991).

settle in Belgium must nd a place to live and make an application to the Ofce for Foreign Nationals. If the Ofce rejects the application, the refugee can appeal to the General Commission for Refugees and Stateless Persons (CGRA), which is the body that takes the nal decision whether to grant refugee status on all admissible applications. If the CGRA rejects the appeal, a further appeal is possible to the Standing Refugee Appeals Board, or even to the Conseil dEtat. Anyone refused asylum is ordered to leave Belgium. Under the 1993 Act, a person can be held for two months in a detention centre so that the expulsion order can be carried out. Persons refused asylum are not protected by the Geneva Convention as they do not have refugee status and can be forcibly deported to their home country. It appears that a considerable number of people refused asylum try to avoid deportation by staying on illegally. The recognition rate (proportion of applications for asylum granted out of the total number of decisions taken each year) has fallen from nearly 40 per cent in 1988 and 1989 to under 10 per cent from 1993 to 1995. Whilst pending cases must be taken into account, there is nonetheless no doubt that the recognition rate has fallen markedly since the early 1990s. The decline is largely due to a 1993 amendment to the Act governing entry into Belgium which introduced stricter conditions for the entry, residence and settlement of foreigners, particularly asylum seekers. Policy developments In January 1994, the Belgian Council of Ministers approved a plan for allocating asylum seekers to specic areas to avoid the situation whereby certain communes were refusing to register applicants for refugee status. The latter are now placed on a waiting list, then directed to a commune where they are systematically registered, in accordance with the plan. On 17 March, the Chamber of Representatives adopted the plan along with various additional measures such as speeding up the asylum process (which has apparently had the effect of dissuading some applicants whose applications would have been automatically rejected), applying an effective deportation policy, increasing the budget for forced repatriation and introducing a computerised ngerprinting system. However, the implementation of the plan ran into difculties and, by the end of 1994, had still not been introduced. The waiting list was not set up until the second half of 1995. Meanwhile, two temporary decrees have listed 34 communes where the registration of asylum-seekers is not authorised. In March 1995, the displaced person status, created in 1992 to handle requests for asylum from nationals of former Yugoslavia, was abolished. Thus, all displaced persons from this region (not including nationals of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo and certain regions of Croatia) will be required to leave Belgium and displaced person status will no longer be granted to new immigrants from these regions. Persons with this status had been entitled to a temporary residence permit valid for as long as it was not possible for them to return to their home region. Any person accepting this status had to forego the right to apply for asylum. It is likely that a certain number of these persons, not wishing to return to their country of origin, have duly applied for asylum or have stayed in Belgium illegally. The legislation of 10 and 15 July 1996 amends the Act of 15 December 1980 on the entry, residence, settlement and deportation of foreigners. The new legislation focuses on two categories of migrants: asylumseekers and students. Broadly speaking, the aim is to tighten immigration controls in order to limit the entry and settlement of nationals from non-European Union countries. Immigration ofcials on the border are thus able to deny entry to foreigners more easily. The Act also contains provisions placing greater responsibility on transport operators, conferring on them the duty to check not only the entry papers required by certain categories of foreigners but also that passengers have the means to support themselves during their stay in Belgium. Foreign students must prove that they have sufcient funds to live on and any person prolonging their studies excessively can be refused permission to stay. Also, family members may receive orders to leave the territory if their income and living conditions are not satisfactory. One section of the Act relates more specically to the asylum procedure. Its primary objective is to bring the law into line with the commitments made under the Schengen Agreement. Applicants will no longer be free to choose the language in which their case is dealt with. Some used to choose the language with the longest backlog. The Act also extends the period of detention of a foreigner in an illegal situation. During this period (initially set at two months), the relevant authorities are responsible for making the necessary arrangements for return to the home country. Another measure introduced by the Act is that all applicants for asylum will now be accommodated in a reception centre. With respect to the integration of foreigners, in March 1994 the Chamber passed legislation to amend the 1981 Act and crack down on certain racist or xenophobic acts. Heavier penalties were introduced and
80

anti-discrimination measures extended. In addition, resolutions were adopted by the Interministerial Conference in September 1995 to facilitate the integration of foreigners. The main focus was to concentrate human and nancial resources on specic projects in large urban areas. It was decided to implement legislation without delay to make naturalisation procedures faster and more exible. Finally, the issue of access by immigrants to certain public service jobs was raised.

BULGARIA
Introduction Bulgarias economy showed a modest improvement in 1994 and 1995 with GDP growth rates around 2 per cent. Unemployment, however, remains high. Between 1990 and 1993, total employment fell by about 1.1 million. In 1995, the number employed rose modestly to about 3 million. In contrast to the large outows recorded in the late 1980s, ofcial emigration from Bulgaria has now stabilised. Immigration to Bulgaria continues to grow. Emigration Following the liberalisation of passport regulations in 1989, over 500 000 Bulgarians have emigrated. However, the ows in recent years have declined and stabilised with approximately 50 000 to 65 000 persons emigrating each year. This levelling off is most likely due to more restrictive controls on immigration in receiving countries as well as an improved political and economic situation in Bulgaria. While in 1989 and the early 1990s the majority of the emigrants intended on settling in host countries permanently, in 1995 less than 10 per cent of the entire outow of Bulgarian citizens reported they intend to stay permanently in the country of destination. Instead, temporary labour migration has become more frequent. The main destinations of emigrants were the New Independent States (NIS), Germany, the United States, Greece and Turkey. The number of economically active emigrants continues to grow. Although women account for over 60 per cent of the permanent settlement outow, labour migration is predominantly men. In addition, Bulgaria continues to lose its intellectuals and specialists from all sectors of the economy. In 1995, emigrants with a university level education represent about 30 per cent of the outow while those with lower education account for 10 per cent. Regarding the country of destination of the highly educated emigrants, the United States is the most favoured country, especially for scientists. However, when comparing this data by level of education with the types of jobs Bulgarians occupy abroad (services, tourism and seasonal employment) it seems as if emigration may result in qualications going unrecognised. The special case of emigration to Turkey According to the 1992 Census, some 345 000 Bulgarian citizens of Turkish origin emigrated to Turkey between 1989 and 1992. This large emigration wave to Turkey has resulted in a signicant population decrease in southern Bulgaria and some municipalities have been completely depopulated. However, the outow has sharply decreased as a result of stricter rules for entry put in place by Turkey. Family reunication has been the main reason to emigrate to Turkey. In 1995, many ethnic Turks who emigrated in 1989 and 1990 returned to Bulgaria for the renewal of their passports. As they can easily obtain dual citizenship, many of them tend to keep their Bulgarian citizenship for the purpose of either maintaining family relationships or conducting business in Bulgaria. Immigration In the last three years, inows of migrants to Bulgaria, including permanent residents, temporary residents, asylum seekers and refugees, have grown. The increase is due to a combination of factors including liberal visa regulations in Bulgaria, Bulgarias geographic location, weak border control at the Romanian and former Yugoslav borders, established channels for organised trafcking of foreigners and the tightening of entry conditions in Western Europe.
81

Permanent and temporary residents Foreigners in Bulgaria with permanent residence status numbered 36 400 by September 1996. The majority were from countries of Central and Eastern Europe, in particular from the NIS. New legislation allows foreigners who have been in Bulgaria for business reasons for six years to apply for a permanent residence status. The number of foreigners with temporary residence and short-term residence status increased to 49 300 in September 1996. Nationals from Greece and the countries of the NIS and Syria predominated. Alongside growing foreign investment and foreign business in Bulgaria, the share of temporary residents from OECD countries has grown over the past three years. Transit migration Analysis of data on the inows of foreigners into Bulgaria shows that around 60 per cent of them are passengers in transit who intend to stay in the country less than 30 hours. The number of transit migrants is growing and reached 6.2 million in 1994. Most are citizens of neighbouring countries: Turkey, Romania, and former Yugoslavia. Employment of foreigners Current legislation allows foreigners legally resident in Bulgaria to work either on a contract basis or to exercise a profession or activity that is not under an employment contract. Foreign employment is facilitated as well by the liberal granting of temporary business visas and the easy establishment allowed for business, based on the Business of Foreign Persons and Foreign Investment Protection Act of 1992. Over two-thirds of the 3 000 investments in 1994 were made with the minimum investment of US$750. However, the growing number of persons entering the country at a time of high unemployment has led the authorities to restrict employment of foreigners by introducing special work permits. The number of permits issued from September 1994 to October 1996 amounted to around 600, of which one fourth were granted to nationals from the United States, followed by the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the United Kingdom, Ukraine and Russia. Work permits are issued only to qualied foreign workers. The main occupations were engineers, senior managers, consultants and teachers. Refugees and asylum seekers Although it was feared that due to Bulgarias geographical proximity with former Yugoslavia high numbers of asylum seekers from the area of conict would seek to enter Bulgaria, these inows never materialised. As of January 1995, approximately 900 asylum applications had been received of which 550 were granted refugee status. Of this number, only 4 were from former Yugoslavia and about 300 were from Afghanistan. However, it should be noted that many nationals from former Yugoslavia entered Bulgaria as business migrants. In 1995, in line with the 1951 Geneva Convention which Bulgaria ratied, new measures were taken on the procedures for granting refugee status. In addition, a National Ofce for Asylum Seekers and Refugees was created and a declaration issued that the status of refugees and asylum seekers could not be less favourable than that of permanent foreign residents in Bulgaria. Policy developments The major concern of the Bulgarian Government in 1995 is to harmonise the legal framework for migration policies in line with the policies and requirements of the European Union. This would involve stricter passport controls and measures to restrict the access of foreigners to the labour market. An Amendment was proposed to the Act on the Residence of Aliens in the Republic of Bulgaria which would tighten the criteria for foreigners who wish to reside legally in Bulgaria through business creation. The Amendment would counter a much used loophole in the legislation which has led to a situation where more than 10 000 foreigners reside in Bulgaria without actual operation of any business. Under the proposal, an investor must invest at least US$50 000 in the rst year and create at least ve jobs for Bulgarian citizens. A second amendment would no longer allow the current exemption for certain groups such as university professors and secondary school teachers to obtain employment permits under bilateral agreements. Legislation regarding employment permits was also changed in 1996 due to the high unemployment and the growing inows of transit migrants (many of whom, it is suspected, enter the labour market). Additional criteria have been added which require foreigners to have special skills and
82

professional experience with a specic educational background. Employment contracts must be full-time and Bulgarian employers are obliged to rst attempt to hire Bulgarian workers.

CANADA
Introduction Both permanent and temporary immigration to Canada have declined since 1993 and may be related to the slowing of economic growth and the continuation of relatively high unemployment. In 1994 the Canadian economy expanded at a robust pace with GDP growing at an annual rate of 4.1, but at a rate of 2.3 per cent in 1995. Employment in 1994 and 1995 also showed signs of slowing with growth of 2.1 and 1.6 per cent respectively. However the unemployment rate dropped slightly from 10.3 per cent in 1994 to 9.5 per cent in 1995. With regard to policy, the Department of Citizenship and Immigration began the implementation of a new organisational structure in 1996. In the context of this new structure, a number of priorities have been established for the 1996 to 1999 period, reecting the long-term planning approach towards immigration policy. Migration and settlement Permanent migration to Canada consists principally of three groups: those entering under the family class with close relatives in Canada; those entering for employment and business reasons under the skilled worker and business classes; and those entering as refugees. Permanent immigration fell from 224 000 in 1994 to 212 000 in 1995 (see Table II.4), a continuation of the downward trend in migration which started in 1993. For 1996, projected gures indicate permanent immigration to be between 199 000 and 205 000. Except for 1994, immigration has fallen within the short-term planned levels. It should be noted that mechanisms for immediate control of the numbers of migrants are limited. Therefore, the short-term planned levels are largely the assessment of demand for entry for the following year within the context of current regulations. More substantial changes to demand can be effected, with some delay, by changes to the regulatory context, such as the points system used for assessing those applying under the skilled worker class. The data in Table II.4 indicate a shift towards the skilled worker class, away from the family class. For example, in 1993 those entering under the skilled worker and business classes accounted for 37 per cent of immigrants and in 1995 they accounted for 47 per cent, whilst family class migration fell from 43 per cent to 36 per cent. Numbers of skilled migrants have in fact been rising, despite falls in overall immigration levels. This trend however is not reected in business class immigrants where numbers have been falling both in absolute and relative terms. Asia continues to be the dominant sending region with immigrants from Hong Kong, the Philippines and India being the top three source countries. Within this context, however, there has been a rapid rise in the number of immigrants from Bosnia-Herzegovina making it in 1995 the seventh largest source country providing nearly 3 per cent of immigrants. Emigration estimates are constructed from a variety of indirect sources, over the last decade the annual estimates have uctuated but tended to fall in the range of 40 000 to 50 000 in recent years. Family migration India remains the most important source country for migration under the family class, accounting for 15 per cent of total family migration compared to 7 per cent of total immigrant landings in 1995. This contrasts with Hong Kong which accounts for 10 per cent of the family class but 15 per cent of total immigrant landings. The large decline in family class migrants is common to both the immediate family or parents and grandparents sub-categories and also across the major source countries (see Table II.4). Given this, it seems likely that it is conditions within Canada that are determining changes in family class migration, rather than changing conditions in specic source countries. Both in 1995 and in 1996 the government annual plans overestimated the number of family migrants. For example, the plan for 1995 estimated 53 000 to 55 000 family class migrants but the outcome was 44 000 landings and in 1996 a range of 47 000 to 51 000 was planned and the projected gure is 38 000 to 40 000. In considering family-related migration as a whole, the spouses and dependents of those migrating under the skilled worker and business classes and also relatives of refugees could be included in the gures. For example, from Table II.4 the spouses and dependents of the skilled worker and business class migrants can be added to the
83

Table II.4. Immigrant landings1 by type, 1992-1995, Canada

Type 1992 1993 1994 1995

Family Refugees Government assisted2 Privately sponsored2 Recognised refugees3 Skilled workers4 Principal applicants Accompanying dependents Business Principal applicants Accompanying dependents Live-in-Caregiver5 Principal applicants Accompanying dependents Retirees Other Backlog Clearance6 Total
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

96 223 36 6 8 21 608 259 960 389

110 581 24 6 4 13 788 924 775 088

93 693 19 7 2 9 724 629 828 267

76 985 27 8 3 16 659 100 208 351

54 324 26 764 27 560 28 143 6 991 21 152 5 479 32 065 252 842

62 901 29 819 33 082 32 626 8 298 24 328 3 001 2 959 42 7 733 14 183 255 819

69 141 28 619 40 522 27 365 7 024 20 341 4 951 4 743 208 7 426 1 560 223 875

81 371 34 509 46 862 19 415 5 291 14 124 5 440 4 648 792 304 423 652 212 249

A landing corresponds to a person obtaining the right of permanent residence, either within Canada or from abroad. Including persons in designated classes, who do not strictly satisfy convention refugee criteria but are resettled for humanitarian reasons. Asylum seekers granted refugee status. Figures include the Independent class, the Assisted Relatives class and their dependents. Persons in this group are selected on the basis of specic criteria. Program for child care workers and assistants for elderly people in private households. The aim of this programme is to process the backlog of asylum requests that built up between 1986 and 1988. (This backlog forms part of the total of 95 000 asylum seekers who entered Canada during that period). The programme started in January 1989 and ended in June 1993. Source: Statistics Canada.

family class. From this perspective, family-related migration accounted for 66 per cent of total migration in 1993 and 65 per cent in 1995. Employment-related immigration Immigrants for permanent settlement in Canada selected for their economic contribution fall into two main groups: i) workers destined for the labour market (skilled worker class); and ii) investors, entrepreneurs and selfemployed (business class). The skilled worker class includes what was previously called the independents class and the assisted relatives class and their dependants. Entry under the skilled worker class is based on a selection test consisting of criteria against which points are awarded, to determine whether they can become successfully established in Canada. The mix of specic selection criteria and their weighting pattern are designed to reect what is needed to succeed in Canadas labour market. In numerical terms the skilled worker class is far more important compared to the business class. For example in 1995 skilled workers accounted for 16 per cent of permanent migration whilst the business class only accounted less than 3 per cent. Hong Kong continues to be the leading source of immigrants in this regard with 20 per cent of the principal applicants in the skilled worker class and 34 per cent of the principal applicants in the business class in 1995. France and China are also relatively important in the skilled worker class, whilst Chinese Taipei and the Republic of Korea are important in the business immigrants class. The Philippines had been the main source country of skilled worker migrants until 1993 when their number decreased sharply. This was largely due to the fact that a large number of these have been re-classied into the live-in-caregiver class. The business immigration programme has been criticised for both the quantity and type of migrants it has attracted. For example, the business focus has been on small scale service activities such as shops and also real estate ventures rather than high technology, leading-edge or high-growth small businesses and companies. It is also argued that the programme has been open to abuse due to relaxed selection procedures and the fact that removal for non-compliance is costly and rare.
84

Table II.5.

Employment authorisations issued to temporary workers by category, 1993-1995, Canada

1993 1994 1995

1. Validated authorisations1 2. Exemptions2 Of which: Applications for landing (family class) Students Performing arts Professionals Employment under reciprocal agreements Signicant benets for Canada Service or repair persons Graduate assistants Refugee claims in process Applications for landing (designated class) Total (including Backlog)

51 981 132 244 26 13 9 6 5 4 4 6 11 5 009 540 049 280 280 557 292 491 654 709

43 398 129 930 21 12 10 7 4 5 4 5 12 5 621 875 157 443 410 356 182 848 073 704

42 203 94 968 15 12 10 7 4 4 4 4 4 3 296 661 021 785 981 979 886 324 307 025

184 225

173 328

137 171

1. The list of jobs which can be validated excludes unskilled jobs, those restricted to Canadian citizens and those with a high rate of unemployment. 2. Categories exempt from validation. The authorisations are usually delivered for 9 months. Source: Statistics Canada.

Temporary employment authorisations In addition to the economic component of the permanent immigration programme, foreign workers whose skills are in short supply or who can provide economic benets can be admitted to Canada on a temporary basis. Such authorisations are also issued to foreign students and to refugee claimants awaiting the disposition of their claim. In line with permanent immigration, the number of temporary immigrants has been falling. The number of employment authorisations in 1995 was 137 000, down for the third year in a row (see Table II.5). This is mainly due to the reduction in the Backlog Clearance programme as well as the relative weak economy in Canada, reducing the demand by employers for foreign workers. The United States is the single most important source country. The number of temporary workers in the service sector continued to shrink and accounted for around 8 per cent of all employment authorisations in 1995, down from almost 11 per cent in 1992. Those in managerial and sales occupations both increased which is likely to be due, in part, to more movement under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). Refugees and asylum seekers Canadian refugee inows, through both Convention and designated classes (persons who do not quite satisfy Convention refugee requirements, but are nonetheless admitted for humanitarian reasons) consists of three major sub-groups: government-assisted refugees selected abroad, privately sponsored refugees selected abroad, and asylum seekers who come to Canada and claim refugee status and who subsequently receive a positive determination on their claim. Asylum seekers are issued an employment authorisation for a period of nine months once certain requirements are met such as a credible basis for their claim and a medical examination. Refugees accounted for 13 per cent of total immigration in 1995 with a rise from 20 000 in 1994 to 27 000 with a projected gure for 1996 of 26 000. The recent refugee inows have been inuenced by the difculties in former Yugoslavia, as evidenced by Bosnia-Herzegovinas ranking at the top of both government and privately sponsored refugee classes. In addition, there has been a substantial rise in the number of successful asylum seekers, notably those from Sri Lanka. Foreign-born population and labour force The proportion of foreign born in Canada has remained fairly constant, however the composition of the foreign born is changing, reecting the changes in major source countries of immigrants. Over the 1986-91 period, the stock of immigrants in Canada grew from 15.6 per cent of the Canadian population to 16.2 per cent,
85

little different from the immigrant share in 1951 which was 15 per cent. More signicantly, the proportion of immigrants of European origin fell from 62 to 54 per cent while that of immigrants of Asian origin increased from 17 to 24 per cent over the same period. The foreign-born represented roughly 18.5 per cent of the labour force in Canada in 1991. In aggregate terms, their involvement and performance in the labour market as indicated by participation and unemployment rates is very similar to the Canadian born. The participation rates of the foreign born tend to be slightly lower but the unemployment rate is virtually the same. However, examination of participation and unemployment across various age groups indicates some differences between the foreign born and the Canadian born. For example, while the participation rates for immigrants 25-44 years is at the same level as the Canadian born (approximately 87 per cent) the difference is more signicant amongst the 45-64 year olds (72 for immigrants and 68 for Canadian born). The participation rate of immigrants who arrived between 1981 and 1991, however, is well below the average for all immigrants and Canadian born. This is conceivably related to the changing composition of the immigrant population towards those whose rst language is not English or French. In this regard, a recent study based on longitudinal data found that the gap in real earnings between those who are procient in Canadas ofcial languages and those who lack such prociency persists even after eight years of residence in Canada. Integration and naturalisation of immigrants The Canadian Government has in place several programmes designed to facilitate the integration of immigrants. The most important, at least in terms of funding, is the Language Instruction for Newcomers to Canada programme, LINC. There appears to be increasing commitment to this programme, in 1993/94 funding was about C$ 79 million and in 1995/96 funding estimates were C$ 95 million. The Adjustment Assistance Programme (AAP) provides assistance such as temporary accommodation and interpretation to persons admitted under the Annual Refugee Plan. Funding of the programme was cut from roughly C$ 64 million in 1993/94 to roughly C$ 45 million in 1994/95 with similar funding in 1995/96. Also, the Host Programme and the Immigrant Settlement and Adaptation Programme (ISAP) provide funds to communitybased organisations to assist newcomers to integrate (e.g. interpretation, employment-related services and understanding cultural differences). The combined funding for these programmes is about C$ 16 million mainly for the ISAP programme. A strong correlation has been observed between high immigration and high naturalisation rates in Canada. The increasing numbers of immigrants obtaining citizenship between 1988 and 1993 is consistent with the pattern of immigrant landings between 1985 and 1990, reecting a three-year residency requirement. Likewise, it is foreseen that higher immigration levels up to 1993 will bring about continued growth in the demand for citizenship until at least 1996. Illegal immigration Legislative changes which became effective on 10 July 1995 deny access to the refugee determination system for multiple or fraudulent refugee claimants or criminals. To combat the growth in illegal immigrant smuggling rings, Canada has recently carried out several measures including developing CO detectors for ship containers and enacting legislation to prevent the transportation of fraudulent documents by mail. Policy developments Until 1993, long-term planning of migrant intakes specied target immigration levels. With the change in government in 1993, this approach was revised and the target levels of immigration set out in the 1991 to 1995 plan were no longer used as a basis for policy. The plan for 1996 to 1999 is far more general in nature, specifying a series of largely qualitative goals rather than specic immigration levels and is accompanied by a reorganisation of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. Planned immigration levels are now only published for the forthcoming year and are specied in terms of ranges, rather than specic numbers of migrants. Many of the goals identied in the 1996 to 1999 plan can be placed under the rubric of increased efciency and cost effectiveness in migration policy, rather than any obvious shift in the general approach to migration. Signicant changes relating to the skilled worker class are likely in 1998 and there will be some changes relating to the business class in 1997. Shifts in policy approach will become clearer as details of these reforms emerge.
86

CZECH REPUBLIC
Introduction The Czech economy has experienced steady economic growth, declining ination and considerable growth in the private sector, which now accounts for over two-thirds of the national economy. The low level of unemployment (3 per cent) along with high real wages has served as a pull-factor for migrant workers from neighbouring countries. Since the beginning of the 1990s, the migration situation in the Czech Republic has been characterised by two trends: a decrease in the intensity of permanent emigration and strong growth in immigration. Permanent emigration Figures indicating permanent emigration have declined markedly since the beginning of the 1990s, in part due to changes in the nature of the data. As of 1991 statistics record only emigrants who have registered their departure from their permanent residence in the Czech Republic and returned their national identity card. Nevertheless, the economic and political changes in the Czech Republic along with the tightening of admission procedures in Western countries are likely to have resulted in a decline in actual emigration. In 1995, the number of Czech nationals who registered their departure was only 400, compared to more than 4 000 in 1990 (not including ows to the Slovak Republic). While between 1990 to 1993 the number of emigrants to the Slovak Republic was stable at a level of approximately 7 000 a year, after the split of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic (CSFR) in 1993, these ows declined considerably (see below). Permanent and temporary immigration The law on foreigners distinguishes between permanent residence permits, long-term residence and shortterm residence. Permanent residence permits are issued largely for family reunication, although in some cases these permits are granted for either humanitarian reasons or reasons of national interest. Long-term stay permits are most often issued for temporary work, study or business. They are never issued for longer than one year, although they are renewable with no limit on the number of renewals. Foreigners who request long-term residence usually do so for employment reasons (including self-employment or starting a business). Short-term stays are limited to six months. Czech national statistics measure immigration by the number of persons receiving permits of permanent residence. According to data from the Czech Statistical Ofce, a total of 10 500 foreigners received permanent residence permits in each of 1994 and 1995, of which about 40 per cent were from the Slovak Republic (see Table II.6). The proportion from the Slovak Republic has changed over time. In 1992, when inows peaked at
Table II.6. Permanent migration ows,1 1990-1995, Czech Republic
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Inows Arrivals (excluding those from Slovak Republic) Arrivals from Slovak Republic Outows3 Departures (excluding those to Slovak Republic) Departures to Slovak Republic Net migration Net migration ows (excluding those between the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic) Net migration ows between the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic
1.

2 338 10 073 4 113 7 674

5 762 8 334 3 896 7 324

7 332 11 740 468 6 823

5 624 7 276 192 7 232

6 131 4 076 209 56

6 695 3 845 401 140

1 775 2 399

1 866 1 010

6 864 4 917

5 432 44

5 922 4 020

6 294 3 705

Statistics on migration ows are records of change of permanent residence (including nationals). Even before the split of the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic, ows between the two Republics were recorded separately. 2. Permanent residents who had their change of address registered. 3. Czech and foreign citizens leaving the Czech Republic permanently are supposed to report their departure to the authorities. Figures represent the total number of registered departures. Source: Czech Statistical Ofce.

87

Table II.7. Foreigners who hold a permanent or a long-term residence permit in the Czech Republic by nationality, 1992-19951
Permanent residence permits2 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 Long-term residence permits3 1993 1994 1995 1992 Permanent and long-term residence permits 1993 1994 1995

Slovak Republic Ukraine Poland Vietnam Germany Former Yugoslavia United States Russia Bulgaria China Austria United Kingdom Romania Greece New Independent States Other Total
1. 2. 3. 4.

10

2 3 2

.. .. 420 570 757 883 651 .. 284 23 .. .. 4 350 848 725

12 1 1 1 2

2 4 3

.. .. 580 004 966 404 015 .. 877 24 .. .. 55 016 650 850

2 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 2

960 563 910 083 272 033 234 734 632 35 575 91 614 1 569 .. 4 163

6 2 12 1 1 1 1 1 2

540 120 071 469 696 275 427 670 686 24 657 142 804 1 117 .. 4 859

2 2 1

1 5

.. .. 233 078 763 499 832 .. 587 331 .. .. 186 110 689 349

8 6 1 3 1 1 2

8 10

.. .. 655 785 976 696 621 .. 172 543 .. .. 489 189 883 061

13 12 8 8 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1

818 667 111 550 923 993 256 877 140 872 300 274 749 328 .. 10 372 71 230

33 26 10 12 3 3 2 2 1 4 1 1

185 038 982 744 857 549 988 717 596 186 566 798 824 456 .. 13 574

12 2 1 2 1 2 1

2 5 8

.. .. 653 648 520 382 483 0 871 354 .. .. 190 460 537 074

21 7 2 5 2 4 2

2 13 13

.. .. 235 789 942 100 636 0 049 567 .. .. 544 205 533 911

16 14 20 9 4 4 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 1

778 230 021 633 195 026 490 611 772 907 875 365 363 897 .. 14 535

39 28 23 14 5 4 4 4 4 4 2 1 1 1

725 158 053 213 553 824 415 387 282 210 223 940 628 573 .. 18 433

24 515

30 441

32 468

38 557

16 657

46 070

120 060

41 172

76 511

103 698

158 617

31 December of each year. Former CSFR in 1992. Permanent permits are issued in the case of family reunication, on humanitarian grounds or for foreign policy interests. Long-term residence permits are valid for one year and may be renewed. Up to 1 January 1993, Slovak permanent residents were registered in the National Population Register. Since the split of the Czech and Slovak Republics, Slovak citizens residing in the Czech Republic are subject to the same rules as any other foreign resident and they are registered in the Central Register of Foreigners. Source: Ministry of the Interior.

88

19 000, the Slovak Republic accounted for 60 per cent and in 1995 for 30 per cent. The stock of permanent residence permit holders is steadily increasing, from 24 500 in 1992 to 39 000 in 1995. Most permanent residence permit holders are from Poland, the Slovak Republic, Bulgaria and Ukraine (see Table II.7). The stock of foreigners with long-term residence permits has also been growing rapidly: 9 200 in 1991; 46 000 in 1993; 71 000 in 1994. In 1995, the number of these permits jumped to 120 000 (145 000 as of June 1996). As mentioned above, long-term residence permit holders generally come for employment purposes and the most important groups are from the Slovak Republic and Ukraine with roughly one quarter each, and Vietnam and Poland with roughly 10 per cent each. The total number of foreigners with either long-term or permanent resident permits has doubled since 1994 to reach close to 200 000 in 1996. Recently a small but rising proportion of both permanent and long-term residents have come from OECD countries, especially the United States, Germany and Austria. The special case of migration between the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic Permanent ows and permanent residence permits During the three-year period before the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic became separate Republics (as of 1 January 1993), data indicate that permanent outows from the Czech Republic to the Slovak Republic were roughly 7 000 each year. In 1994 a sharp decline was registered with only 56 Czechs going to the Slovak Republic. Inows of permanent immigrants from the Slovak Republic dropped substantially in 1994 in comparison to the levels reached in 1992 and 1993, around 12 000 and 8 000 respectively. In June 1996, around 8 000 Slovak citizens were holders of permanent residence permits in the Czech Republic and 36 000 were holders of longterm residence permits. These low gures are mainly explained by the fact that a large number of nationals from the Slovak Republic have obtained Czech nationality (see below). Labour migration While other foreigners need a residence permit and a work permit, under the Treaty on the Mutual Employment of Citizens signed by the Czech and Slovak Republics in October 1992, no work permit is needed as nationals of each Republic have free access to both labour markets. However, Czech employers are obliged to register Slovak workers in the Czech Labour Ofces. Since the break-up of the Federal state, the number of Slovak workers has been increasing steadily from 23 000 in 1993 to 67 000 as of June 1996 (see Table II.8).

Table II.8.

Stock of foreign workers in the Czech Republic by country of origin, 1990-19961

Thousands
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

Registered foreign workers Of which: Ukraine Poland United States Germany United Kingdom Bulgaria Russia Romania Former Yugoslavia Vietnam Hungary Slovak workers3
1. 2.

95.5 .. 54.8 .. .. .. .. .. .. 3.0 34.0 .. ..

29.8 .. 16.8 .. .. .. 0.3 .. 0.1 1.9 9.8 0.3 ..

14.5 .. 7.2 .. .. .. 0.1 .. 0.0 1.3 5.5 0.1 ..

28.2 7.7 10.6 1.2 0.7 0.9 0.7 1.3 0.5 1.9 0.6 .. 23.3

32.9 12.7 8.7 1.5 1.1 1.1 0.6 0.6 0.7 1.9 0.4 .. 39.2

52.5 26.7 12.1 1.7 1.5 1.2 0.8 0.7 0.8 .. .. .. 59.3

67.3 38.1 12.3 1.7 1.3 1.3 0.8 0.7 0.6 .. .. .. 67.0

Former CSFR until 1992. Data refer to the stock on the 31 December of each year, except in 1992 and 1996 (30 June). A foreigner can be employed only as the holder of a residence permit and an employment permit. A written offer by the employer is needed to apply for a work permit. These rules do not apply to Slovak citizens. 3. Under the Treaty on Mutual Employment of Citizens signed by the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic in October 1992, nationals of the two Republics have free access to both labour markets. The estimates of the number of Slovak citizens are made by the local labour ofces. Sources: Federal Ministry of the Interior and Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs.

89

Naturalisations In January 1993 a new law on the acquisition of the citizenship of the Czech Republic came into force. In accordance with this law Slovak citizens living on the territory of the Czech Republic prior to the separation of the CSFR could opt for Czech nationality until 30 June 1994. In total, in 1993 and 1994, around 375 000 citizens of the Slovak Republic obtained Czech nationality. During the same period a total of 2 800 other foreigners were granted Czech nationality. Refugees and asylum seekers From mid-1990 to mid-1995, around 9 500 asylum seekers from 42 countries were accepted into refugee camps on the territory of the Czech Republic (before 1993 most camps in the CSFR were established in what is now the Czech Republic). In 1994, of the 1 100 foreigners who applied for refugee status only 9 per cent were accepted. As in other years, about one half of the applicants were Bulgarian and a further 40 per cent were from the New Independent States (NIS), mainly Armenians. In 1995 the number of asylum seekers (1 400) increased but the proportion granted refugee status decreased yet again (4 per cent). Asylum seekers from Afghanistan predominated. In addition to foreigners applying for refugee status, some asylum-seekers eeing the war in former Yugoslavia were granted a temporary protection status. However, as of May 1994, the conditions for acceptance were made more restrictive and by 31 December 1994, the number registered a decline from 2 100 to 1 800. By 31 December 1995 around 1 300 persons in the Czech Republic had been granted temporary stay. Illegal and transit migration Although the number of immigrants for whom the Czech Republic is a nal destination has increased, it remains a transit country. Foreigners passing through the Czech Republic originate mainly from Central and Eastern European countries, the NIS and certain Asian countries. The majority of them enter legally, as false tourists. A smaller percentage pass themselves off as asylum-seekers or enter illegally. In 1993, the Department of Foreign and Border Police Services of the Ministry of the Interior recorded 43 000 detentions at the borders of the Czech Republic. In 1994, the number detained declined to 20 000 and stayed at the same level in 1995. The majority of detentions involved citizens of former Yugoslavia, followed by Bulgarians, Romanians and Ukrainians. The number of foreigners banned from residence, due to violations of Czech law declined from 16 500 in 1993 to 8 200 in 1995. The recent decrease in illegal and transit migration can be attributed, in large part, to changes as of 15 January 1994 in Czech visa policies towards some countries of the Balkan Peninsula and the NIS. In addition, the recent adoption of a new asylum law in Germany and the conclusion of readmission agreements with the Czech Republic, and also with Germany, Austria, the Slovak Republic, Poland, Hungary, and Romania, have also played a role in the decline. Labour migration Employment of Czech citizens abroad The available data on labour migration show that after growing rapidly in the early 1990s, in 1994 and the rst half of 1995, labour migration of Czech nationals has declined signicantly. Seasonal migration to Germany dropped from 23 000 in 1992 to 12 000 in 1993 and to roughly 3 400 in both 1994 and 1995. The number of commuters to both Germany and Austria is now estimated at 10 000 daily, half its number in 1993. Similarly, the numbers of Czechs employed abroad on the basis of bilateral agreements with Germany have not reached set quotas. The decline in labour migration outows can be explained by three phenomena. First, two of the main labour receiving countries of Czech workers, Germany and Austria, recently adopted new regulations governing the employment of foreigners from non-EU countries in industry and construction. Second, recent surveys indicate a lower level of interest in work abroad among the Czech population, most likely due to improvement in the domestic labour market. Finally, some enterprises in other countries which formerly employed Czech workers have relocated to the Czech Republic due to lower costs of labour.
90

Employment of foreigners The most common forms of legal employment of foreigners in the Czech Republic are individual work permits and permits issued within the framework of business contracts. A foreigner can be employed only as the holder of a residence permit (long-term or permanent) and a work permit. A written offer by the employer is needed to apply for a work permit. According to the Employment Service of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, the stock of valid work permit holders in December 1995 was around 52 500, compared to 28 200 in 1993 (citizens of the Slovak Republic, who do not need a work permit, are not included, see above). The largest increase was in the number of Ukrainians who now account for almost 50 per cent. Poles are the next largest group with 23 per cent (see Table II.8). Most migrants from the eastern European countries worked in labour intensive sectors, especially in the construction sector. Among foreign workers from Western Europe and overseas countries, on the other hand, language teachers, managers and consultants predominated. Foreigners who wish to be self-employed must obtain a business authorisation. Czech law currently has few regulations for these permits and this channel appears to be one frequently used by certain groups of immigrants to enter the Czech labour market without having to obtain a permit. According to statistics from the Ministry of Industry and the Economy, roughly 45 000 foreigners (including Slovaks) hold this type of authorisation. These foreigners are permitted to engage in economic activity (with or without members of their family). By nationality, the Vietnamese are the largest group followed by the citizens of the Slovak Republic and Ukraine. Most of the activities involve trade in consumer goods. The Czech authorities would like to make the granting of these authorisations more selective, not only to better regulate the number of self-employed foreign workers, but also to better control the nature of their activity. Policy developments Czech policy makers are seeking to harmonise migration policy with that of European Union member states. In January 1994, an amendment of the 1990 Refugee Act entered into force. One of the main purposes has been to speed up asylum procedures in cases when the application is manifestly unfounded. In April 1996, a second amendment was passed which annulled the former ve-year limit of residence for refugees and made it unlimited. The 1992 law on the stay of foreigners was amended in both September 1994 and April 1996. The objective of both amendments was to better dene and tighten-up rules concerning foreigners, in particular, for those who violate laws or human rights in the Czech Republic. Other changes included stricter regulations for non-visa holders once in the Czech Republic, the possibility of long-term stay permits losing their validity upon termination of the employment and stricter means testing requirements for renewals of short-term stays. Considerable effort has been devoted to the regulation of labour ows both to and from the Czech Republic. Bilateral labour agreements have been developed with Germany, Poland, the Slovak Republic, Vietnam and Ukraine, and are in progress with Russia and Mongolia. One interesting aspect of the recently signed contracts between the Czech Republic and Vietnam (November 1994) and the Ukraine (March 1996), is that it includes an annual quota for workers from each country. Concerning Czech workers abroad, an association agreement between European Union countries and the Czech Republic was signed on 19 December 1994 and entered in force on 1 February 1995. It guarantees workers of the Czech Republic the same conditions of work, remuneration and dismissal as nationals of those countries.

DENMARK
Introduction The migration situation in Denmark has been relatively stable over the past two years with only slight increases in both the foreign population and the foreign labour force. Asylum seeker ows declined signicantly, in large part due to fewer applications from nationals from former Yugoslavia in 1994 and 1995. However, a slight increase in the number of asylum seekers was seen in 1996. Immigration and emigration Danish statistics on resident foreigners are based on population registers and cover foreigners permanently resident in Denmark (persons with dual nationality are considered to be Danish). Asylum seekers, persons who are provisionally resident and other foreign temporary residents are excluded. Long-term immigration into
91

Denmark is dened as actual residence for more than one year. Thus, the immigration statistics for a particular calendar year are available, at the earliest, one year after the end of the migration year when it can be determined if persons who entered during the preceding year actually stayed more than one year. Other persons such as asylum seekers and war refugees with temporary residence are not included, even if they have been resident for more than one year. Flows of long-term immigrants (including returning Danes) into Denmark have remained stable since 1990 with around 29 000 annually (see Table II.9). In 1994, approximately half were returning Danes. Foreign immigrants were mainly from Europe (including other Nordic countries) and Asia. Germany and the United Kingdom predominated among EU countries and Iraq among Asian countries. Since 1991, the number of Asians has declined by 30 per cent with the numbers from Europe and other Nordic countries compensating for the decline. It should be noted however, that since most of the refugees with temporary residence were not granted asylum status until 1995, the number of long-term migrants may well show a substantial increase in subsequent data. Emigration ows from Denmark (including both Danes and foreigners) remained stable over the period 1990-94 at roughly 17 000. Almost 90 per cent of those who leave have Danish citizenship or citizenship of an EU or Nordic country. Residence permits granted Residence permits are required by the following groups: persons entering through family reunication; European Union nationals; refugees, and employment-related immigrants. Nordic citizens do not need a residence permit. The number of residence permits granted in 1995 jumped to 37 900 from 20 300 in 1994, in large part due to strong growth in the number of permits given to refugees (see Table II.9). The introduction of stricter family reunication rules in 1992 has led to a levelling off in the number of permits granted in the category of family reunication. Asylum seekers and refugees Whereas in 1992 and 1993 Denmark experienced close to triple the number of asylum seekers of previous years, with 14 000 in each year, in 1994 the number fell to approximately 6 700. The gure again dropped in 1995 to 5 100, although it increased slightly in 1996 to 5 900. The largest groups are from Somalia and former Yugoslavia. In 1994, Denmark introduced visas for nationals from Bosnia-Herzegovina and a number of African countries and created a new channel for asylum seekers to apply directly as refugees to a Danish Government ofce in Zagreb (3 332 applied in 1994). The number of asylum seekers accepted as refugees (all categories except provisional residence) jumped in 1995 to 20 300 after a slight drop from 3 400 in 1993 to 2 800 in 1994. This is because a large number of people from former Yugoslavia with a temporary residence permit were entitled to apply for asylum after two years of residence in Denmark. The majority of them have now been granted permanent residence as refugees. Although no precise statistics are available in Denmark, it is estimated that the acceptance rate was about 40 per cent in 1995 which is signicantly lower compared to the level of 70 to 80 per cent during the 1980s. Foreign population The number of foreign citizens in Denmark has grown continuously from 108 000 in 1984 to 196 700 in 1994 and 222 700 in 1995, to reach 4.2 per cent of the total population. The increase in 1995 was mainly brought about by persons from former Yugoslavia who were granted permanent residence after two years of stay. Onethird of the total is from Nordic or European Union countries and North America. Turks and nationals from former Yugoslavia account for 16 per cent and 13 per cent respectively. Immigrants and their descendants In 1994 Danmarks Statistik introduced new statistics on both immigrants and their descendants which differ from the statistics which count foreign citizens only. The new denitions take into account two categories: immigrants born abroad to parents with either foreign citizenship or who were born abroad themselves; and, people born in Denmark with both parents either born abroad or descendants of immigrants themselves. These new statistics count almost 92 000 more people from other backgrounds than the population registers in 1995 (see Table II.9).
92

Table II.9.

Current gures on ows and stocks of migrants, foreign population and labour force in Denmark
Thousands
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Long-term immigration by nationality Denmark Other Nordic countries European Union Other countries in Europe Africa Asia Other regions Long-term emigration by nationality1 Denmark Other Nordic countries European Union Other countries in Europe Africa Asia Other regions

29.2 11.7 1.9 2.6 3.8 1.6 5.0 2.6 17.7 12.5 1.3 1.6 0.5 0.2 0.9 0.7 21.7 4.0 1.7 9.0 2.4 4.6 4.6 1.3 0.7 0.6 0.3 2.2 1.0 0.3 0.6 169.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 5.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

29.1 12.2 1.8 2.7 2.9 1.6 5.5 2.4 17.4 12.6 1.4 1.4 0.6 0.2 0.8 0.6 21.3 3.8 2.3 8.6 2.4 4.3 13.9 9.9 9.0 1.4 0.9 2.0 0.9 0.4 0.6 180.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 5.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. 5 180.6 2 910.3 269.5 2 069.9 300.5 270.4 2 270.3

28.2 12.8 1.9 3.0 2.3 2.2 4.3 1.8 17.1 12.1 1.3 1.4 0.6 0.2 0.8 0.6 17.6 3.4 2.8 5.6 2.1 3.7 14.3 9.9 8.7 2.0 1.0 1.6 0.7 0.1 0.8 189.0 61.3 50.3 77.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. 5.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 5 196.6 2 908.3 261.2 2 028.0 323.4 295.7 2 288.3

28.9 13.4 2.5 3.7 2.2 2.2 3.5 1.5 17.7 12.7 1.3 1.6 0.5 0.2 0.7 0.7 20.3 2.8 4.3 6.7 2.1 4.3 6.7 2.1 0.7 2.4 1.6 1.6 0.5 0.3 0.6 196.7 65.0 52.8 78.9 283.7 36.8 51.9 74.3 84.5 36.2 5.7 0.4 0.3 1.9 2.0 0.3 0.8 5 215.7 2 896.0 247.6 2 051.4 278.9 318.1 2 319.8

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 37.9 20.3 3.8 6.8 2.2 4.7 5.1 1.2 0.8 1.7 1.2 1.6 0.5 0.2 0.6 222.7 72.6 68.6 81.6 314.6 38.3 53.4 93.9 89.6 39.3 5.3 0.3 0.2 1.5 2.2 0.3 0.7 .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

Grants of residence permits, by category2 Refugee EU provisions Family reunication Employment Others Asylum seekers by region of origin Europe Of which: Former Yugoslavia Africa Of which: Somalia Asia Of which: Iraq Sri Lanka Other regions Stock of foreigners, immigrants and descendants3 Foreigners Refugees Europe and North America Other regions Immigrants and descendants, by region of origin Nordic countries EU Other European countries Asia Other regions Acquisition of Danish nationality, by region of origin Nordic countries EU Other European countries Asia Africa Other regions Total population, by labour force status In the labour force Self-employed Wage and salary workers Unemployed Not stated Out of the labour force
1. 2.

A long-term immigrant/emigrant is dened as a person who has lived in/out of the country for over one year. All foreigners (except Nordic countries citizens) who want to reside for more than 3 months in Denmark need a residence permit. The duration of the permit depends on the reasons for granting it but it generally does not exceed two years. 3. An immigrant is dened in Danish statistics as a foreigner or a Danish citizen born abroad to parents either born abroad or born in Denmark. A descendant is a person born in Denmark with parents who are either immigrants or descendants of immigrants. Source: Danmarks statistik.

93

Naturalisations In 1994, around 5 700 persons acquired Danish citizenship, a level similar to the preceding three years. The number fell slightly in 1995 to 5 300. Whereas in previous years comparatively few Turkish and former Yugoslavian citizens were naturalised, naturalisations among these groups increased signicantly in 1994, although they dropped again in 1995. It is thought that for Turks the increase in 1994 might have been a reaction to stricter family reunication rules. In 1995, the number of naturalisations among Africans and Asians are still stable around 6 and 42 per cent respectively of the total number of naturalisations. Foreigners and the labour market The Danish labour force in 1994 counts 2.9 million persons (see Table II.9) of which 2.7 per cent were foreigners, a signicantly smaller share than the foreign share of the total population. This difference is often attributed to a higher proportion of children among the foreign population, a lower participation rate of women in the labour market, and adults pursuing further education, including language training. Recent research on integration and mobility of ethnic minorities has pointed to the duration of residence in Denmark as a key factor for labour market integration. The unemployment rate has been increasing in Denmark for the last decade, and even faster for immigrants and refugees than for Danes. However, between 1994 and 1995 the total number of unemployed in Denmark declined by almost 15 per cent and among foreign citizens by 4 per cent. Those who arrived from non-EU countries (Former Yugoslavia, Turkey), Africa (Somalia) and Asia (Pakistan) as refugees are more likely to be unemployed and also account for 70 per cent of the foreign unemployment in Denmark. Generally, while those from the Nordic countries, the EU and North America have similar employment patterns when compared to Danish workers, those from Turkey, Pakistan and Asia are over represented in the self-employed category. Policy developments All ve Nordic countries in the Nordic free circulation area signed a co-operation agreement with the Schengen countries in December 1996. The free circulation area will thus be extended from Nordic countries to the Schengen area after ratication by the Danish Parliament. The issue of the integration of foreigners is receiving growing attention in Denmark. In June 1994, modications were introduced to improve the situation of refugees from former Yugoslavia. These included more language and other training, better housing, increased employment opportunities and more leisure activities. According to a new Act in January 1995, most of the Bosnian war refugees will be granted residence and entitled to the same integration programmes as recognised refugees (housing, social benets, education and work permits). In addition, a detailed plan of action to dismantle labour market barriers to immigrants and refugees was introduced in Autumn 1994. Parallel to these efforts, some municipalities have introduced limitations on how many refugees or immigrants are allowed to stay in certain urban districts to avoid high concentrations of immigrant groups. In 1995 several changes were made to the Aliens Act concerning asylum seekers. First, a procedure was introduced to enable applications to be refused if unfounded or based on insufcient information. This has not only resulted in a decline in the number of asylum seekers since 1994 but also contributed to streamlining the administrative procedure and curtailing the number of applications from countries considered as safe countries. Second, new restrictions on the introduction of new evidence were implemented. Third, polices were developed to allow for the imprisonment of asylum seekers and for a new procedure to register asylum seekers through a computer nger-printing system. In addition, the Danish government has decided to x a quota for residence permits given to persons from former Yugoslavia.

FINLAND
Introduction The recession at the beginning of the 1990s and the disruption in the important trade relationship between Finland and the Soviet Union adversely affected the Finnish economy. However, the export-driven growth strategy started to bear fruit at the beginning of 1994, showing an increase in both exports and production for the
94

domestic market. In 1995, the recovery lost momentum as foreign demand weakened. The unemployment rate declined slightly in 1995, but was still high at 17.2 per cent. Despite the fact that migration ows into Finland have levelled-off, the foreign population continues to grow. The Finnish Government has recently increased its efforts to promote the integration of foreigners, in particular taking steps to combat their high unemployment rate. At the end of 1995, the government established a commission to discuss future policies regarding immigration and asylum. Immigration and emigration Between 1989 and 1991 Finland saw a rapid rise in immigration (including returning Finnish nationals). The increase was largely due to inows of refugees and returning Finns from Russia and Estonia (many were ethnic Finns, known as Ingrians). Since 1991, however, there has been a general downward trend in the number of inows of both Finns and foreign nationals. In 1994 it declined to 11 600 of which 4 000 were Finns. The year 1995 registered a slight increase with 12 200, mostly due to increasing numbers of returning Finns. Overall, the largest inows are from Russia followed by those from Estonia and Sweden. Among non-European immigrants, Somalis predominate. Emigration (including both Finns and foreigners) jumped from 6 400 in 1993 to almost 9 000 in both 1994 and 1995, largely due to growing numbers of emigrating Finns. Refugees and asylum seekers Finland accepted roughly 1 400 refugees in each year in 1994 and 1995, less than half the number of refugees accepted in 1993. Contrary to 1994 when Africa was the most important sending region, in 1995, Eastern Europe was the most important sending region. Refugees from the Middle East were signicant in both years. The number is regulated by the yearly quota decided upon by the Finnish Parliament. It was set at 500 in 1994 and at 1 000 both in 1995 and in 1996, half being targeted to refugees from former Yugoslavia. Approximately 13 000 refugees were living in Finland as of December 1995. Arrivals of asylum seekers have declined sharply from over 2 000 in 1993 to about 840 in both 1994 and 1995 partly due to a 1993 amendment to the Aliens Act which provided for the rejection of applications from asylum seekers originating from safe countries. The rst list of safe countries comprised the EU and EFTA countries, Poland, the Slovak Republic and the Czech Republic and was later extended to include Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Russia and Hungary. More than 670 decisions on asylum were made by the Ministry of the Interior in 1995, of which about 40 per cent were refusals. Asylum seekers, especially from Somalia, tend to stay in Finland even if they were refused. Their rising number has become of concern to the Government. Foreign population The foreign population continued to grow. In 1995 the number reached 68 600, more than ve times greater than in 1980 (see Table II.10). The share in the total population remains relatively small at 1.3 per cent. The single most important group of immigrants is from Russia (15 900) followed by Estonia (8 400) and Sweden (7 000). The numbers from Africa and Asia are growing rapidly. Approximately half of them are women. The average age of foreigners residing in Finland is generally younger than the average age of Finns, with more than 80 per cent of foreigners under 44 years of age. Labour migration At the end of 1994 more than 12 000 foreigners held a work permit (not required for Nordic citizens and ethnic Finns), although the number declined to 8 000 in 1995 (see Table II.11). Western Europeans and North Americans mainly work in professional, managerial and technical jobs whereas other nationals are mostly involved in lower-skill jobs. The integration of foreigners into Finnish society is hampered by a high unemployment rate. The unemployment rate for foreign labour stands at about 34 per cent in the country as a whole and as high as 60 per cent in the capital region where more than half the foreign population resides. In January 1996, the number of unemployed foreigners totalled 12 700. The unemployment rate of foreigners reached 47 per cent as of January 1996 whereas that of Finns was 19 per cent. Nationals from Russia and Estonia accounted for roughly half of the unemployed foreigners. The highest rate was found among nationals from Iraq, Somalia, Iran, former Yugoslavia and
95

Table II.10. Foreign population1 in Finland by region of origin in 1985, 1990-1995

Region 1985 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Nordic countries Other European countries Asia Africa North America Latin America Oceania Stateless Unknown Total

5 780 6 960 1 219 429 1 619 271 200 342 214 17 034

7 10 3 1 1

143 637 002 247 840 406 285 369 1 326

7 16 4 2 1

417 601 276 795 989 475 335 391 1 531

7 19 5 3 2

459 719 277 497 066 500 357 375 1 596

7 26 7 4 2

545 067 248 387 210 554 366 401 1 309

7 32 9 6 2

804 914 861 265 222 678 389 999 880

8 36 11 6 2

153 891 302 970 321 751 397 1 064 717

26 255

35 810

40 846

50 087

62 012

68 566

1. Data are from population registers and refer to the population on 31 December of the year indicated. Source: Central Statistical Ofce of Finland, Central Population Register.

Table II.11. Number of valid work permits1 by region of birth, 1993-1995, Finland
1993 1994 1995

NIS2 and Baltic States EEA countries Africa Asia North America South America Others Total
1.

6 339 901 649 990 315 136 2 515 11 845

8 520 39 681 796 305 38 1 845 12 224

4 585 306 645 961 393 82 1 066 8 038

Total number of permits issued. Note that one person can be granted several work permits per year. Nordic citizens and ethnic Finns do not need a work permit. 2. New Independent States. Source: Ministry of the Interior.

Vietnam, who mostly arrived as refugees. In April 1995, the Ministry of Labour established a working group to develop measures to help immigrants enter the labour market. Policy developments There have been several important policy developments in Finland concerning foreigners in 1994 and 1995. One change of note is that in 1995 the constitution of Finland was amended to extend coverage of fundamental rights to foreign nationals. Regarding the employment of foreigners, an amended Aliens Act came into force in March 1994, which implemented a new procedure for issuing work permits to employers. This procedure links the issuing of work permits to foreigners with the local labour market situation. The employers must consult the local employment ofce before either recruiting foreign workers or extending their work permit. In order to further the integration of foreigners already in Finland, the Government has started a four-year (1995-1999) project called pathway to employment for the socially excluded nanced by the European Social Fund. This project focuses on specic measures to help those who are at risk of being marginalised and establishes new co-operation between the various authorities and organisations concerned. In addition, a pilot project for improving immigrants employment situation through establishing a human capital database was launched in the Helsinki region in 1995. The database contains information on an immigrants educational background, vocational and language skills and other interests and is designed to help small and medium-sized enterprises recruit immigrants with special skills. The Ministry of Labour has taken action against discrimination in hiring and at the work place. The amended Criminal Code in September 1995 states that it is against the law to practise discrimination in announcing a job vacancy or in recruitment as well as at the work place on the basis of race, nationality, ethnic origin, language, sex, age, family relations, religion or political opinion. In addition, the advisory board for
96

refugees and immigration affairs has developed measures to promote co-operation between government bodies, the media and non-governmental organisations as well as political parties and decision makers in order to prevent discrimination. In March 1995 a new Directorate of Immigration was established in the Ministry of the Interior. The Ministry is responsible for arrangements concerning immigration and residence, asylum and Finnish citizenship. The Directorate will specically handle individual permits and applications for asylum and citizenship. All ve Nordic countries in the Nordic free circulation area signed a co-operation agreement with the Schengen countries in December 1996. The free circulation area will thus be extended from Nordic countries to the Schengen area after ratication by the Finnish Parliament. Finally, Finland reached an agreement with Lettonia and Estonia on the deportation of illegal foreigners. If an illegal foreigner coming from or through these countries is found in Finland, he can now be sent back to the originating country. In addition, regional co-operation between Nordic countries and the Baltic States is currently being reinforced in order to establish effective measures to prevent trafcking in illegal migrants.

FRANCE
Introduction Legal migration from countries outside the European Union has declined sharply in the last two years. Family reunication remains the main channel of entry, while the inow of workers and asylum seekers has fallen signicantly. As a result of the recent changes in the legislation on the acquisition of French nationality, the 1994 naturalisation gures were exceptional (over 126 000), mainly because the authorities were processing pending cases quickly before all the naturalisation provisions came into force in 1995. Although down on 1994, the number of naturalisations in 1995 was far higher than the gures for the years 1990 to 1993. There have been new developments in immigrant integration policy and recent measures have improved living and working conditions in distressed urban areas (Urban Regeneration Pact Pacte de relance pour la ville) and facilitated the entry of immigrants into employment. Permanent immigration Foreigners granted permanent immigrant status are entitled to remain in France for at least one year (asylum seekers and students are not included in this category). In 1995, OMI (Ofce des migrations internationales ) recorded 56 700 new permanent foreign immigrants, 7 900 of these from the European Economic Area (EEA). The downward trend that started in 1993 was conrmed markedly in 1995. In addition, OFPRA, (Ofce fran c ais de protection des r efugi es et apatrides) granted refugee status to some 4 800 people in 1995. The ows of permanent immigrants do not allow all of the inows from EU countries to be taken into account. According to some estimates, the recorded ows might represent only half of actual inows from these countries. Permanent immigration inows are classied under four categories (see Table II.12). The main category is family reunication (55 per cent), which accounted for a stable share compared to 1994. The category of workers, both wage earners and self-employed, has continued to fall since 1993 and in 1995 represented some 25 per cent of all registered ows. People granted refugee status represented only 8 per cent of ows. Finally, the fourth category is immigration to France to visit family members (12 per cent of total ows in 1995). Immigrants in this category have visitor status and renewable residence permits valid for at least one year. There are three types of inows in the family reunication category: foreign family members of French nationals, family members of foreigners (which is family reunication in the strict sense of the term) and family members of refugees. In 1995, for the rst time, the gures for family reunication involving foreign family members of French nationals were higher than for family members of foreigners. In the latter category, wives joining their foreign husbands accounted for 80 per cent of inows, whilst there was a balanced gender distribution for inows of foreign family members of French nationals. In 1995 the ow of immigrants for employment, wage earners and self-employed, was more than 25 per cent down on the previous year, the rst time since 1987 that there had been such a fall. The largest numbers were workers from Europe. The proportion of women migrant workers from non-European Union countries was steady at around 30 per cent. The breakdown of inows of foreign workers by economic sector continues to be marked by the predominance of the tertiary sector: some 75 per cent of new wage earners nd their rst job in services. The decline in
97

Table II.12. Immigration ows by category and region of origin, 1994 and 1995, France
Numbers and percentage change (1995/1994)
1994 Europe Total Numbers % Numbers % Numbers % Numbers % Numbers % Numbers % Numbers %
1

1995 Former USSR Africa Asia America Others Total

Permanent immigration Family reunication Family members of French nationals Family members of foreigners Family members of refugees Workers Wage earners Self-employed Visitors Refugees Other Temporary immigration Asylum seekers Students Holders of a provisional work permit2 Trainees Total
1.

69 37 16 20 19 18 1 5 7 46 25 16 4

289 678 056 646 776 553 349 204 188 025 46 940 964 309 063 604

12 431 2 293 1 455 725 113 8 421 8 356 65 767 949 1 7 674 5 680 1 211 697 86 20 105

26 19 8 47 15 29 29 7 19 38 67 14 13 17 11 42 22

1 007 533 439 80 14 126 120 6 245 103 1 038 372 337 305 24 2 045

3 2 19 52 40 25 26 14 25 61 3 20 39 13 41

24 18 10 8

253 792 367 281 144 2 276 1 752 524 2 284 888 13

15 17 1 31 16 21 15 36 17 10 68 28 36 20 3 15 20

11 6 2 3 1 1 1 2

427 586 249 910 427 153 102 51 037 649 2

23 16 20 29 12 40 41 24 6 34 2 8 9 9 51 13

7 3 1 1

366 243 878 315 50 2 044 1 735 309 1 964 115 5 451 330 3 207 1 785 129 12 817

7 7 1 16 4 24 28 17 47 69 5 46 2 38 2 2

255 120 70 49 1 42 41 1 55 38 264 86 93 82 3 519

26 65 36 69 83 22 23 0 20 53 11 50 72 26 50 19

56 31 16 14 14 13 6 4 40 20 15 4

739 567 458 360 749 062 106 956 352 742 16 442 415 057 526 444

18 16 3 30 3 28 29 21 22 32 65 14 21 8 11 26 16

13 525 6 375 6 136 885 129 37 778

12 490 7 572 4 073 772 73 23 917

98

116 229

97 181

Europeen Economic Area (EEA) nationals are not registed by the Ofce des migrations internationales (OMI). However, permanent wage and salary workers are nonetheless counted through employment registrations submitted by employers. Immigration of permanent wage and salary workers who are nationals of the EEA represents 7 917 persons in 1995. 2. Provisional work permits (APT) are granted for a 9 month period and are renewable. Sources: Ofce des migrations internationales (OMI); Ofce fran c ais de protection des r efugi es et apatrides (OFPRA).

the number of permanent immigrant workers entering France in 1994 and 1995 has more specically involved unskilled and semi-skilled workers, while inows of managerial and technical staff continue to rise. In 1995, the latter group represented approximately 40 per cent of new immigrant workers (compared with 25 per cent in 1993 and 1994). The number of people granted refugee status fell by a third in 1995, thus conrming the downward trend that started at the beginning of the 1990s. The refugees mainly come from Asia, particularly Sri Lanka. The number of adult refugees resident in France stood at 152 000 at the beginning of 1995. Between 1994 and 1995, visitor inows increased by some 23 per cent. This increase can largely be explained by the fact that some family members are unable to meet family reunication requirements. Permanent immigration by region of origin Flows of foreigners from countries outside the European Union were 16 per cent down on 1994. Half of these immigrants are from Africa and around a quarter from Asia. All inows by region of origin declined in 1995, except for those from the former Soviet Union. However, the latter ows represent only 2 per cent of total permanent immigration (see Table II.12). The free movement of people between European Union countries makes it more difcult to record permanent immigration from these countries, a trend reinforced by the introduction in 1994 of free movement between European Economic Area countries. Information on inows of nationals of European Economic Area countries is obtained from the employment registrations submitted by employers to the regional police ofces ( pr efectures). The 1995 gure was about 7 900, 30 per cent down on the previous year. The proportions from sending countries remained stable, with the Portuguese accounting for nearly 40 per cent of all new immigrants and United Kingdom nationals 15 per cent. Workers from European Economic Area countries are mainly employed in the tertiary sector (75 per cent) and, looking solely at the available data, their level of qualication is generally lower than that of workers from non-European Union countries. Temporary and seasonal immigration Foreigners with a temporary residence or work permit are all issued an initial residence card valid for between three months and one year. They cannot stay permanently in France unless they change status. Temporary immigration includes immigrants who have obtained a temporary work permit, those who have entered the country to follow a course of study or to undertake work experience, and asylum seekers. In 1995 over 4 500 new work permits were issued, valid for up to nine months renewable, about 500 more than in 1994. Nearly one-third of these permits were issued to people working as researchers, teaching assistants or teachers in higher education (see Table II.12). Seasonal immigration, for which permits are valid only for a stay of up to six months, fell by a further 10 per cent, reducing the number of seasonal workers recorded by OMI to 9 400. In 1995, nationals from Morocco and Poland accounted for nearly 90 per cent of inows and 96 per cent of foreign seasonal workers were employed in agriculture. It should be remembered, however, that these statistics do not include seasonal workers from countries within the European Economic Area. Student inows were estimated at over 15 000, down on the previous year. Inows from African countries, especially, were lower. The number of asylum seekers fell for the sixth year running (20 400 applications in 1995 compared to 26 000 in 1994). This fall was mainly attributable to the decline in applications by people from Africa. OFPRA rejected around 84 per cent of applications processed in 1995. Departures from France France does not have a population register, which means that permanent departures are only recorded if they involve ofcial action by OMI or by the Ministry of the Interior. Two types of outow are recorded: forced departures and assisted departures. Forced departures, in other words deportations, include expulsions (1 000 in 1995) and actual removals of illegal immigrants to the border (9 000). The removal rate was similar to that in 1994 (22 per cent). In total, the annual number of forced departures fell by some 10 per cent in 1995 compared with 1994. There were about 2 800 assisted departures. These are voluntary returns within the framework of specic schemes such as reintegration, voluntary return and humanitarian repatriation programmes.
99

The foreign population At the last census in 1990, the foreign population was estimated at 3.6 million, or 6.3 per cent of the total population. About 20 per cent of the foreign population had been born in France. Foreign births (children born to foreign mothers) stood at 75 250 in 1994, 10.6 per cent of total births. Over half of these children have a mother of African origin (mostly from the Maghreb countries). Acquisition of French nationality Over 126 000 naturalisations were recorded in 1994. The exceptionally high number is explained by the fact that pending cases were processed quickly before the provisions of the 1993 Act came into force. In 1995 some 92 500 people acquired French nationality. Nationals of African countries (the majority from the Maghreb countries) accounted for over 50 per cent of these naturalisations. In addition to naturalisations there is the attribution of French nationality at birth of some children born in France to foreign parents, themselves born on French territory. Since the 1993 Act came into force, this rule only applies, subject to a residence requirement, to children with at least one parent born in Algeria before its independence in 1962. Approximately 8 000 children were naturalised under this provision in 1995. The foreign labour force According to the INSEE employment survey, in March 1996 the number of foreigners aged over 15 years was approximately 2.8 million. This gure includes 1.6 million labour force participants, nearly a third of whom were from the Maghreb countries. The other foreign workers mainly came from European Union countries (630 000, over half of these from Portugal), sub-Saharan countries, Turkey and former Yugoslavia. The foreigners in employment stood at 1.2 million. Nearly 540 000 of these were nationals of European Economic Area countries. The number of salaried foreign workers was over one million, of which 37 per cent were women. The tertiary sector employs 60 per cent of dependent foreign workers, against 20 per cent in industry, l6.5 per cent in building and public works and 3.5 per cent in agriculture. While foreign workers are still concentrated in particular sectors, they are spreading more widely across the employment spectrum. Foreign nationals are more vulnerable to unemployment than French nationals. Their share of total unemployment is 12.5 per cent, twice as high as their percentage in the total working population. By nationality, Algerians constitute the largest group of job seekers, followed by Moroccans, Portuguese, Tunisians and Turks (see Table II.13). The unemployment rate for foreigners is double the rate for nationals, although it should be noted that the rate for foreigners from European Union countries was actually lower than that of French nationals in 1995 and 1996 (see Table II.14). Unemployment among young foreigners in the 15-24 age bracket from nonEuropean Union countries is a cause for concern. Half of this group is unemployed. Over the last few years, France has implemented a variety of programmes to assist both French and foreigners, in particular the young, to integrate into the labour market (see Table II.15). Policy developments The main focus of migration policy in the past two years has been on the entry, residence and employment of foreigners and on their integration. Labour market access and employment eligibility requirements for highly skilled foreigners have been facilitated by new provisions designed to relax the procedures for renewing temporary work and residence permits. A new status of non-certicated hospital practitioner has been created for the benet of French or foreign doctors unable to practise in France because of their formal credentials or nationality. Special rules apply to the issue of temporary work permits to foreign nationals eligible to take the national certication tests. The procedures for issuing residence and work permits to foreign managers of French companies or foreign subsidiaries have been simplied. The same applies to the procedure for issuing temporary work permits to artists and technicians in the entertainment industry. In 1995 a regularisation programme enabled certain foreigners (from sub-Saharan Africa and Algeria) who were the parents of French children to obtain a temporary residence permit. These foreigners had been illegally resident in France and could not be removed because of their direct relationship with a French resident. Measures to facilitate the integration of foreigners in France have focused in particular in the past two years on teenagers and young adults. These measures are not targeted solely at foreigners, but apply to young French
100

Table II.13. Job-seekers1 by nationality and by sex, France

Total in 1995 and percentage change (1995/1994 and 1994/1993)
Percentage change Total in 1995 1995/1994 Total Women Total Women Total 1994/1993 Women

Total job-seekers French Foreigners EU Of which: Italians Spaniards Portuguese Non EU Of which: Algerians Moroccans Tunisians Other Africans Turks Former Yugoslavs Southeast Asians

3 100 187 2 726 840 373 347 71 917 10 8 42 301 85 74 29 39 28 8 10 206 652 165 430 192 884 421 249 426 082 449

1 553 852 1 409 369 144 483 30 025 3 3 17 114 31 26 7 16 11 3 5 523 678 023 458 351 358 772 712 028 809 255

1.9 1.6 3.5 3.3 3.6 6.7 2.9 3.5 3.4 3.6 4.1 5.4 2.1 0.6 13.2

2.4 2.3 4.1 6.0 3.5 7.5 7.3 3.6 3.0 4.4 4.0 4.7 0.9 0.3 13.5

0.9 0.9 1.0 4.8 6.2 5.4 5.9 0.1 0.1 1.1 0.1 0.7 2.5 2.4 7.6

2.3 2.0 4.9 0.5 0.4 0.8 0.6 6.2 6.7 8.3 7.6 7.3 5.8 0.3 6.1

1. Persons registered with employment ofces (ANPE, Agence nationale pour lemploi). Sources: Minist` ere du Travail, de lEmploi et de la Formation professionnelle; Agence nationale pour lemploi (ANPE).

people too. They cover education, preparation for working life and, more generally, the social environment. Mentoring schemes have been extended to provide support to young people in nding and keeping a job. The e schemes, called Ville, Vie, Vacances since 1995, are targeted in particular at the most Pr evention Et marginalised young people, offering them social and cultural activities during the summer holiday period. The stated objectives of the 1996 Urban Regeneration Pact (Pacte de relance pour la ville) are to combat exclusion in urban areas and encourage the occupational, social and cultural integration of people living on highdensity housing estates or in distressed areas. The programme in general is founded on prioritising vulnerable areas according to their economic and social problems and on introducing positive discrimination in the areas of the economy, taxation, education and housing. The aims are to encourage enterprise creation (tax-advantageous zones), provide jobs for young people in the 18 to 26 age bracket, restore equal opportunity through schools, modernise and diversify housing, restore social harmony and strengthen the role of associations.

Table II.14.

Unemployment rates (as dened by the ILO) by region of origin, 1994-1996, France
As a per cent of total labour force
Of which: women 1994 1995 1996 1994 1995 1996

Total French Foreigners Of which: EU Non EU

Source:

12.4 11.6 24.5 13.1 32.6

11.6 10.9 21.6 10.4 29.1

12.1 11.3 24.1 10.9 32.3

14.3 13.6 28.4 14.1 41.5

13.9 13.3 24.3 11.6 35.1

.. .. 27.0 11.7 38.4

Labour Force Surveys, INSEE, 1994, 1995 and 1996.

101

Table II.15. Foreigners admitted to training schemes or participating in certain employment initiatives,1 by nationality, 1995, France
Total and percentages
Training schemes Individual training credits Numbers Integration and training schemes for employment Numbers Regional programmes2 Numbers Other schemes3 Numbers Employment-solidarity contracts Numbers Employment initiatives Skill formation contracts4 Numbers Apprenticeship contracts5 Numbers

% 100 87.5 12.5 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.6 2.4 4.2 0.6 1.8 1.2 0.3

% 100 83.9 16.1 1.4 0.4 1 3.8 2.8 1 2.1 0.6 0.5

% 100 89.7 10.3 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.4 3.5 0.7 1.0 1.0 0.3

% 100 88.2 11.8 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.6 2.5 2.4 0.7 2.2 0.6 0.4

% 100 92.3 7.7 1.1 0.2 0.2 0.5 1.9 1.6 0.4 1.4 0.3 0.2

% 100 96.4 3.6 1.0 0.2 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.1 0.2 0.2

% 100 96.5 3.5 1.6 .. 1.2

Total French Foreigners EU Of which: Italians Spaniards Portuguese Non EU Of which: Algerians Moroccans Tunisians Other Africans Turks Southeast Asians

89 567 78 351 11 216 839 70 86 537 2 176 3 769 569 1 576 1 071 271

192 856 161 741 31 115 2 688 820 1 868 7 5 1 4 1 284 450 992 141 157 967

63 409 56 866 6 543 503 56 51 33 1 550 2 243 454 643 639 174

95 121 83 858 11 263 1 218 156 211 548 2 366 2 328 648 2 068 596 405

668 420 617 133 51 287 7 1 1 3 12 10 2 9 1 1 185 244 114 546 704 365 766 489 855 154

96 657 93 162 3 495 988 208 780 534 745 131 208 224

171 010 165 065 5 945 2 733 .. 2 031

500 1 430 232 278 595 177

0.3 0.8 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.1

102

1. Yearly cumulated ows of monthly entries (number of persons receiving remuneration or a newly signed contract). 2. Regional training programmes for youth aged 16-25. 3. 38 per cent of these programmes concern people under 25 years old. 4. Contracts in the private sector. 5. Contracts in the private sector. Situation at end March 1996 and not at end December 1995 as for the other measures. Sources: Agence nationale pour lemploi (ANPE); Direction animation de la recherche, e tudes et statistiques (DARES); Caisse nationale de secours agricole (CNASEA).

GERMANY
Introduction The decline in entries of foreigners is occurring in a context of slower economic growth. The unemployment rate is exceptionally high (11.5 per cent in 1996) and growth prospects for 1997 are poor (about 2.5 per cent). Net migration gain has stabilised at a level comparable to that reached in the late 1980s, well below the record highs of 1991 and 1992. This is a result of both the July 1993 changes in the asylum law and policies designed to restrict entries of new workers from countries outside the European Union. Germanys population continued to grow in 1995, in large part, as a result of the number of entries of ethnic Germans (Aussiedler) from the Central and Eastern European countries and the increase in the foreign population (net inows and natural increase). In 1996, however, arrivals of ethnic Germans were nearly 20 per cent down on the two previous years. Migration and settlement The statistics available on foreign migration ows seek to measure both entries and departures. Entries include short-term stays of at least three months and inows of asylum seekers. All persons occupying a private residence for a period exceeding three months are required to register. Because of this broad denition of immigration ows, net ows need to be considered rather than just inows, so that the extent of migration is not inated relative to ows recorded in other countries. Over the last 25 years, foreign immigration has moved cyclically, following the pattern of economic and political events (see Chart II.6). High net ows up until the early 1970s were attributable to recruitment agreements entered into with a number of countries, mostly European (Yugoslavia, Italy, Greece, Spain, Turkey, Portugal, Morocco and Tunisia). The volume of ows fell considerably after the rst oil crisis, with family migration becoming the main form of migration. Finally, migration to Germany has been augmented by a third

Chart II.6. Migration flows of foreigners,1 1960-1995, Germany Thousands

Net migration of foreigners Inflows of foreigners

1 200 1 000 800 600 400 200 0 -200 1960 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94

1 200 1 000 800 600 400 200 0 -200

1. The data cover western Germany up to 1990 and Germany as a whole from 1991 on. Source: Federal Statistical Office.

103

factor since 1989. The upheavals in the Central and Eastern European countries explain the exceptional scale of inows, especially of asylum seekers and ethnic Germans (Aussiedler). Since 1993, net migration gures have remained positive but have continued to diminish, falling to 230 000 in 1995. The main source countries are Bosnia-Herzegovina, Turkey and Poland. In contrast, entries of nationals from other Central and Eastern European countries have plummeted, with net ows becoming negative in some cases (Croatia, Bulgaria and former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in particular). Flows from the European Union are increasing. Foreign births and entries of foreign residents and ethnic Germans account to a large extent for the increase in the total population (see Chart II.7). The proportion of foreigners in the total population increased for the fourth year running and stood at 8.8 per cent in late 1995. Over one quarter of foreign nationals came from a European Union country and about two-thirds were from OECD countries (mainly Turkey, Italy and Greece). Roughly One-third of foreigners have been in Germany for less than four years, due in large part to the high levels of inows in the early 1990s. On the other hand, close to 45 per cent of foreigners have been in the country 11 years or longer. Naturalisations The number of naturalisations continued to rise sharply, to over 300 000 in 1995 (only 30 000 of which were by discretionary decision), with the main groups being of Kazak or Russian origin and to a lesser extent Romanian and Polish (see Statistical Annex, Table B3). The Aliens Act was amended to facilitate the naturalisation procedure for long-standing foreign residents, the new provisions coming into force in July 1993. The main requirements relate to the legal period of residence: 8 years for second-generation young people and 15 years for adults. There are special provisions for people whose German origins have been acknowledged and who hence have the right to reside in Germany and obtain German nationality. The requirements for a discretionary decision are more restrictive, particularly when it comes to knowledge of the German language. Turks were the main group naturalised by discretionary decision in 1995 (almost 11 000 naturalisations, i.e. more than one-third of all discretionary decisions). Asylum seekers Following an amendment to the basic law, tougher legislation was introduced on 1 July 1993 to clarify who is entitled to apply for asylum. This has drastically reduced the number of justiable requests and increased the recognition rate. Nearly 130 000 applications were made in 1994 and 1995, less than half the level in 1993. In 1995, the biggest ows were still from former Yugoslavia (26 000) and Turkey (25 500), but also Afghanistan (7 500), Iraq (6 900) and Sri Lanka. Applications from the last three countries have increased since 1994. Migration and the labour market Any foreigner from a country outside the European Union requires a work permit in order to take up paid employment in Germany. In 1995, nearly 470 000 new permits were issued, over half to new arrivals to Germany. The approximately 12 per cent increase on 1994 can be attributed to the growing number of these new arrivals (see Table II.16). The majority of all permits, known as ordinary permits, are subject to the rule of prior entitlement for German workers and foreigners with comparable status. In addition they are only valid for a specic activity. The remaining permits are special permits which grant unrestricted access to the labour market, for a limited or unlimited period, with no geographical or occupational restrictions. These special permits are generally issued after ve years of employment in Germany during the previous eight years, or after a period of six years of uninterrupted legal residence. Other categories of foreigners who can obtain this type of permit include: spouses of German nationals or of foreign nationals resident in Germany for at least four years, recognised asylum seekers, young people who enter Germany before the age of 18 under certain conditions. It should be noted that, out of all permit holders in Germany in 1995, 90 per cent hold a special permit. Within the framework of bilateral agreements (the most recent having been signed with Latvia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Romania), quotas for labour employed in Germany under contracts for work and services are set each year according to the situation on the German labour market. In 1995, the total quota was set at 56 000 workers originating from fteen different countries, chiey those of Central and Eastern Europe (see Table II.16). Sub-quotas are also set for each sector of economic activity. In January 1995, two thirds of the quota were allotted to the construction industry. The employment of guest workers (Gastarbeiter) is another form of co-operation with the Central and Eastern European countries and in 1995 nearly 5 500 workers were recruited for periods of between 12 and 18 months. In addition, Germany has nearly 7 000 cross-border
104

Chart II.7. Change in net migration and natural increase, nationals and foreigners, 1970-1995, Germany Thousands
Net migration Natural increase Total change2

300

Nationals1

300

200

200

100

100

-100

-100

-200

-200

-300

1970

72

74

76

78

80

82

84

86

88

90

92

94

-300

800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 -100 -200 -300 1970 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 Foreigners

800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 -100 -200 -300

1. Aussiedler are considered as nationals in statistics on migration. They can reside in Germany and acquire German nationality as soon as their German origins are recognised. 2. Net migration and natural increase. Source: Federal Statistical Office.

105

Table II.16. Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Germany
All gures in thousands unless otherwise indicated
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Components of population change Total population Natural increase Net migration Germans1 Natural increase Net migration Foreigners Natural increase Net migration Flows of foreigners2 Inows by nationality Poland Turkey Bosnia-Herzegovina Former Yugoslavia Italy Russian Federation Other Net migration by nationality Bosnia-Herzegovina Turkey Russian federation Poland Italy Former Yugoslavia Other Inows of ethnic Germans from: Central and Eastern Europe Of which: Former USSR Romania Poland Eastern Germany

695.7 13.9 681.9 63.0 311.6 76.8 370.2

614.1 13.4 600.7 65.8 177.7 79.2 423.0

711.7 76.3 788.0 165.2 195.2 88.9 592.9

372.3 98.8 471.1 189.8 194.5 91.0 276.6

205.8 115.1 320.8 203.4 168.3 88.3 152.6

288.6 119.4 408.0 206.3 180.7 86.9 227.2

Issue of work permits for a rst employment5 Of which: Asylum seekers Contract workers By duration of stay in Germany Newly entered Of which: Polish workers Not newly entered By kind of permit6 Ordinary permit Special permit Stock of employed foreign workers by economic activity7 Agriculture Energy, mining Manufacturing industry Construction Commerce Transport and communication Intermediary services Non-prot organisations, private households Regional authorities, Social Security Other services Not specied Stock of contract workers by nationality8 Of which: Poland Hungary Croatia Czech Republic9 Slovak Republic Turkey Slovenia Bosnia-Herzegovina10 Romania Bulgaria

288.0 7.7 41.6 138.6

494.9 64.7 95.4 241.8

664.1 84.3 136.2 408.9

555.8 64.5 70.0 325.6

419.4 44.1 63.5 221.2 126.2 198.2 323.1 96.3 2 168.0 24.7 26.3 885.1 202.5 220.2 101.8 22.8 32.2 54.0 557.5 40.9 48.4 19.2 9.2 5.3 2.6 2.2 .. 1.4 1.2 .. ..

470.0 40.3 76.6 270.8 181.6 199.2 374.7 95.3 2 155.9 25.3 24.0 863.6 203.9 215.1 100.2 22.7 33.2 49.0 562.3 56.6 56.2 28.8 10.2 5.2 2.5 2.4 1.8 1.8 1.0 .. ..

149.4 170.7 117.2 1 740.3 15.1 31.5 903.5 138.2 135.3 71.7 14.6 21.1 49.1 360.1 0.2 32.1 15.4 6.1 .. 2.0 .. .. .. 6.8 .. ..

253.1 385.6 109.3 1 842.5 16.9 30.5 937.3 141.8 155.5 80.3 15.9 22.6 50.0 391.5 0.1 76.6 41.9 11.3 .. 7.8 .. .. .. 9.5 3.7 1.0

255.3 494.0 170.1 1 966.8 19.7 29.4 957.1 162.0 178.9 89.1 17.3 24.6 51.0 437.5 0.1 115.1 63.5 15.0 .. 13.2 .. .. .. 8.7 .. ..

230.2 388.8 167.0 2 131.6 24.0 28.6 953.0 188.9 211.4 99.1 21.0 29.7 54.8 521.1 0.1 63.3 11.5 15.2 8.3 1.3 1.2 .. 2.8 1.6 .. ..

842.4 200.9 83.6 .. 65.2 36.9 .. 455.8 376.4 .. 48.5 .. 43.1 2.8 26.9 255.0

920.5 128.4 81.9 .. 221.0 35.4 .. 453.8 423.0 .. 45.8 .. 13.1 1.0 168.0 197.1

1 207.6 131.7 80.6 .. 341.3 30.1 24.6 599.3 592.9 .. 40.3 18.4 22.2 2.7 241.9 272.8

986.9 75.2 67.8 107.0 141.6 31.7 29.4 534.1 276.6 96.7 22.3 21.7 26.6 0.7 68.1 93.7

774.0 78.6 63.9 68.3 63.2 38.7 33.4 427.8 152.5 51.8 17.6 21.1 12.9 6.6 1.0 41.5

788.3 87.2 73.6 55.2 54.1 48.0 33.0 437.2 227.2 39.4 30.4 19.5 16.5 14.5 13.8 93.2

106

397.1 148.0 111.2 133.9 381.3

222.0 147.3 32.2 40.1

230.6 195.6 16.1 17.7

218.9 207.3 5.8 5.4

222.6 213.2 6.6 2.4

217.9 209.4 6.5 1.7

Table II.16.

Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Germany (cont.)
All gures in thousands unless otherwise indicated
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Inows of asylum seekers Of which: Former Yugoslavia Turkey Afghanistan

193.1 22.1 22.1 7.3

256.1 74.9 23.9 7.3 5 882.3 8.7 19.2 15.4 56.7 100.0 141.6

438.2 122.7 28.3 6.4 6 495.8 12.0 20.1 16.0 51.9 100.0 179.9

322.6 74.1 19.1 5.5 6 878.1 9.0 23.8 17.8 49.5 100.0 199.4

127.2 30.4 19.1 5.6 6 990.5 6.3 23.9 22.3 47.4 100.0 259.2

127.9 26.2 25.5 7.5 7 173.9 7.9 23.1 24.5 44.5 100.0 313.6

5 342.5 Stock of foreign population by duration of stay3 Less than one year (%) 6.1 1 year to less than 4 years (%) 16.8 4 to less than 10 years (less than 11 from 1994 on) (%) 16.7 10 years or more (11 years or more from 1994 on) (%) 60.4 Total (%) 100.0 Acquisition of German nationality
4

Seasonal workers by nationality11 Poland Croatia Slovak Republic Romania Czech Republic Hungary Slovenia Bulgaria

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2 602.2 1 689.4 6.3 208.1 10.7

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2 978.6 1 808.3 6.6 254.2 12.2

181.7 143.9 7.0 7.8 3.9 12.0 5.3 1.1 0.7 3 419.1 2 270.3 8.2 344.8 15.1

155.8 136.7 5.8 3.9 2.3 3.5 2.5 0.6 0.7 3 698.1 2 556.0 9.2 408.1 16.2

192.8 170.6 5.6 5.4 3.9 3.7 2.8 0.6 0.1 3 611.9 2 564.9 9.3 424.5 16.6

101.4

Unemployment (national denition) Total number of unemployed workers (Germany as a whole) Total number of unemployed workers (western Germany) 1 883.1 Unemployment rate (%) (western Germany) 7.2 Total number of foreign unemployed workers 203.0 Foreigners unemployment rate (%) (western Germany) 10.9

Note: The data cover western Germany in 1990, Germany as a whole from 1991 on, unless otherwise indicated. Data for Former Yugoslavia cover Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia in 1992 and 1993 and exclude Republic of Macedonia from 1994 on. 1. Some ethnic Germans are included in these gures. 2. Data are from population registers and refer to 31 December of the given years. 3. Data are from population registers and refer to 31 December of the given years (see details by nationality in Statistical Annex B1). 4. See details by nationality in Statistical Annex B3. 5. Citizens of EU Members States are not included, except those of Spain and Portugal until 1992. 6. An ordinary permit is only granted if no domestic worker is available. This is not the case for the issue of a special permit. The activity of holders of a special work permit is not restricted. 7. Data are for 30 September of each year and include cross-border workers but not the self-employed. Figures cover only western Germany for all years. 8. Contract workers are recruited under bilateral agreements and quotas by country of origin are revised annually. 9. Former CSFR until 1992. 10. Former Yugoslavia until 1992. 11. Seasonal workers are recruited under bilateral agreements and they are allowed to work 3 months per year. Sources: Bundesanstalt f ur Arbeit; Statistiches Bundesamt.

107

worker. This category of worker is also subject to the rule of prior entitlement or employment priority to people already living in Germany. Finally, since 1991, workers from non-EU countries have been able to come for seasonal work in Germany for up to three months in the year. Nevertheless, priority is rst given to workers already resident in Germany including German nationals who could be employed on a seasonal basis, foreign workers with prior entitlement (EU nationals, for instance) or other workers who only qualify for an ordinary work permit (for example, asylum seekers). In 1995, nearly 193 000 immigrant workers, mostly Poles (see Table II.16), were placed in jobs, mainly in agriculture and the hotel and catering industry, within the framework of bilateral agreements between Germany and Poland. It would seem, over a long period, that uctuations in the employment of foreign workers have been greater than they have been for the population as a whole (see Chart II.8). This Chart is based on gures produced at the end of June of each year, and shows that the employed labour force (measured as the number of employed workers registered with Social Security in the western part of Germany only) has been falling since 1993. The decline in the foreign employed labour force started in 1994. Almost 12 per cent of the 367 000 job losses between June 1993 and June 1994 affected foreigners. The percentage had dropped to only 6 per cent between 1994 and 1995. The gap between unemployment rates in the national and foreign populations has continued to widen since the early 1980s (see Chart II.9). In 1995, the rate stood at an annual average of 16.6 per cent for foreign nationals, compared with 9.3 per cent for the population as a whole (according to the national denition based on the unemployment registers). However, the rate conceals wide disparities, by nationality and sector of the economy. The Turks are the hardest hit (24.4 per cent at the end of the year), along with the Italians (20.6 per cent) and Greeks (19 per cent).

Chart II.8. Annual change in employment, total population and foreigners, 1970-1995, Germany Percentages

20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 1970 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94

Employment (total population) Employment (foreign population)

20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15

Note:

Figures represent, for a given year, percentage change in the stock of employed people compared to the previous year. Data on employment are from Social Security records (as an annual average up to 1973, in June from 1974 on). The data only cover western Germany. Source: Federal Statistical Office.

108

Chart II.9. Unemployment rates, total and foreign population, 1970-1995, Germany As a per cent of total labour force

16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 1970 72 74 76 78
Unemployment rate (total population) Unemployment rate (foreign population)

16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 84 86 88 90 92 94 0

80

82

Note:

Figures on unemployment are given as an annual average and correspond to the national definition based on the register of unemployment people. The data only cover western Germany. Source: Federal Office of Employment.

Illegal migration The illegal employment of foreign labour persists, despite numerous efforts to combat the entry of illegal foreign migrants. Criminal trafcking organisations are developing, especially those smuggling workers in from the Central and Eastern European countries. In 1994 and 1995, approximately 30 000 foreign nationals were apprehended each year after having entered the country illegally, most frequently via the borders with Poland or the Czech Republic. Nearly 79 000 cases of illegal employment of foreign labour were recorded during 1995. In order to improve the effectiveness of measures to restrict ows of non-EU foreign nationals, particularly through the asylum-seeker channel, Germany is endeavouring to sign readmission agreements with the main countries from which the illegal migrants come. Policy developments Over half of foreign nationals have lived in Germany for at least ten years and it would be logical to assume that a large number of them intend to stay permanently. Thus, at the same time that new policies are being developed to tighten entry for new immigration from outside the European Union, the Federal Government is trying to facilitate the integration of foreign workers and their families who are long-time residents of Germany. Responsibility for this is shared between the Federal Government, the States and the Municipalities. The Federal Ministry of Labour has launched schemes to help the second generation immigrants nd employment through increased job training. The Federal Government is also supporting the initiatives of some foreigners (particularly Turks) who wish to return to their country of origin. The German government seeks to inform them about the conditions of their return and the opportunities for salaried work or self-employment. In addition, technical training courses recognised by the country of origin are offered in Germany. The Federal Government and industry have together funded an infrastructure to promote return migration and develop self-employment in the home country. A centre was opened in Turkey in June 1995. In co-operation with Hungary, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic,
109

Germany has created professional training programmes for workers (Gastarbeiter) who, upon completion, will return to their country of origin.

GREECE
Introduction In 1995, for the third year in a row, ofcial migration ows into Greece remained stable. At the same time illegal migration ows persist. The large inows of both foreigners and people of Greek origin in the late 1980s and early 1990s had been unexpected and constituted a reversal of the situation of emigration which prevailed for almost 150 years. The socio-economic changes in Central and Eastern Europe were a determining factor in these movements. Greeces historical and cultural ties with several of these countries point to the possibility for further migration to Greece. Emigration Greeces National Statistical Service ceased collecting data on emigration in 1977. Thus, only an estimate of the magnitude of recent emigration can be obtained through the records of receiving countries. After considerable emigration in the 1950s and 1960s, emigration of Greeks to the traditional receiving countries of the United States, Canada and Australia now amounts to only a few hundred persons annually and is primarily of a family character. In contrast, migration to Germany, historically an important European receiving country for Greeks has continued at higher levels with ows averaging roughly 22 000 annually between 1990 and 1994. However, it should be noted that over the same time period, 80 000 Greeks left Germany and most likely returned to Greece. Out of the 50 000 Greek students currently studying in foreign universities, it is estimated that 25 per cent will not return. Greek emigrant remittances coming through ofcial sources amounted to about US$3 billion in 1995 (nearly one fourth from Germany). Migration and settlement Residence permits issued In 1995, the number of residence permits issued to foreigners increased slightly to reach over 78 000, although this is still below the level of 85 000 permits issued annually between 1989 and 1992 (see Table II.17). The large majority of permits were issued to nationals from countries outside the European Union. Over one-third of all permits were issued to citizens of countries with a large number of ethnic Greeks, in particular, Russia, Turkey and Albania. Residence permits are valid for one year but may be renewed annually for a period of up to ve years. After ve years of legal residence and employment, a foreigner can request authorisation for family members to enter Greece. The foreign population The total foreign population in Greece according to the last census (1991) was 167 000 of which the majority (60 per cent) were from European countries (excluding Turkey but including the former Soviet Union). Foreigners from Asia accounted for the next largest group with 29 000, including 11 000 from Turkey, many of Greek origin. However, it is suspected that many foreigners were not counted by the census. A second estimate is provided by the Ministry of Public Order and includes foreigners holding valid permits, foreigners with expired permits, and foreigners without permits on a waiting list. As of 1 January 1996 this number stood at approximately 300 000. Settlement of ethnic Greeks After sharp increases in recent years, ows of ethnic Greeks from the former Soviet Union and Albania have slowed down since 1994. Close to 60 000 ethnic Greeks from the former Soviet Union (Pontians) have been accepted for settlement. However, ofcial numbers are an underestimate as data refer only to those who have come to Greece with a returnee visa and do not include those who arrive with a tourist visa. Naturalisation is granted without any special formalities and government assistance is given for integration and assimilation. Despite these ofcial measures, some Pontians have faced integration difculties. These difculties with the
110

Table II.17.

Residence permits issued to foreigners,1 by country of origin, 1991-1995, Greece

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Total Of which: Russia Turkey Cyprus Albania Bulgaria Egypt United Kingdom Former Yugoslavia Georgia United States Romania Philippines Poland Germany Syria Lebanon Italy
1.

87 660 15 412 6 394 6 366 742 2 773 4 167 3 867 791 .. 2 430 2 092 4 791 1 758 1 974 971 1 459 1 156

85 328 16 3 5 13 2 3 3 1 2 2 4 1 1 1 1 260 904 244 246 631 969 703 044 .. 169 320 340 420 838 920 335 058

70 146 14 5 5 2 2 3 3 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 267 075 591 417 620 002 590 481 .. 331 497 117 372 754 943 295 351

77 163 17 6 5 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 041 187 491 728 532 599 188 870 .. 794 542 727 889 523 118 343 041

78 209 17 5 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 314 102 720 245 657 558 091 924 879 800 618 308 680 473 335 232 891

Data refer to total number of permits issued. One person can be granted several work permits per year. However a large majority of the permits are delivered for one year and only a small number of persons receive more than one permit (5 310 in 1995). Figures include ethnic Greeks. Source: Greek Ministry of Public Order.

attenuation of conict in the former Soviet Republics and the Greek governments policy to support Greek communities abroad instead of encouraging return migration may have contributed to a decline in the inows of Pontians. Ethnic Greeks from Albania have not been encouraged to settle in Greece and the Greek government provides nancial assistance and other incentives to encourage them to return to Albania. Recently, the Greek Government has undertaken initiatives aimed at assisting the economic development of Albania, the most important of which is to include Southern Albania in the category of preferential treatment usually reserved for Greeces less developed regions. Neither Albanians nor ethnic Greeks from Turkey are encouraged to change their nationality. In order to facilitate the re-integration of ethnic and foreign pupils, the Greek Government has established three types of educational institutions: reception classes for ten or more pupils, tutorial sections for three to nine pupils and special schools for the children of returnees from English speaking countries. Albanian pupils constitute the largest group in both reception classes and tutorial sections. The special schools located in Northern Greece (Salonica) have gradually become dominated by the ethnic pupils, mainly Pontians, from the former Soviet Union countries. Naturalisations The 1991 law on aliens is very restrictive with respect to the naturalisation of foreigners not related to Greeks. Even for the foreign spouse of a Greek national, the acquisition of Greek nationality is far from being a formality. Indeed, after applying, the spouse must wait ve years before the application is examined by the relevant authorities. Other foreigners who apply for Greek nationality must have been resident in the country for ten years. No statistics are available for all categories of applicants, in particular for those which demonstrate Greek descent as these fall under the jurisdiction of the Prefects. Over the past ten years, between 100 and 500 foreigners (with no Greek descent) were naturalised each year. In 1995, the number jumped to close to one thousand. Refugees and asylum seekers For most refugees, Greece has traditionally been a country of transit. In fact, data show that between 1985 and 1995, over 22 000 asylum seekers in Greece were resettled in other countries, the majority in the United States and Canada. However, the possibility of local settlement is not excluded and new legislation was passed in
111

1991 which has allowed for the development of procedures for the recognition of political refugees, the treatment of asylum seekers and refugees and the procedures for granting a work permit. After reaching a high of 2 700 in 1991, the number of asylum seekers entering Greece dropped to 1 300 in both 1994 and 1995. In 1995, political refugee status was granted to 123 persons. Labour migration and work permits The number of foreigners with work permits or special cards (for European Union nationals) increased only slightly in 1995 to 27 400, of which 42 per cent were of EU origin and 13 per cent were of ethnic Greek origin from Albania, Cyprus and Turkey. Since free circulation went into effect in 1988, the number of EU workers has doubled. In 1995, the ve most important countries of origin for permit holders were the United Kingdom, Egypt, the Philippines, Russia and Germany, which together account for almost half of all permits. Since 1990, the number of permits going to workers from the Philippines has dropped sharply. The inux of Eastern Europeans and Albanians may have contributed to a displacement of Asian workers, especially Filipino women in domestic services. Two-thirds of foreign workers in Greece are employed in trade, restaurants, hotels and other services. An additional 14 000 foreigners not included in the statistics on work permits are engaged as seaman on Greek commercial ships or Greek-owned foreign-ag ships. Most are from the Philippines, Pakistan, India and Sri Lanka, Honduras and Indonesia. The maximum number of work permits granted each year to foreign migrants by country of citizenship, occupation and duration of work and for the various regions of the country is determined by a joint decision of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Labour and Public Order after consultation with the Manpower and Employment Organisation and the representatives of Trade Union and Employer organisations. Illegal migration Most foreigners who work in Greece do so illegally. Various estimates put the number of illegal migrant workers at between 250 000 and 470 000 or between 6 to 12 per cent of the Greek labour force. Half are thought to be Albanians. This large number reects both push and pull factors. The latter include the strong seasonal character of the Greek economy (especially in construction, tourism and agriculture), and the continuing exodus of Greeks from low-status jobs. Immigrants without work permits can nd jobs despite high unemployment. Their wages, perhaps three to six times more than they can earn at home, are about half the market rate in Greece and they, of course, have no social security coverage. In addition, established networks assist newcomers with information and accommodation and contribute to the continuing inows. A large number of small rms in Greece across all sectors are dependent on foreign labour. In addition, foreign labour is used by many households for care of small children and older persons, as well as for house maintenance and repairs, where it provides lowpriced and exible labour. Because of this demand, foreign workers appear to benet both local producers and consumers, which may help to explain why major labour market conicts with native Greeks have not so far developed. Illegal migration ows to Greece in many cases involves organised trafcking in migrants. Every few months the Greek authorities intercept and uncover organised illegal entry of groups of migrants from the northern and eastern borders of the country, from Turkey or from the Aegean islands. There have also been cases where the migrant smugglers throw their passengers overboard in order to escape apprehension by the Greek authorities. Between 1991 and 1994 approximately 760 000 illegal entrants were deported (mostly Albanians). In 1994, the number showed a decline with only 10 000 deportations recorded in that year. In 1995 the gure was roughly 13 600 and consisted of mostly Romanians, Bulgarians and Russians. Policy developments It is widely recognised in Greece that current legislation regulating the ow of foreign workers has not been effective in controlling illegal migration. Consequently, a special committee has been set up to draft Presidential decrees for regularising the situation of illegal foreign workers in Greece. These decrees will specify the conditions necessary for illegal migrants to benet from the amnesty as well as the methods and means for their registration in Greece and the procedures for issuing residence cards. It is anticipated that these measures will be
112

combined with stricter border control policies and sanctions for illegal trafcking of migrants and for employers hiring illegal foreign workers. During the past two years steps have been taken to harmonise Greek legislation in accordance with European Union directives, Council of Europe conventions and the Geneva Convention of July 1951 on refugees (Greece signed in 1959 but with reservations concerning a refugees right to work or circulate freely). Legislation was passed which would allow policies to be developed concerning the procedures for the recognition of political refugees, the treatment of asylum seekers and the procedures for granting a work permit to recognised refugees.

HUNGARY
Introduction Hungary is emerging with difculty from a long period of recession, and its economic performance since the beginning of the transition has been relatively weaker than that of Poland or the Czech Republic. Unemployment reached record levels in February 1993, with some 705 000 people registered as unemployed. During the 1989-1993 period, inequalities in income distribution widened signicantly. The deterioration of public accounts and the foreign balance was one of the factors that led to the introduction of an economic stabilisation programme in 1995. There has been positive growth of GDP in real terms (2.9 per cent in 1995). The unemployment rate has stabilised at around 10 per cent. At the same time, the informal economy has continued to develop and currently accounts for nearly 30 per cent of GDP according to some estimates. By the mid-1980s, migration issues had become a major concern. Today, partly because of the more restrictive admission policies of Western European countries, Hungary is no longer only a transit country, but is becoming a host country for many migrants, especially for ethnic Hungarians. Emigration Since October 1993, all citizens who reside abroad for more than three months have been required to report this fact to the competent authorities. However, since there are no penalties for failure to notify the authorities, this provision has yet to lead to improved statistical information on emigration. The Hungarian government continues to promote the temporary emigration of Hungarian workers to Western European countries for the purpose of gaining skills and experience. For example, nearly 7 000 Hungarians worked in Germany in 1995 under the programme of sub-contract workers, as did some 2 800 seasonal workers. Permanent and temporary immigration The statistics available on long-term immigration (foreigners residing legally in Hungary for more than one year) show that the decline in ows of legal immigration rst observed in 1991 is continuing. The legislation passed in May 1994 tightening the requirements for the entry, stay and settlement of foreigners has reinforced this trend. In particular, this legislation species that immigrants must have resided legally in Hungary continuously for at least three years before they are eligible to apply for permanent resident status. As a result, only 5 600 permanent residence permits were granted in 1995, compared with 10 600 in 1994 and 14 800 in 1993. The pattern of countries of origin of new migrants has changed progressively during the 1990s. In 1989 and 1990, some 80 per cent of immigrants were ethnic Hungarians from Romania. In 1994, however, although they remained the largest group of immigrants to Hungary, Romanians only accounted for one-third of new arrivals. Because of the war in former Yugoslavia, there was large-scale immigration from this country in 1992 and 1993. Lastly, with the collapse of the Soviet bloc, nationals of the states of the former Soviet Union (notably in Ukraine and Russia) began to emigrate to Hungary. The data available on temporary immigration concern the issuing and renewal of short-term residence permits (for one, three or six months). The number of these permits, which are most often granted for long-term visits, asylum requests or work, again decreased. In 1994 and 1995 50 000 and 30 000 short-term residence permits were granted respectively. At the beginning of 1996, nearly 140 000 foreigners (holders of residence permits valid for longer than one year) were living in Hungary, of whom some 80 000 were permanent residents. Of these, 120 000 were of working age (15 to 64 years old) and one-third had entered at the beginning of the 1990s. Most of them came
113

from neighbouring countries: Romania, the former Soviet Union and former Yugoslavia (see Table II.18) and over half of them were ethnic Hungarians. Naturalisations Between 1990 and 1995 nearly 61 000 people have obtained Hungarian nationality, of whom 90 per cent were ethnic Hungarians, chiey from Romania. The remainder came primarily from states of the former Soviet Union. The Citizenship Act that entered into force on 1 October 1993 makes it more difcult to obtain Hungarian citizenship. As a rule immigrants are now required to reside continuously in the country for eight years before they become eligible for Hungarian nationality. The yearly number of applications for naturalisation has fallen from 13 000 between 1991 and 1993 to fewer than 4 000 as of 1994. There are special provisions for some categories of immigrants. For example, immigrants who have been granted refugee status may acquire Hungarian nationality after only three years of residence. Individuals who were deprived of their Hungarian citizenship during past decades may recover their nationality after one year of residence. However, naturalisation through marriage has been made more difcult since it may now only be obtained after three years of legal residence in Hungary (instead of one year). Refugees and asylum seekers In 1994 and 1995, Hungary admitted 3 400 asylum seekers and 5 900 refugees (including individuals eeing the war in former Yugoslavia). The ethnic make-up of these migrants has changed markedly. From 1988 to 1990, they were mainly ethnic Hungarians from Romania. As of 1991, the growing number of migrants arriving from former Yugoslavia made it necessary to pass special legislation providing for temporary asylum in Hungary. Since 1993, this ow has declined substantially. Nevertheless, the return of nationals of former Yugoslavia to their country of origin is a problem that has yet to be solved. The number of individuals granted temporary protection in Hungary was estimated at 5 700 in mid-1996. Illegal and transit migration The scant data or estimates available on illegal migration suggest that this phenomenon is continually on the rise. They also make it possible to follow the routes taken by illegal migrants. Over 6 000 foreigners were turned back at the border in 1994 (5 080 in 1993). More than 25 300 were stopped at borders, most of whom were Romanians in transit towards Western Europe, although some were nationals of former Yugoslavia, the former Soviet Union and Turkey, as well as of Asian (Sri Lanka) and African countries (Ghana, Nigeria). Some of those stopped had false papers, which shows that there are networks and specialised agencies that facilitate illegal transit towards Western and Northern Europe. The route taken by these migrants crosses the country from the south or the east (at the borders with Romania and former Yugoslavia) to reach Western Europe (through Austria) or south-western Europe (through Slovenia), a route that makes it possible to reach Germany via Italy. Labour migration All foreigners entering Hungary legally for the purpose of work must have a work permit and a visa (which can be obtained in a consulate abroad). Access to the labour market is strictly regulated. The employment situation may constitute grounds for refusal to employ any foreigners wishing to work in Hungary. Moreover, permits are generally issued for a short time and are always for a specic activity. If a foreigner changes employers, a new permit must be granted. Since August 1995, some categories of workers (for example, experts of international organisations, managers employed by foreign rms) do not need work permits. Overall, the number of work permits issued during the years 1994-95 was stable at roughly 20 000. Foreigners working in Hungary are primarily Romanians, but there are also nationals of the former Soviet Union, former Yugoslavia, Poland and OECD countries (United States, United Kingdom, Germany). Given the complexity of the system of issuing work permits and the size of the informal sector, the employment of illegal immigrants is common, just as working in the underground economy is very widespread among the national population. Illegal employment mainly involves temporary unskilled jobs. According to some estimates, 70 000 to 100 000 foreigners, mostly from Romania, are working illegally in Hungary. Traditionally these jobs are in construction or agriculture. More recently, illegal migration from Russia and Ukraine has been observed. These new immigrants generally work in entertainment or petty trade.
114

Table II.18 Number of foreign residents1 in Hungary by nationality and by year of entry, January 1996
Thousands
According to the year of entry Total Before 1988 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 Unknown Total2 Of which: women

Romania Former Yugoslavia Former USSR Germany Poland China Former CSFR United States Greece Bulgaria Vietnam Other Total

65.7 17.0 16.3 7.8 4.5 4.3 3.8 2.0 1.6 1.6 1.3 14.0 139.9

3.1 0.8 5.4 4.8 2.8 2.4 0.2 0.3 1.2 0.2 3.2 24.4

5.8 0.1 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.8 8.2

13.4 0.1 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 1.1 16.7

12.6 0.2 1.1 0.4 0.1 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.7 17.4

6.5 3.0 1.6 0.3 0.2 1.9 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 1.8 16.3

5.3 2.9 1.5 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 1.2 12.5

5.7 4.9 1.5 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 1.3 14.8

3.8 2.3 1.4 0.4 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 1.6 10.7

2.5 1.1 0.8 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.1 1.0 6.5

7.0 1.5 1.9 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.7 12.5

26.3 6.4 9.0 4.8 1.8 1.3 2.3 0.8 0.6 0.7 0.5 4.5 59.1

1. Persons who have held a residence permit with a one year length of stay and are still living in the country as of January 1996. Figures include some asylum seekers and refugees. 2. Excluding women whose year of entry is unknown. Source: Ministry of the Interior, Alien Police.

115

Policy developments In addition to its determination to reduce public decits and to continue the liberalisation of its economy through further privatisations, the new government elected in May 1994 has reiterated its intention of combating the illegal employment of foreign labour. In practice, the ne payable by employers who employ foreign workers illegally has been raised from two to ve times the minimum wage. However, it seems that simply reinforcing the existing system has not yet proved to be a sufcient deterrent. The new legislation on the entry, stay and settlement of aliens in Hungary entered into force in May 1994, superseding the legislation on the residence of aliens of 1982. It applies to foreigners and immigrants, except for refugees and asylum seekers. The nancial requirements for the entry and settlement of foreigners are more stringent. Only foreigners who have resided legally in Hungary for three years are eligible to settle in the country and obtain a permanent permit. The immigration police have been given more extensive powers to monitor the entry and stay of immigrants. Nevertheless, this legislation stipulates that individuals who are sent back or expelled to another country should not be subject to ill treatment. Pursuant to a decree adopted in 1989, individuals who have been granted refugee status enjoy virtually the same rights as nationals with regard to working conditions and rights to medical care and social security. Temporary refugees have more limited rights. However, it is now easier for them to obtain a work permit.

IRELAND
Introduction In Ireland the recent volatility of migration ows points to a link between changes in migration ows and relative changes in economic conditions in Ireland and in the main receiving countries for Irish emigrants. For example, in the late 1980s, due to a divergence in labour market conditions between Ireland and other countries, particularly the United Kingdom, emigration was particularly high. The early 1990s involved yet another change as the net migration balance became positive. This was mainly caused by a deterioration in external labour markets which had the effect of deterring many potential emigrants from leaving and inducing many of those abroad to return home. These events led to a substantial increase in the labour force and in unemployment. When the pace of economic growth accelerated after 1993, very large employment increases materialised. The unemployment rate fell from 16.7 to 12.9 per cent in the three years (to April 1996) and migration (in net terms) remained negligible during this period. Emigration Ireland has been considered unique in that it was alone among European countries in experiencing almost continuous population decline through emigration over a long period (see Chart II.10). The population of what is now the Republic of Ireland stood at over 6.5 million in 1841; by the beginning of this century it had fallen to about 3.2 million. Thereafter the rate of decline diminished, although with considerable variation over time. In the 1990s, the population has increased at a moderate pace, to reach just over 3.6 million in 1996. A more detailed description of the historical trends in population and migration may be found in the 1995 edition of Trends in International Migration. Figures based on the Annual Population and Migration estimates and the Census show that emigration has stabilised around 33 000 to 36 000 outows annually in the 1990s (see Table II.19). The destinations of these emigrants appear to be broadening. Whereas in the late 1980s and early 1990s roughly 60 per cent of all emigrants went to the United Kingdom, in 1992 the proportion began to decline and in 1996 was about 45 per cent. The 1996 gures indicate an additional 18 per cent go to the United States, roughly 15 per cent to other European countries and 23 per cent to other destinations. The net migration balance has been, however, much lower in the 1990s than in the 1980s, pointing to a general trend of stabilising outows and growing inows. In earlier periods, emigration was a permanent event for most migrants. As they were mainly unskilled and could obtain only low-wage employment there was little prospect of even a temporary return in the short term. The position has changed greatly over time. Todays emigrant is better equipped educationally and can avail of better job opportunities. The facilities afforded by the speed, convenience and relatively inexpensive nature of current air travel means that the emigrant is, for the most part, a highly mobile person who tends to return to Ireland at fairly frequent intervals, either for leisure purposes, or for intermittent periods of work. This greater
116

Chart II.10. Components of population change in intercensal periods, 1871-1996, Ireland Thousands
Natural increase Net migration

40 20 0 -20 -40 -60

1871-81 1881-91 1891-1901 1901-11 1911-26 1926-36 1936-46 1946-51 1951-61 1961-71 1971-81 1981-91 1991-96

40 20 0 -20 -40 -60

Note: Annual average. Sources: Commission on Emigration, Reports (1954); Census of population of Ireland 1991, Volume 1, Population classified by area; Census of population of Ireland 1996, preliminary report.

mobility has contributed to the fact that migrants are now much more responsive to changes in relative economic conditions, a feature which helps to explain some of the volatility evident in migration ows in recent years. Immigration There are now signicant migration inows to Ireland. This migration consists of, in large part, returning Irish emigrants or their families. However, it also includes non-Irish nationals coming to reside in Ireland, in particular persons coming to work or study, and their dependants. The available evidence suggests that the migration inow consists essentially of two very distinct groups. In the rst place there are those with skills and qualications who appear to enter employment immediately upon entry. This group includes some foreigners, such as those taking up employment in multinational enterprises which account for a substantial part of the industrial sector in Ireland. This particular ow can, therefore, be viewed as economically benecial, as the individuals concerned tend to ll vacancies in strategic areas of the economy. There has been, however, from time to time, a further signicant group of return migrants who remain unemployed upon return, having obviously had unsatisfactory experiences abroad and who appear to return to Ireland more as a refuge. While the available estimates do not allow a more detailed analysis, other evidence suggests that many such persons are young and unskilled. Foreign population and employment in Ireland When compared with other European countries the total number of foreign residents in Ireland is relatively small. Data based on the annual Labour Force Survey for 1995 show that out of the current population of 3.5 million, it is estimated that there are some 96 000 foreign nationals, i.e., less than 2.5 per cent. The great majority (73 000) are European Union passport-holders (most from the United Kingdom) and about 23 000 are from other countries (of which 8 000 are from the United States).
117

Table II.19.

Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force in Ireland
Figures in thousands unless otherwise indicated
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

Emigration by country of destination United Kingdom Other EU countries United States Other countries Immigration by country of origin1 United Kingdom Other EU countries United States Other countries Net migration1

70.6 48.4 3.9 8.2 10.1 26.7 14.2 3.6 3.1 5.8 43.9

56.3 35.8 5.1 7.7 7.7 33.3 17.6 5.0 3.9 6.8 23.0 3 502.7 3 422.0 80.7 .. 62.3 7.1 11.3 2.3 0.1 3.4 1.2 0.6 1.6 1 097.7 28.3 .. 22.2 2.3 3.8 32.1 35.1 .. 35.6 32.4 33.6

35.3 23.0 3.1 4.8 4.4 33.3 18.7 4.2 4.3 6.1 2.0 3 523.9 3 436.3 87.6 .. 67.7 7.7 12.2 2.5 3.8 1.2 0.7 2.0 1 093.6 31.5 .. 24.9 2.5 4.1 31.8 36.0 .. 36.8 32.5 33.6

34.6 17.3 7.7 3.8 5.8 40.8 22.7 6.6 4.6 6.9 6.2 3 549.1 3 454.2 94.9 60.9 12.2 9.3 12.5 2.7 3.5 1.2 0.7 1.6 1 107.9 31.4 20.1 4.7 2.4 4.2 32.1 33.1 33.0 38.5 25.8 33.6

36.3 17.1 7.3 5.9 6.0 34.8 17.5 6.7 5.0 5.6 1.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.7 0.1 4.2 1.4 0.9 2.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

35.9 15.4 5.7 4.7 10.1 30.4 15.3 5.9 4.3 4.9 5.5 3 570.7 3 479.6 91.1 58.2 12.2 9.4 11.3 2.6 0.4 4.3 1.5 0.9 1.9 1 150.4 31.2 14.0 5.0 2.8 9.4 33.1 34.2 24.1 41.0 29.8 83.2

33.9 13.5 4.9 8.9 6.6 32.2 16.1 6.5 4.0 5.6 1.7 3 581.6 3 486.1 95.5 60.0 13.0 8.2 14.3 2.7 0.4 4.3 1.4 0.7 2.2 1 199.3 34.3 21.3 5.7 2.6 4.7 34.4 35.9 35.5 43.8 31.7 32.9

32.8 14.5 4.9 6.0 7.4 38.4 17.2 7.0 6.6 7.6 5.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

Total population Irish nationals Total foreign population Of which: United Kingdom Other EU countries3 United States Other countries Percentage of foreign population in total population Asylum seekers Work permits issued and renewed Of which: India and Pakistan United States and Canada Other countries Labour market Irish nationals in employment Foreigners in employment Of which: United Kingdom Other EU countries3 United States Other countries Employment to total population ratios Irish nationals in employment (%) Foreigners in employment (%) Of which: United Kingdom (%) Other EU countries (%)3 United States (%) Other countries (%)

3 515.2 3 435.9 79.3 .. 62.3 6.5 10.5 2.3 2.5 0.7 0.5 1.3 1 063.2 26.7 .. 21.6 1.7 3.4 30.9 33.7 .. 34.7 26.2 32.4

Note: Figures for the European Union refer to the 12 rst members of the Union. 1. The gures for 1992 to 1996 are provisional and may be subject to revision when the 1996 Census results are available. 2. Estimated from the annual labour force survey. Fluctuations from year to year may be due to sampling error. 3. Including the United Kingdom until 1991. Sources: Central Statistical Ofce; Labour Force Survey.

In 1995, there were about 35 000 foreigners in employment according to the labour force survey. The majority of these being UK nationals. Calculation of employment to the total population aged 15 and over indicates a lower incidence of employment for most foreign nationals, and this is also reected in higher unemployment rates (see Table II.19). In the case of non-EU nationals wishing to take-up paid employment in Ireland, the prospective employer must obtain, in advance, a work permit for the immigrant from the Department for Enterprise and Employment. The number of work permits issued or renewed has been rising fairly rapidly, from about 2 500 in 1989 to over 4 200 in 1993, but has remained more or less constant since that time (see
118

Table II.19). A high proportion, about 80 to 90 per cent, of the permits are issued to nationals employed in the service sector including medicine/nursing, commercial/nancial, entertainment/sport, education and catering activities. People from the United States/Canada and Pakistan/India receive the most permits. The majority are skilled or highly qualied workers who enter the country to ll specic posts. Another signicant (but smaller) group consists of the self-employed in the catering trade (mainly from Asia) who may also employ unskilled workers of the same nationalities. Refugees and asylum seekers Ireland has not traditionally received many refugees or asylum seekers, however numbers are growing rapidly. The number of applicants seeking refugee status in Ireland was over 400 in 1995, compared to less than 40 in 1992. These gures do not cover programme refugees, such as Bosnians displaced from former Yugoslavia which the Irish Government has agreed to accept in recent years. There are, at present, over 1 200 such refugees in Ireland. Policy developments Despite the small numbers involved, the question of the procedures for dealing with immigrants and, in particular, with refugees and asylum seekers, has become a controversial issue. This arose because of the increasing numbers and public disquiet due to the treatment of some non-European nationals who entered (or attempted to enter) the country were maintained in detention for unduly long periods. In response, the Minister of Justice appointed an interdepartmental committee in May 1993 to examine and re-state present policy and practice in relation to the admission, residence and rights of EU and non-EU nationals, particularly asylum seekers and refugees. This has resulted in the 1996 Refugee Act, the rst signicant legislation in this area since 1936. The Act has established an Applications Commissioner who can independently assess applications for asylum as well as an Appeals Board. The other important provisions are: Codication of procedures with regard to detention. The Act has used the 1951 UN convention and the 1967 Protocol to that Convention as a basis for dening refugee status. In addition there has been extension to these guidelines with inclusion of those suffering from persecution for reasons of gender, sexual orientation or membership of a trade union. Commitment to providing language translation for asylum seekers has been strengthened. The Dublin Convention of 1980 established rules amongst the EU Member States regarding which state is responsible for examining the application for asylum. The 1996 Refugee Act contains provisions which ratify the Convention for Ireland.

ITALY
Introduction Over the past two years, there have been major changes in Italy in immigration control practices at borders and within the country. Immigration ows have tended to stabilise. Between November 1995 and March 1996, Italy implemented a new programme of regularisation for foreigners in an irregular situation. Nearly 250 000 applications for regularisation were led. Many of these applicants had previously had a legal status but for various reasons had been unable to renew their residence permits. Consequently, the causes of the illegality of many foreign workers in Italy appear to be more linked to endogenous reasons (general social and economic framework in Italy) rather than exogenous reasons (illegal entry). Migration and the resident foreign population Some one million foreigners held residence permits at the end of 1995, or approximately 1.7 per cent of the total population. Nearly 83 per cent of them come from countries outside the European Union, with slightly over two-thirds coming from developing countries. Between 1990 and 1995, the relative sizes of the different foreign communities changed profoundly. The number of Europeans from Eastern European countries increased almost ve-fold, rising from 43 000 to 215 000, while there was only a very small increase in the number of Africans (from 238 000 to 265 000), two-thirds of whom were from North Africa. Moroccans and nationals of former
119

Yugoslavia are the most numerous (each of these communities accounts for 10 per cent of the total foreign population), followed by nationals of the United States (slightly more than 6 per cent). The relatively small size of these percentages shows the great diversity of the foreign community in Italy, which comprises 187 different nationalities. Slightly over half of foreigners live in Northern Italy and approximately one-third in Central Italy. Milan and Rome are the two main poles of attraction. Based on the data available on holders of residence permits, immigrants can be classied on the basis of the reason given for their presence in Italy when their residence permit was issued. Work was the main reason (over 55 per cent of cases in 1995). In addition, foreign workers residing and working legally in Italy may be joined by their spouse, dependent children and parents. These persons are authorised to stay in the country for the same period of time as the head of family. Children and spouses (but not parents) may obtain a work permit one year after their arrival. In 1990, 13 per cent of all residence permits held by foreigners had been granted for family reunication. In 1995, this gure had risen to 19 per cent, i.e. an increase of 80 per cent in the number of permits granted for this reason over the period (see Table II.20). In 1995, nearly 45 per cent of the individuals who had been issued permits for reasons of family reunication came from Africa (primarily the Maghreb countries); 55 per cent were spouses and 34 per cent were children under the age of 14.

Table II.20. Current gures on foreign population in Italy

Thousands
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Foreigners (except EU) who hold a permit of residence1 By region of origin2 Europe Africa Asia America Other By reason for presence Employment3 Family reunication Studies Religion Tourism (long-term) Retirees Training Asylum seekers/refugees Other and not specied By region of residence North Central South Acquisition of Italian nationality Mixed marriages Regularisation programmes of immigrants in an illegal situation by region of residence4 North Central South Legal action taken against foreigners Foreigners for whom a penal action has been undertaken Foreigners under arrest Foreigners who are to be expelled Expelled foreigners
1.

781.1 267.4 238.6 140.4 128.3 6.5 360.9 101.5 75.8 39.1 68.7 43.7 24.2 4.7 63.3 304.1 331.1 145.9 5.3 8.6 234.8 89.2 75.9 69.7 .. .. .. ..

896.8 302.5 265.0 148.8 140.1 40.3 442.1 120.2 61.9 43.9 72.6 48.4 26.9 23.3 55.6 399.1 313.9 183.8 4.5 9.4 .. .. .. ..

923.6 325.9 283.8 158.5 148.7 6.7 487.7 135.8 60.0 47.1 63.7 47.1 20.3 7.4 54.5 427.6 321.4 174.6 4.4 10.0 37.1 14.8 30.6 4.0

987.4 363.9 287.6 172.5 157.4 5.9 506.5 153.0 65.2 52.3 64.2 46.4 25.7 13.8 60.2 475.9 343.6 167.9 6.5 10.0 54.2 20.5 49.0 5.6

922.7 367.2 259.6 150.4 140.4 5.1 516.7 164.2 55.4 53.5 39.7 43.4 13.8 10.1 25.8 473.3 284.2 165.2 6.6 11.0 57.1 23.1 57.0 6.2

991.4 404.3 265.0 164.2 152.5 5.4 544.3 185.4 61.5 57.5 48.6 43.6 12.9 10.9 26.8 507.6 320.2 163.6 7.4 .. 248.5 108.6 74.1 65.9 57.2 22.2 56.3 7.5

Data are from population registers and refer to the population on 31 December of the years indicated. Children under 18 who are registered on their parents permit are not counted. Data are adjusted to take account of the regularisations which occurred in 1990. The decrease observed for 1994 is a result of a clean-up of the register of foreigners: duplicate entries and entries of persons who had returned to their country of origin were removed. 2. See details by nationality in Statistical Annex B1. 3. Including self-employed and unemployed. 4. The gures for 1990 represent the actual numbers of regularisations. The gures for 1995 represent the number of individuals who applied for regularisation from November 1995 to July 1996. Sources: Ministry of the Interior; ISTAT.

120

Some 7 500 individuals acquired Italian nationality in 1995, an increase of approximately one thousand over the previous year. In the future, naturalisation will be more difcult for nationals of non-EU countries because since the entry into force of the new Nationality Act (February 1991) at the end of 1993, they are now subject to a residence requirement of ten years (instead of ve) before they may apply for naturalisation. Asylum seekers In 1991, there were some 30 000 asylum seekers (including 18 000 Albanians). Asylum requests fell signicantly in 1992 (6 000) and stabilised thereafter at an annual ow of approximately 1 700. The rate of refusals was very high (83 per cent). Since 1992, Romanians have been the largest group of asylum seekers. However, since 1993 requests for asylum from Romania have fallen by half with each subsequent year. Foreign workers and the labour market According to the data provided by the Ministry of the Interior based on residence permits held by foreigners, the stock of foreign workers (dependent workers and self-employed, including the unemployed) was approximately 600 000 in 1995, up slightly over the previous year. Foreign workers from outside the EU mainly nd employment as unskilled workers and most often do strenuous manual labour. In Northern and Central Italy, immigrants mainly work in small and medium-sized industry, construction and the tertiary sector (transport, cleaning services, hotels and catering). In the South, they work mainly in agriculture, services and care of the elderly and sick. As regards seasonal employment in agriculture, between 1994 and 1995 the number of non-EU seasonal workers rose by 40 per cent, from 6 400 to 11 000. This increase was accompanied by a slight drop in the number of Italian seasonal workers. In 1995, the Ministry of Labour carried out a survey of over 29 000 enterprises throughout Italy, which employed some 740 000 workers, 2.2 per cent of whom were non-EU foreign workers. Approximately 37 per cent of them were in irregular situations (the percentage varied according to the sectors of activity and regions) (see Table II.21). A third of these workers in an irregular situation did not hold a valid residence permit. The other reasons for irregular situations were connected with the employment of undeclared labour, a phenomenon not limited to foreign workers, since it is estimated that over 10 million Italians do undeclared work. The overall unemployment rate in Italy in 1995 was 12 per cent; however, this overall gure masked large differences between the North (7 per cent), the Centre (10 per cent) and the South (21 per cent). The number of non-EU foreigners registered with unemployment ofces on 31 December 1995 was 98 400. Slightly more than half of them were looking for their rst job. Most of them were unskilled workers. Almost a third of job-seekers registered have been unemployed for more than a year.

Table II.21.

Relative share of foreign workers in an illegal situation1 out of the total number of workers surveyed (excluding EU), by region and industry division, 1995, Italy
Percentages
North Central South Total

Agriculture Industry Crafts Business Tourism Entertainment Transport Hotel Cleaning services Services to private households Total (all activities) Of which: Illegality linked to residence permit

37.2 99.6 99.8 45.0 43.4 39.6 14.4 42.6 31.1 50.0 31.1 8.4

53.2 53.0 65.9 50.8 55.6 17.5 32.9 39.8 34.3 44.6 43.3 15.8

52.3 57.5 68.8 57.6 94.1 64.5 70.7 69.2 74.6 59.4 32.8

45.9 23.3 39.3 46.9 55.7 25.3 17.0 43.9 33.0 55.5 37.1 12.9

1. Illegality linked either to the lack of valid residence permit or to undeclared employment. Source: Survey carried out by the Ministry of Labour of 29 097 enterprises employing 738 437 salaried workers, of which 17 913 were non-EU foreigners.

121

Policy developments On the basis of the available information, it would appear that recent illegal immigration in Italy is due more to endogenous rather than exogenous causes. In fact, since 1991, the authorities, in particular the police, have imposed tighter border controls. The number of people assigned to the task has considerably increased and the army and navy have been more actively involved. In addition, a number of illegal immigration channels, organised and run by foreigners or Italians, have been dismantled. Over the past three years, the number of arrests and deportations of foreigners has risen steadily and has mainly involved Tunisians, Moroccans, nationals of former Yugoslavia, Algerians and Albanians. At the end of 1995, the Italian government passed a decree providing for a third programme of regularisation of foreigners in irregular situations (following those of 1986 and 1990). Between November and March 1996, some 250 000 applications were led (see Table II.20). To qualify for this programme applicants had to have been employed (to prove that they had worked at least four out of the previous twelve months) or have a relative they wished to join who had lived in Italy for over two years and had a sufcient income and was able to accommodate them adequately. Self-employed workers were excluded from the programme. According to preliminary data, it appears that nearly all applications are on the grounds of work. By nationality, the largest numbers of applicants for regularisation are respectively Moroccans, Albanians, Filipinos and Chinese. In most cases, they are immigrants who previously held a residence and work permit that was not renewed, pointing to the endogenous nature of the issue of illegal migration in Italy. An active policy for the integration of immigrants in Italy has been implemented at the local level, the local authorities having been given the necessary powers and government appropriations by legislation enacted in 1990. Most of the initiatives at municipal level are run by an ofce responsible for the initial reception of immigrants that provides guidance on obtaining access to the various public and private services available. Action, guidance and training programmes have been implemented for government employees to make them more aware of issues concerning the integration of immigrants. Many non-governmental organisations are involved in urban initiatives (accommodation, health care and legal assistance, literacy programmes). The main obstacle to the integration of immigrants is the growth of the underground economy, which encourages them to remain in an illegal situation and to accept poor living and working conditions. The Ministry for Italians Abroad created by the previous government has been abolished. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is now responsible for this matter, which is an important one since it is estimated that there are some 4.4 million Italians living abroad. Some 86 per cent of them live, in roughly equal numbers, in Europe (primarily in Germany, France and Switzerland) and in South America (mainly in Argentina and Brazil).

JAPAN
Introduction The Japanese economy showed relatively slow growth in 1995 but the labour market does not yet indicate signs of improvement. OECD gures for 1996 indicate a GDP growth of 3.6 per cent. Employment growth has been weak for the past several years and the unemployment rate has been rising since 1991, recording the highest rate ever at 3.4 per cent in January 1995. The inow of foreign nationals as well as foreign workers decreased in 1995, although the total foreign population including foreign workers continued to grow. Inows of foreign nationals In principle, the Japanese government does not admit migrants to come to Japan for settlement. Those who enter Japan are assigned a residence status according to their activities in Japan or their personal status as a foreigner eligible to enter and reside in Japan. Permanent residence status is granted after a fairly extensive stay and not at the time of initial entry. The number of entries of foreign nationals, excluding temporary visitors and persons entering Japan with re-entry permits, fell by about 12 per cent between 1994 and 1995 to a total of 210 000. Most of the decline is due to a drop in the number of persons entering in the category of entertainer. Foreign population Under the Alien Registration Law, foreign nationals who stay for more than 90 days in Japan are obliged to register at the local government ofce. The number of registered foreigners increased in 1994 and 1995 and is the
122

highest ever recorded in 1995 at 1 362 000, representing about 1.1 per cent of the total population (see Table II.22). Among the registered foreign nationals, Asians account for more than three-quarters, followed by South Americans with 16 per cent. Of Asian countries, those from the Korean Peninsula number 666 000 and represent about half of the total, although both the absolute number and proportion have been decreasing. On the other hand, the numbers of Chinese (including people from Chinese Taipei) and Brazilians continued to grow. Nearly half of all registered foreign nationals were classied as permanent residents and a quarter as longterm residents. Although the number of permanent residents has been decreasing in recent years, that of long-term residents has sharply increased since 1990 when the government claried the criteria of long-term residents (the 1989 amendment of Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Law). Roughly two-thirds of the long-term residents were spouses or children of Japanese nationals, mostly from Brazil, China, the Philippines, the Korean Peninsula and Peru. The number of persons granted naturalisation continued to grow and reached 14 000 in 1995 (compared to 11 000 in 1994). Koreans and Chinese accounted for 73 per cent and 23 per cent respectively (see Table II.22).

Table II.22.

Current gures on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Japan
Thousands
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Inows of foreign nationals Of which: workers

258.4 113.6 1 218.9 693.1 171.1 119.3 61.8 42.5 131.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 7.8 5.7 1.8 216.4 35.9 .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

267.0 108.1 1 281.6 688.1 195.3 147.8 62.2 42.5 145.7 635.4 339.9 209.3 7.9 122.8 85.5 220.8 9.4 7.2 1.8 292.8 67.8 85.5 21.6 22.8 9.2 5.4 5.8 20.7

234.4 97.1 1 320.7 682.3 210.1 154.7 73.1 42.6 157.9 631.8 359.2 222.4 7.4 129.5 95.4 234.3 10.5 7.7 2.2 296.8 70.4 95.4 23.5 28.5 9.9 5.9 6.2 21.4

237.5 111.7 1 354.0 676.8 218.6 159.6 86.0 43.3 169.7 631.5 375.4 231.6 7.0 136.8 105.6 241.5 11.1 8.2 2.5 288.1 65.6 105.6 24.8 34.8 10.1 6.8 6.8 22.3

209.8 81.5 1 362.4 666.4 223.0 176.4 74.3 43.2 179.1 626.6 402.3 244.4 6.8 151.1 88.0 245.5 14.1 10.3 3.2 284.7 55.5 88.0 25.1 16.0 9.9 7.4 7.2 22.4

Stock of registered foreign nationals2 By country of origin Republic of Korea China (including Chinese Taipei) Brazil Philippines United States Other By status of residence Permanent residents3 Long-term residents Of which: Spouse or child of Japanese national Spouse or child of permanent resident Other Foreign workers with permission of employment Other (accompanying family, student, trainee etc.) Naturalisations Of which: Republic of Korea China Illegal immigrant statistics Estimates of illegal residents4 Number of foreign nationals deported Foreign employment, by status of residence5 Specialist in humanities and international services Entertainers Engineers Skilled labour Instructors Other
1. 2. 3.

Excluding temporary visitors. Re-entries are excluded. Data are based on registered foreign nationals which include foreigners staying in Japan for more than 90 days. Essentially Korean nationals. A special permanent residents category was introduced in 1992. It includes Koreans and Taiwanese nationals who lost their Japanese nationality as a consequence of the Peace Treaty of 1952 but who had continued to reside permanently in Japan. 4. Estimates of overstayers. Most of them are thought to be working illegally. 5. Permanent residents, spouses or children of Japanese nationals, spouse or children of permanent residents and long-term residents have no restriction imposed to the kind of activities they can engage in Japan and are excluded from these data. Source: Ministry of Justice.

123

Refugees from Indochina Over 10 000 Indochinese refugees were living in Japan as long-term residents as of August 1995. Although the Government had set a quota of 10 000 for these refugees, they reafrmed in 1994 that Japan would in fact accept more than this limit. However, as a result of a policy change regarding these refugees, boat people arriving after March 1994 are no longer subject to favourable screening procedures, and are treated in the same way as other illegal foreign nationals. Foreign workers in Japan The total number of foreign nationals estimated to be working in Japan is stable at approximately 600 000. However, this estimate needs further explanation. First, it includes the number of registered foreign nationals with permission to work (88 000 in 1995). Second, an additional 152 000 foreign nationals included in this estimate are workers of Japanese descent. Third, the other half of foreign nationals working in Japan, roughly 300 000, are estimated to be working illegally. The remaining 60 000 includes students with permission to work part-time. It should be noted that it does not include foreign nationals who are permanent residents, mostly Koreans, or their dependants, who do not need permission to work. Focusing on the data for registered foreign workers, there has been an upward trend in the number of foreign workers. This is partly a result of the expansion of the acceptance of a wider range of foreign nationals with expert technology, skill or knowledge brought about by the 1989 amendment of the Law. In 1995, the number of foreign workers fell to 88 000 (see Table II.22), with most of the decline occurring in the category of entertainers (see below). Since 1993 an annual report on the employment of foreign workers requires that employers submit a report on foreign nationals they employ to Public Employment Security Ofces. In 1994, these reports showed that the difcult employment situation adversely affected the employment of foreign workers, particularly those employed in manufacturing or large enterprises. In addition to setting guidelines to ensure appropriate working conditions for foreign workers, the Ministry of Labour also provides special services for the employment of foreign workers including supplying interpreters. Illegal migration Illegal migrants to Japan consist largely of persons who enter Japan illegally by boat or who overstay their authorised duration of stay. The number of refusals upon entry to Japan has been consistently around 19 000 since 1992. Recently, the growing number of groups of illegal migrants from China and the Korean Peninsula has become of concern. In many cases, the groups were guided by international trafckers or disguised as Indochinese Refugees. It is estimated that the number of overstayers declined to 288 000 in 1994 and 285 000 in 1995, after peaking at 299 000 in 1993 (see Table II.22). The number of foreign nationals deported from Japan decreased from 70 000 in 1993 to 55 000 in 1995 but it is still twice the 1990 level. Approximately 90 per cent of foreign nationals deported were working illegally. The decrease of overstayers may be partly due to reinforcement of border controls including an increased number of inspectors and their improved training as well as installations of a more elaborate detection system. The government reinforced co-operation between the relevant authorities to exchange information on illegal entry. In addition, there is a new policy to encourage the governments of sending countries to both strengthen control over departures and offer information to potential migrants about regulations on immigration in Japan. Policy developments The eighth Basic Employment Measures Plan in 1995 conrmed that Japanese migration policy will remain focused on the entry of foreigners with technological expertise, skill or knowledge, or who engage in business which requires a knowledge of foreign culture not possessed by Japanese. The criteria for the entry under the category of entertainers was amended against the backdrop that those who come as entertainers are often not fully qualied. In addition, those with lower levels of qualications are often employed under poorer working conditions. As a consequence of the stricter examination on entry based on this amendment and control over criteria for departure in sending countries, the number of these entries fell signicantly from 91 000 in 1994 to 60 000 in 1995.
124

Special measures were carried out for foreigners adversely affected by the great earthquake in January 1995, including extension of their permission to stay. Illegal migrants who were residing in the earthquake area and reported to the immigration ofce were allowed to leave the country without penalty.

LUXEMBOURG
Introduction Since the end of the 19th Century, the proportion of foreigners in the population of Luxembourg has steadily increased. Foreigners accounted for barely 3 per cent of the population in 1875, 10 per cent at the end of the Second World War and slightly over 33 per cent in 1995 (out of a total population of 412 800). Luxembourg is the OECD country with the highest proportion of foreigners in its population. Because of their numbers, foreigners play a crucial role in the demographic growth of the country. Between 1 January 1961 and 1 January 1996, the total population increased by 97 900 people, but only 1 350 were Luxembourg nationals, while 96 550 were foreigners. Because of its growing importance as a nancial and banking centre, the fact that insurance companies and large media groups are based there and the presence of international organisations, Luxembourg attracts large numbers of skilled individuals. Migration movements and the resident foreign population Since 1990, the annual ow of foreigners has averaged some 10 000 arrivals and 6 000 departures. While net migration is positive for all nationalities, the Portuguese still account for the largest number of new arrivals. Although net migration by the Portuguese fell by some 30 per cent in 1994 in comparison with the previous year, in 1995 it increased slightly. Three quarters of the new immigrants come from countries of the European Union (see Table II.23). However, the number of foreigners from outside the European Union has grown considerably in recent years, primarily because of the admission of nationals of former Yugoslavia who have been granted ad hoc humanitarian status. Based on the initial estimates available, the foreign resident population reached 140 000 people on 31 December 1995, or 33.4 per cent of the total population. The largest groups were the Portuguese, followed by Italians, French, Belgians and Germans (see Table II.23). Over the years the structure of the resident foreign population by nationality has changed. Between the end of the Second World War and the end of the 1970s, the largest foreign group was the Italians. They were overtaken by the Portuguese, whose numbers increased steadily during the 1980s to reach 51 500 on 1 January 1996. During the same period the number of Italian residents decreased. The Portuguese community currently represents 37 per cent of the foreign population (compared to 15 per cent for Italians) and 12 per cent of the total population (compared to 5 per cent for Italians). In the last twenty years the fertility rate of foreign women has been much higher than that of nationals. In 1970 the fertility index was 1.9 for nationals and 2.4 for foreigners. However, in the early 1980s, the gap quickly narrowed and the trend was reversed in 1987 when the national index (1.5) overtook that for foreigners (1.3), a trend that was conrmed the following year (1.6 compared with 1.5). The total fertility rate for foreign women was only slightly lower than that for nationals in 1990 and 1991 and overtook it in 1992. In 1994, it was 1.7 for nationals and 1.8 for foreign women. The share of marriages between foreigners in the total number of marriages has increased (from 18.8 per cent in 1990 to 23.3 per cent in 1995). The number of naturalisations, which had risen considerably at the end of the 1980s (in part because of the changes introduced by the Act of 11 December 1986 lowering the required age to 18), fell substantially in 1991 (582) in comparison with the previous year (748). There has subsequently been a slight increase, a trend conrmed in 1995 when there were 802 naturalisations. In all, there were some 8 900 naturalisations over the period 1981-1992. It should be noted that EU citizens (who account for 90 per cent of non-Luxembourg nationals) generally do not try to acquire the nationality of the host country. Migration and the labour market In 1995, total employment grew by 2.5 per cent, the same increase as the previous year. Foreign resident or cross-border workers accounted for 56 per cent of total salaried workers in 1995 (see Table II.23), clearly showing their vital importance to Luxembourgs economy and labour market. The economic downturn and the rising unemployment rate since 1991 have still not led to a decline in the number of immigrant and cross-border workers.
125

Table II.23.

Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Luxembourg
Figures in thousands unless otherwise indicated
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
3

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

Components of total population change Natural increase Of which: foreigners Net migration Of which: foreigners Population on 31 December of the years indicated Of which: foreigners Migration ows by country of origin/destination Inows by main country of origin Portugal France Belgium Germany Other countries Net migration Portugal France Belgium Germany Other countries Foreign population by main nationality1 Portugal Italy France Belgium Germany Spain Other countries Acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality2 Italy France Germany Belgium Other countries Mixed marriages % of total marriages

Inows of foreign workers 1.2 1.1 1.4 1.7 1.6 Of which: women 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.7 .. Inows by region or country of origin 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.0 4.6 EU 4.1 4.2 4.2 3.9 4.7 Of which: 389.8 395.2 400.9 406.6 412.8 France 117.7 122.7 127.6 132.5 138.1 Germany Portugal 10.9 10.7 10.1 10.1 10.3 Belgium 3.5 2.9 2.9 2.4 2.4 Italy 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.5 Other countries 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.9 Inows by major industry division 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.6 Agriculture, forestry 4.8 5.2 4.5 4.8 4.9 Extractive and manufacturing industries 3.1 2.9 2.6 2.8 2.6 Building 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 Trade, banks, insurances 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 Transports, communications 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 Hotels 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Personal services 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.4 Other services 117.8 122.7 127.6 132.5 138.1 Inows by status of residence 42.1 44.2 47.1 49.4 51.5 Resident workers 19.5 19.5 19.7 19.7 19.8 Cross-border workers 13.1 13.3 13.8 14.3 15.0 Stock of workers (excluding unemployed) 10.3 10.6 10.9 11.3 11.8 Total employment4 8.9 8.9 9.2 9.5 9.7 Breakdown by nationality (%)5 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.8 Luxembourgers (%) 21.4 23.6 24.3 25.4 27.5 Resident and cross-border foreigners (%) 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 Stock of cross-border workers by nationality4 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 France (%) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Belgium (%) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Germany (%) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Job-seekers (national denition) 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 Of which: foreigners (%) 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 21.7 22.0 22.2 23.2 26.8

16.9 5.9 15.4 6.1 2.4 3.2 2.3 0.5 1.6 0.2 1.9 2.9 5.6 1.2 2.3 0.3 2.5 6.3 10.7

16.6 5.7 15.4 6.2 2.3 2.8 2.2 0.5 1.3 0.3 1.5 2.8 5.9 1.1 2.3 0.3 2.4 6.4 10.2

15.4 5.6 13.9 5.4 2.6 2.5 2.1 0.5 1.4 0.2 1.1 2.1 6.2 0.9 2.3 0.3 2.2 5.7 9.6

16.2 5.7 14.7 6.0 2.5 2.2 2.5 0.6 1.5 0.2 1.1 1.6 7.5 1.0 1.9 0.3 2.4 5.5 10.7

16.5 5.9 15.5 6.7 2.2 2.2 2.6 0.5 1.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

126

194.9 199.7 203.2 208.3 213.5 51.2 48.8 38.9 47.0 35.0 18.0 2.3 41.9 49.4 50.6 43.3 51.3 31.4 17.3 2.7 45.9 48.0 52.0 47.3 50.7 31.1 18.2 3.5 51.1 46.0 54.0 51.3 51.0 30.5 18.5 4.6 53.6 44.0 56.0 55.8 .. .. .. 5.1 54.3

1. Data are from population registers and refer to the population on 31 December of the years indicated. 2. Children acquiring nationality as a consequence of the naturalisation of their parents are excluded. 3. Data cover arrivals of foreign workers to Luxembourg and foreign residents entering the labour market for the rst time. 4. Annual average. The data for 1995 are provisional. 5. Data as of 31 March of each year. Sources: STATEC; Inspection g en erale de la S ecurit e sociale (IGSS); Administration de lEmploi.

Since the beginning of the 1970s, the number of foreign cross-border workers employed in Luxembourg has increased considerably, from 7 200 in 1970 to some 60 000 in 1996. Whereas in 1970 the majority of cross-border workers were Belgian citizens by 1993 the distribution was reversed and the majority were French (52 per cent), followed by Belgians (30 per cent) and Germans (18 per cent). A study published in January 1995 based on social security records made it possible to identify certain characteristics of these cross-border workers. More than two thirds are men, although women are relatively more numerous in the category of ofce workers from the cross-border of France and Germany. On average, German cross-border workers are more frequently employed in the construction and public works sector, while Belgians more often work in the nancial sector and the French in business services and real estate. The foreign workforce represented a total of 111 800 persons in 1995, including cross-border workers. Foreign workers are primarily recruited in bordering countries and Portugal. The employment of Portuguese nationals accelerated between 1987 and 1990, but then fell steadily in the years that followed and is now tending to stabilise. New hirings of foreign workers totalled some 16 000 in 1994, including 10 600 cross-border workers. The majority of foreigners in employment were blue collar and ofce workers in the private sector. The main sector for the employment of foreigners was commerce, and to a much lesser extent construction, the hotel industry and non-household services (see Table II.23). The foreign active population is younger, on average, than that of Luxembourg nationality. For Portuguese workers, the discrepancy is greater still. In the last census taken in 1991, over 70 per of the latter were between the ages of 15 and 39, compared with only about 60 per cent of workers of Luxembourg nationality. Asylum seekers Until 1987 most asylum seekers in Luxembourg were part of quotas accepted by the government under international refugee resettlement programmes. For example, refugees were accepted from Chile (1974), Vietnam and Cambodia (1977-80 and 1987), Poland (1982) and Iran (1986). The number of independent applications increased during the 1980s and has accelerated since 1990 following the political changes in central and eastern European countries. The total, however, is still very small, between 100 and 200, except in 1991 (238) and 1993 (225). In March 1992, the government introduced an ad hoc humanitarian status for refugees from former Yugoslavia. The beneciaries receive social assistance from the government, free medical care, clothing and a work permit valid for the length of stay corresponding to their status. Since the beginning of the war until 1 November 1995, over 3 000 nationals of the former Yugoslavia had registered. A large number of these refugees were able to obtain an extension of their residence permit and a foreigners identity card (there were 1 274 such refugees at the end of September 1996). Policy developments During the past two years, a number of measures have been introduced supplementing the legislation and regulations governing the employment of salaried workers who are nationals of a country that does not belong to the European Economic Area. The impact of these new provisions is not yet clearly reected in the available statistics. Of the considerable legislation passed during this period, the following are worth mention: The Act of 28 January 1994 laid down the procedure for electing representatives of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to the European Parliament. This Act determined the conditions under which resident foreigners from EU countries would be able to participate in elections. The Act of 4 March 1994 abolished the last remaining restrictions that previously prevented foreigners from becoming founding members of non-prot associations. Grand Ducal Regulation of 17 June 1994 laid down the measures applicable for the employment of foreign workers within the Grand Duchy. Priority is given to citizens of countries that are Member states of the EU and the European Economic Area. The Acts of 23 December 1994 constituted a decisive event in the constitutional history of Luxembourg, since they amended a number of articles of the Constitution with a view to allowing non-Luxembourg nationals to exercise certain political rights in particular with regard to local elections. This constitutional amendment was taken into account by the Act of 3 July 1995, which abolished the requirement that candidates be of Luxembourg nationality in order to stand for elections to occupational chambers. The Act of 18 August 1995 comprised a number of texts updating the basic migration legislation (1972) with respect to the entry, stay, medical examination and labour market access of foreigners. In particular, this new legislation took into account the entry into force of the Schengen Convention as well as the provisions applicable to the Member countries of the European Union and the European Economic Area.
127

Other legislation concerned the integration of foreign children through education. The objective is one of school for all, but with special measures for foreigners with particular difculties. The trilingual basis of education (Luxembourgish, French, German) remains a cornerstone of the national identity, but special arrangements apply to foreign children so that they are not handicapped by their lack of familiarity with these languages when they begin their education. To this end the Act of 3 June 1994 created a system of preparatory classes for technical secondary education. Other legislation laid down that foreign pupils are to be integrated into Luxembourg schools with due regard to their native culture and mother tongue (primarily Portuguese).

MEXICO
Introduction In 1995, following the 1994 peso crisis, the Mexican economy experienced its sharpest recession in decades with a 6.2 per cent decline in GDP. Labour markets were particularly hard hit and both real earnings and formal sector employment declined. Despite the fact that many dismissed workers joined the already large informal sector, the open unemployment rate in urban areas still rose sharply. The stabilisation measures initiated in March 1995 combined with strong export growth in goods and services led to GDP growth of 2.8 per cent in 1996 although improvements in labour market trends are not yet apparent. The Mexican labour force continues to grow by almost 3 per cent annually due to the rapid expansion of the working age population and rising female participation rates. This is the highest labour force growth rate in any OECD country. Migration, whether inside Mexico or to abroad, plays an important role in labour market adjustment. Emigration The most important international migration ow for Mexico has been emigration toward the United States. Since the early years of World War I, substantial numbers of Mexican nationals have been crossing into the United States for employment. These ows reect both push and pull factors including the widening wage differential between the two countries, decline in real income and employment opportunities in Mexico and demand for low-skilled, low-paid labour in labour intensive sectors in the United States. The prole of Mexican migrants to the United States has evolved over time, reecting changing conditions in both countries. Whereas most of them initially came from rural areas to work as seasonal labour in the United States agricultural sector, they have increasingly originated from urban areas and are working in sectors such as services, construction and labour-intensive manufacturing. The number of Mexicans entering the United States as permanent immigrants has grown steadily each decade since the mid-1950s (see Table II.24). Between 1989 and 1995, more than 2.5 million Mexicans were accepted by the United States as permanent residents, of which close to 2 million through the legalisation programme for illegal immigrants put into place by the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA). The decline since 1992 is a result of the winding down of the legalisation programme as well as the end of a special 3-year visa programme (between 1992 and 1994) for the spouses and children of legalised aliens. According to the 1990 US census, 4.3 million people living in the United States were born in Mexico, 23 per cent of the total foreign-born population. This is ve times the number in 1970. New data show strong growth in the number of people from Mexico. In 1994, the US Bureau of the Census monthly Current Population Survey (CPS) counted 6.3 million Mexicans or 28 per cent of the total foreign-born population. The impact of emigration remains important for Mexico. In 1994, the number of Mexicans living in the United States represented approximately 6 per cent of the total Mexican population of 93 million. Ofcial remittances from Mexicans in the United States are estimated at US$3 billion a year and although they represent only a small percentage of the current trade balance (10 per cent in 1994) they are of great importance to particular regions. Undocumented migration According to estimates made by the United States Immigration and Naturalisation Service in 1992, Mexicans account for roughly 40 per cent of the total undocumented population of 3.4 million. Since 1988, El Colegio de la Frontera Norte of Tijuana has undertaken a continuous survey based on border interviews to try and capture the magnitude and nature of the ows between Mexico and the United States. This survey, known as
128

Table II.24. Mexican emigration to the United States, 1911-19951

Thousands
Of which: immigrants who had beneted from the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)

Period

Numbers

1911-20 1921-30 1931-40 1941-50 1951-60 1961-70 1971-80 1981-90 1991-95 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
1.

219.0 459.3 22.3 60.6 299.8 453.9 640.3 1 655.8 1 487.9 405.7 680.2 947.9 214.1 126.6 111.4 89.9

962.7 1 042.3 339.2 623.5 894.9 122.5 17.5 4.4 3.0

Data refer to grants of permanent residence in the United States. Data refer to scal year (October to September of the given year). Source: US Department of Justice, 1995 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1995.

the Zapata Canyon Project has pointed to two trends in undocumented migration from Mexico to the United States. The rst is the common circular movement of migrants between the two countries, clearly related to the geographical proximity of the countries. Workers often alternate stays in the receiving areas in the United States with periods spent in their home communities in Mexico. In the survey over half of those interviewed at the border claimed more than three trips to the United States. The second trend is that the data for the rst eight months of 1995 point to small declines in border crossings to the United States. These data do not support claims that undocumented migration grew sharply as a result of the devaluation of the peso. Instead, they suggest migrants might have been deterred due to higher migration costs (e.g. recent United States policy for tighter border control). According to data from the National Migration Institutes Orderly and Safe Repatriation Program, about 850 000 undocumented Mexican migrants were returned to Mexico from the United States in 1995. Immigration Mexico is receiving a growing number of foreigners. Immigration from Central America in particular has become more important within the last fteen years. This migration is, in part, transit migration, with the United States as the migrants ultimate destination. However, the southern part of Mexico does traditionally recruit agricultural labour from Central America for its coffee, banana and sugar production. It is estimated that about 70 000 such temporary workers are employed in Mexico each year and a new attempt has begun to offer these workers a legal status (see below). In addition, since 1979, Mexico has been at the receiving end of sizeable refugee ows originating in Central America and several refugee camps are situated in the south. Mexico has not yet ratied the Geneva Convention and as a result, many of the refugees and asylum seekers are without a legal status. Policies are currently being developed to accord these refugees a legal status to live and work in Mexico (see below). Most come from Guatemala, El Salvador or Honduras. The number of individuals either refused entry or expelled from Mexico who were in violation of the General Law on Population was roughly 100 000 in both 1995 and 1996, the large majority from Guatemala, El Salvador or Honduras.
129

Flows of business people under NAFTA The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), signed by Mexico in 1992, went into force in 1994. It had already been in place since 1989 between Canada and the United States. The purpose of NAFTA is to promote the free ow of goods and capital and thereby to stimulate economic and job growth throughout North America. It is expected also that, in the case of Mexico, a convergence of earning levels will occur over the longterm, thus reducing the propensity to emigrate. NAFTA does not create a common market for the movement of labour but does permit the temporary entry of highly-qualied workers, in particular, business visitors, treaty traders and investors, intracompany transferees, and professionals. As a result of NAFTA, between January and August 1995 the temporary entry of 38 400 business people into the country was authorised, with over 95 per cent coming from the United States (see Table II.25). The ows almost doubled in 1996 to reach over 60 000. The foreign population in Mexico The foreign population in Mexico is estimated at roughly 0.5 per cent of the total population or 430 000 people. This includes those foreigners with either the intention to reside permanently (155 000) or the right to remain permanently in Mexico (105 000). United States and Spanish nationals account for almost half of both groups. The estimate also includes foreigners who are granted certain kinds of temporary stay in Mexico (170 000), mostly students and visitors. Several groups are not included in the estimate of the foreign population, such as temporary agricultural workers, refugees living in camps on the southern borders and many documented transit migrants. North Americans entering through the business programme initiated by NAFTA are also not counted. Policy developments The National Migration Institute (INM) is responsible for authorising and supervising procedures concerning the entry, stay and departure of foreigners, monitoring foreigners activities while in Mexico and combating the trafcking of undocumented migrants. Efforts are currently focused on ve programmes: National Program for Migrant Protection: to defend the rights of migrants regardless of their nationality or migration situation. Southern Border Program: to carry out actions to regulate the admittance and stay of foreigners in the southern border. This mainly involves two groups of foreigners: temporary agricultural workers and refugees, both groups are largely from Guatemala. On 26 February 1996 the Presidents of Guatemala and

Table II.25.

Inows of North American temporary visitors for business, by category and nationality, 1994-1996,1 Mexico
1994 1995 1996

Nationals of Canada Business persons Traders and investors Intracompany transferees Professionals Nationals of the United States Business persons Traders and investors Intracompany transferees Professionals Total Business persons Traders and investors Intracompany transferees Professionals
1.

1 290 1 000 20 30 240 28 800 25 000 340 830 2 630 30 090 26 000 360 860 2 870

2 050 1 700 30 50 270 36 360 32 500 270 960 2 630 38 410 34 200 300 1 010 2 900

1 940 1 640 40 40 220 59 610 52 700 820 1 100 5 000 61 550 54 340 850 1 140 5 220

Holders of an FMN visa are allowed to come to Mexico as often as they wish for 30 days (renewable). Data as of April-December 1994, January-August 1995 and January-August 1996. Source: National Migration Institute.

130

Mexico signed a joint declaration on the necessity of establishing a legal framework for Guatemalan temporary agricultural workers in Mexico. As a consequence, the INM is developing criteria, requirements, procedures and conditions for admittance, stay and departure of temporary agricultural workers and their families. On 14 August 1996 a new programme for Guatemalan refugees was initiated. Refugees will be able to obtain the documents which will allow them to live and work in Mexico legally. The programme also provides for the acquisition of Mexican nationality to refugees with children born in Mexico or those married to Mexicans. Orderly and Safe Repatriation Program: to respond to the fact that many repatriations from the United States were often carried out in a haphazard fashion and sometimes with no verication that the expelled migrant was actually Mexican. In February 1995, an agreement was reached with the United States on ways to carry out expulsions in a more orderly manner. The Paisano Program: to welcome Mexicans returning to Mexico and inform them about their rights and obligations. This programme also disseminates information in host countries about return to Mexico. Combating Trafcking in Humans: to combat the growing number of migrant trafckers in recent years. On 23 March 1995, an Inter-Institutional Collaboration Agreement was signed by the Secretaries of the Interior, the Treasury, Communications and Transportation and the General Attorneys Ofce. This agreement seeks to encourage more effective co-operation and law enforcement in the ght against trafckers of undocumented migrants.

NETHERLANDS
Introduction Following falls in immigration both in 1994 and 1995, provisional gures for the immigration of foreigners in 1996 show a 15 per cent increase on the previous year. Within this context however, the number of asylum seekers has fallen, which is probably linked to a tightening of policy in this regard. Naturalisation has reached historically high levels, reducing growth in the stock of foreign nationals. Labour market conditions are improving and this is thought to partly explain the recent increase in immigration. Migration and settlement Currently, the main means of permanent settlement in the Netherlands, for non-European Union nationals, is through family reunication. Historically, the important source countries of migrants have been Germany, Indonesia, Morocco, Surinam and Turkey. In recent years refugee ows from the former Yugoslavia have made a signicant contribution to the net inows of migrants. Migration ows based on population register data are shown in Chart II.11 and Table II.26. The inows include asylum seekers who live in private dwellings (such individuals are usually only counted as immigrants if they are granted asylum) and outows are generally considered to be underestimated (see below). In Chart II.11 it can be seen that inows of foreigners strongly inuence the pattern of net migration over time. The population register data show that in 1994, the largely upward trend in the inow of foreigners, which began in the early 1980s, was reversed with a fall by about 20 per cent between 1993 and 1994. Following relatively little change in 1995, provisional gures for 1996 indicate an increase of about 15 per cent to a total inow of 77 000. A number of factors are considered to have driven these recent trends in immigration. The introduction of new rules relating to waiting periods for family reunication in 1993 is thought to partially account for the fall in immigration in 1994. However, since then, immigrants, in particular from Turkey, Morocco and Surinam, have become eligible for admission under these new rules and this is thought to explain part of the increase in immigration in 1996. Also, conditions in the Dutch labour market are improving with falling unemployment rates which may provide additional incentives to immigrate. Although migration ows of Dutch nationals are relatively stable compared to those of foreigners, recent years have shown rises in outows and falls in inows such that negative net migration of Dutch nationals has become relatively signicant (11 000 in 1996, see Table II.26). Combining this with the net migration of foreigners gives a positive net migration gure of 43 000 in 1996, 10 000 more than in 1995. The former Yugoslavia, European Union countries and Turkey were particularly signicant in terms of net migration (see Table II.26) in 1995, the provisional gures for 1996 indicate increases in net migration from the European Union countries and Turkey but a substantial decrease in net migration from the former Yugoslavia.
131

Chart II.11. Migration flows,1 1980-1996, Netherlands Thousands

Immigration of foreigners Emigration of foreigners Immigration of nationals Emigration of nationals Total net migration Total net migration, adjusted figures2

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1980 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

1. Data are taken from population registers, which include asylum seekers living in private households. 2. The data include net administrative corrections. Source: Central Bureau of Statistics.

In assessing the net migration gures it should be noted that the population register data relies on accurate reporting of residence by individuals. Using additional information, statistical corrections are calculated by the Dutch Central Statistical Ofce which can be used to adjust the net migration gures. For example, in 1995, net administrative corrections to the register amounted to -18 000 (see Table II.26), pointing to the predominance of unregistered departures over entries. To-date these administrative corrections have been of the same sign and roughly of the same magnitude each year, therefore the net migration trend which includes these corrections has been similar to that without corrections (see Chart II.11). Refugees and asylum seekers Data for 1995 and 1996 indicate a signicant reversal of the previously upward trend in numbers of individuals seeking asylum (see Chart II.12 and Table II.26). In 1994 there were 53 000 requests for asylum compared to only 21 000 estimated for 1996. The decline in requests is related to measures to reduce the number of asylum seekers which were implemented in 1994 and 1995 (see below). In 1995 the top six source countries of asylum requests were the former Yugoslavia (6 149), Somalia (3 977), Iran (2 698), Iraq (2 431), Afghanistan (1 912) and the former Soviet Union (1 887). As this list implies, most asylum requests are from those countries where there is war or oppression. There was rapid growth in the number of persons granted asylum between 1991 (2 695) and 1994 (19 345), a reection of the increased number of requests (see Chart II.12 and Table II.26). However in 1995, there was a slight fall in the number of those granted asylum. There has been a rapid rise in the number of expulsions of individuals from the Netherlands (see Table II.26), partly as a result of the more restrictive recognition procedures for asylum seekers. These gures include those who have been expelled by force (36 per cent of the total in 1995), those who have left voluntarily but with the encouragement of the authorities (35 per cent) and also those whose residence cannot be traced and are said to have left the country (29 per cent). This latter group is thought to include individuals who remain as illegal residents in the Netherlands.
132

Table II.26. Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force in the Netherlands
Figures in thousands unless otherwise indicated
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 19961 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Migration ows Total population Inows Outows Net migration Dutch nationals Inows Outows Net migration Foreign nationals Inows Outows Net migration Total net migration by selected regions and countries European Union Former Yugoslavia Turkey Morocco Surinam Net administrative corrections3 Adjusted total net migration gures Stock of population4 Total population Total foreign nationals Of which: Turkey Morocco Germany United Kingdom Former Yugoslavia Naturalisations Total Of which: Turkey Morocco Surinam Former Yugoslavia United Kingdom Naturalisation rate (%) Refugees and asylum seekers New requests for asylum Total requests for asylum heard Total grants of asylum Expulsions Total Of which: asylum seekers

117.4 57.3 60.0 36.1 36.7 0.7 81.3 20.6 60.7 10.5 1.0 10.3 8.4 6.3 11 49

120.2 57.3 62.9 35.9 36.0 0.1 84.3 21.3 63.0 11.8 2.0 10.7 7.8 6.1 13 50

116.9 58.8 58.1 33.9 36.1 2.2 83.0 22.7 60.3 12.7 4.8 7.3 6.1 6.2 15 43

119.2 59.2 59.9 31.6 37.0 5.4 87.6 22.2 65.4 10.6 8.6 6.0 4.8 7.2 16 44

Labour force Total number of foreign nationals in employment5 96.1 109.0 As a per cent of all foreign nationals 63.3 65.6 32.8 43.4 Dutch nationals born in the Netherlands Working age population 30.9 29.1 31.8 Labour force 39.4 41.6 43.2 Employment 8.5 12.5 11.4 Unemployment 99.3 62.2 37.2 68.4 22.7 45.7 5.8 8.1 2.7 2.0 2.4 17 20 67.0 21.7 45.3 6.0 7.1 3.5 1.9 1.4 18 15 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 71.4 33.1 13.5 4.0 1.7 0.8 9.4 29.3 50.8 18.5 40.0 14.5 77.2 Dutch nationals born abroad and foreigners 22.4 Working age population 54.7 Labour force Employment 8.7 Unemployment 3.0 5.0 Participation rates (%)6 3.2 Dutch nationals born in the Netherlands 2.5 Dutch nationals born abroad and foreigners . . Of which: .. Turks Moroccans Other Mediterraneans .. Other Europeans .. Surinamese Antillians .. Indonesians .. Other .. . . Unemployment rates (%)7 . . Dutch nationals born in the Netherlands Dutch nationals born abroad and foreigners Of which: .. Turks Moroccans .. Other Mediterraneans .. Other Europeans .. Surinamese .. Antillians .. Indonesians .. Other 21.0 .. .. .. ..

197 214 229 28.5 29.2 30.2 9 408 6 445 5 933 511 889 547 423 125 69 62 59 47 .. .. 61 67 .. .. 5.0 16 34 35 10 7 18 22 8 17 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4.5 15 33 31 13 7 15 20 7 16

219 28.1

216 28.5

221 ..

. . 9 340 9 340 9 391 . . 5 826 5 859 5 986 . . 5 452 5 435 5 574 .. 374 423 412 . . 1 080 1 133 1 107 .. 580 608 610 .. 473 484 489 .. 107 123 122 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4.4 15 26 30 9 6 16 19 7 19 62 54 43 33 60 63 59 57 59 53 5.4 17 32 36 15 7 16 23 7 22 63 54 42 40 56 61 60 56 57 53 6.4 19 36 31 18 9 18 30 7 21 64 55 44 42 59 62 63 58 58 51 5.8 19 41 27 19 8 15 28 8 28

15 010.4 15 128.6 15 239.2 15 341.6 15 421.5 692.4 732.9 757.4 779.8 757.1 203.5 156.9 44.3 39.0 13.5 12.8 2.0 3.0 1.6 0.2 0.6 2.0 21.2 10.6 1.5 10.7 2.7 214.8 163.7 46.9 41.8 15.1 29.1 6.1 7.3 4.0 0.5 0.9 4.2 21.6 17.2 2.7 14.3 4.0 212.5 165.1 49.3 44.1 18.8 36.2 11.5 8.0 5.1 1.1 0.7 4.9 20.3 32.1 11.8 21.2 7.5 202.6 164.6 52.1 44.7 24.7 43.1 18.0 7.8 5.0 2.1 0.5 5.7 35.4 30.8 15.0 20.2 7.2 182.1 158.7 53.4 43.0 29.9 49.5 23.9 8.1 5.4 1.9 0.5 6.3 52.6 51.5 19.3 31.2 13.3

133

1. Figures for 1996 are provisional. 2. Data are taken from population registers, which include some asylum seekers. 3. The administrative corrections account for unreported entries and departures on the population register. 4. Data are from population registers and refer to the population on 31 December of the years indicated. Figures include administrative corrections. 5. Estimates are for 31 March and include cross-border workers, but exclude the self-employed and family workers. 6. The percentage of those in the labour force out of the total working population based on Labour Force Survey data. 7. Unemployment rates based on registered unemployment gures. Sources: Central Bureau of Statistics; Ministry of Justice; Labour Force Survey.

Chart II.12. Inflows of asylum seekers,1 1986-1996, Netherlands Thousands

50 40 30 20 10 0
Total grants of asylum Total requests for asylum heard New requests for asylum

50 40 30 20 10 0

1986

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

1. A request heard is a request on which a decision is made in the given year without regard to the year in which the request was filed. Requests granted refer to applications for asylum in the given or in the previous year. They include persons who are granted refugee status and persons who receive a temporary residence permit on humanitarian grounds. Source: Ministry of Justice.

The foreign population and naturalisation Growth in the population of foreign nationals has been falling in recent years (see Chart II.13). The declining rate of growth in the foreign population is largely attributable to large increases in the number of naturalisations, rather than net migration which in the past was the main determinant of the trend in the foreign population change. The increase in naturalisations is generally considered to be the result of the recognition of dual nationality which came into effect in 1991. The naturalisation rate (measured by the number of naturalisations compared to the foreign population at the beginning of the year) reached 9.2 per cent in 1995 (see Table II.26), a very high gure compared to other European countries. Discussion in the Dutch Parliament of high levels of naturalisation may result in more restrictive rules with regard to the acquisition of Dutch nationality. In the Netherlands, at the end of 1994, out of a total population of 15.4 million, 9 per cent (1.4 million) were born overseas, of which 57 per cent were Dutch nationals and the others foreign nationals. The top ve countries of origin for the foreign born were Surinam (181 000), Indonesia (180 000), Turkey (166 000), Morocco (140 000) and Germany (131 000) (see Table II.27). Foreigners and the labour market In September 1995 a new law on foreign labour was introduced with the aim of further regulating the employment of non-EU nationals (see below). There were 221 000 foreign nationals in employment in 1995, or close to 30 per cent of the total foreign population (a relatively stable proportion over recent years, see Table II.26). When evaluating relative labour market performance between migrants and non-migrants, the Dutch authorities dene those of Dutch origin as Dutch nationals who were born in the Netherlands and those of non-Dutch origin are therefore those who are born overseas and foreign nationals born in the Netherlands. This is obviously an attempt to base the comparison on all migrants, recent and otherwise, rather than, for example, only those who are foreign nationals. According to this approach, the 1995 labour force survey indicates that out of the total
134

Chart II.13. Components of foreign population change,1 1980-1996, Netherlands Thousands

60 40 20 0 -20 -40

Net migration Natural increase Foreign population change

60 40 20 0 -20
Statistical adjustment

-40 -60

Naturalisation

-60 1980 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96

1. Figures have not been adjusted to include net administrative corrections. Source: Central Bureau of Statistics.

working age population (15-64 years age group), just over 10 per cent are not of Dutch origin. The participation rate for those of non-Dutch origin is 55 per cent compared to 64 per cent for those of Dutch origin. These rates vary by ethnic group and sex. For example, particularly low participation rates are found amongst Moroccan and

Table II.27. Foreign-born population by birthplace, 1 January 1995, Netherlands

Thousands and percentages
Total foreign-born Of which: Dutch nationals Per cent of total foreign-born population with Dutch nationality

Birthplace

Europe Turkey Western Germany Belgium Former Yugoslavia Asia Indonesia Americas Surinam Africa Morocco Oceania Total
Source: Central Bureau of Statistics.

543.6 166.0 131.2 43.2 37.2 304.1 180.4 301.8 180.9 222.6 139.8 12.2 1 387.4

219.9 41.1 84.1 26.1 8.3 232.8 172.2 258.6 162.2 62.9 28.8 9.7 786.3

40.5 24.7 64.1 60.4 22.4 76.6 95.5 85.7 89.7 28.2 20.6 79.7 56.7

135

Turkish women, compared with their male homologues or compared with women from the Netherlands Antilles or Indonesia. Based on the same concepts of Dutch and non-Dutch origin, unemployment rates using registered unemployment gures and labour force estimates from the labour force survey indicate a large difference between the two groups with unemployment rates in 1995 of 5.8 per cent and 19 per cent respectively. Among the latter, unemployment rates reached 41 per cent for those of Turkish origin and 28 per cent for those of Moroccan and Antillean origin. Unemployment for those of Dutch origin fell between 1994 and 1995 but this was not matched for the non-Dutch where the unemployment remained constant at 19 per cent, and even increased in some cases, notably amongst those of Turkish origin (see Table II.26). Policy developments Signicant policy changes over the last few years include the recognition of dual nationality in 1991, the revision of the 1965 Aliens Act in 1992 resulting in measures to limit asylum seekers, and new rules for family reunication in 1993. More recent policies have involved further measures with regard to asylum seekers, new legislation regarding foreign workers and further development of integration policy. In August 1994, the Dutch Parliament introduced the principal of safe countries, enabling asylum seekers to be rejected on the basis that they have come from what is considered to be a safe country, whether this is their country of origin or otherwise. In addition, new asylum centres were opened at the Belgian and German borders to immediately reject applications coming from any safe country. On 1 September 1995 the Aliens Employment Act (WAV) replaced the Foreign Workers Employment Act (WABW). Its goal is to better regulate the employment of non-EEA foreigners on the Dutch labour market. The most important ground for refusal of employment permits remains the employment situation on the Dutch labour market (priority rule). The Dutch Aliens Police became the authority which will add a note to the residence permit of a foreigner stating that he/she is free (or not) to take up employment. The concept of an employer was also enlarged to oblige more employers (in particular the self-employed) to apply for employment permits for foreigners. Other new legislation with regard to workers, known as the Law on Identication (June 1994) has made it more difcult for undocumented migrants to work in the Netherlands. All job seekers need a tax and social security number; these numbers will no longer be issued without a valid residence permit. In January 1996 a new phase began in the integration policy for newly arrived immigrants (Newcomers Policy or Inburgeringsbeleid). Under this new phase of the policy, newcomers who receive social welfare benets may have their benets cut if they do not participate in the integration programmes. The programmes themselves are aimed at providing Dutch language skills and other information to help foreigners integrate into Dutch society.

NORWAY
Introduction Following the strong growth seen in 1994, in 1995 the Norwegian economy showed signs of slowing down. However, the labour market situation continued to improve with a drop in the unemployment rate (4.9 per cent in 1995). After large increases in the late 1980s and early 1990s, largely due to high levels of asylum seeker ows, immigration ows to Norway have stabilised. For the last few years, Norway has been faced with the task of settling over 18 000 refugees and asylum seekers who were granted residence permits and, in this context, new policies for refugees and for the integration of immigrants have received high priority. Immigration and emigration Immigration to Norway (including returning Norwegians), which had been climbing since 1990, slowed in 1994. A sharp increase in new arrivals from Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1993 brought the number to 31 700, but it fell back to 26 900 in 1994 and 25 700 in 1995. It should be noted that immigration statistics for Norway include asylum seekers, even if no decisions have yet been taken on their case. Nordic country nationals continued to account for one-fourth of new arrivals and other Europeans for over 30 per cent. Asians (with 15 per cent of all arrivals) were the next largest group. The number of Norwegians leaving Norway had signicantly dropped in the early 1990s but again started to increase in 1994.
136

Foreign population Although the share of foreign nationals in the total population in Norway has doubled from 2 per cent in 1980 to almost 4 per cent in 1995, as of January 1996 the number of foreigners in Norway showed a decline for the rst time in 20 years (to 160 800). Europeans, including nationals from Nordic countries, account for 60 per cent of the total and Africans and Asians together for close to one third. The number of Asians declined slightly in both 1995 and 1996 after several years of steady growth in their numbers. The decline in the total foreign population, and in particular for Asians, is partly due to the large number of naturalisations in the previous year. In 1995, the number of naturalisations jumped to 11 800 from 5 500 in 1993 and 8 800 in 1994. Over half of all naturalisations are of Asians and the number of Africans naturalising is rising. Foreigners are entitled to apply for Norwegian citizenship after seven years of legal residence in Norway. Refugees and asylum seekers High numbers of asylum seekers started to arrive to Norway in 1985. The inow reached its peak in 1987 at 8 600, although from 1989 to 1991 it stabilised at between 4 000 and 5 000. However, in 1993, a large inow, mostly from former Yugoslavia, drove the number to almost 13 000. After the introduction of a visa regime for Bosnians in October 1993, which followed one for Serbs put into place in 1992, asylum ows from former Yugoslavia fell dramatically. In 1994 and 1995 the total number of inows of asylum seekers dropped to 3 400 and 1 500 respectively (see Table II.28). Any asylum applicant whose application is rejected has to leave the country. In 1994 roughly 3 800 rejected applicants were deported due to their illegal residence in Norway. In 1995 the gure was 1 500 as of September. Norway also receives a xed number of refugees in co-operation with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) under a resettlement quota. Between 1992 and July 1996, Norway received approximately 6 000 resettled refugees under this quota, more than half from former Yugoslavia and for the three-year period between 1995 and 1997, Norway plans to accept 3 500 refugees for permanent settlement and temporary protection. Persons granted either refugee status or collective protection (see below) and thus, temporary work or residence permits, are entitled to family reunication irrespective of their ability to provide economic support. Those granted residence permits on humanitarian grounds, must prove that they have sufcient nancial means until they can obtain a permanent residence permit (after 3 years of stay in Norway). Following the recommendation by a Ministerial working group, the government has proposed to eliminate this requirement. The 1995 White Paper on Refugee Policy reinforced the refugee repatriation programme. It facilitates and supports individual refugees who wish to return by providing pre-departure assistance and travel expenses.

Table II.28. Inows of asylum seekers by nationality, 1990-1995, Norway

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Total Of which: Somalia Iran Former USSR Former Yugoslavia1 Bosnia-Herzegovina Iraq Sri Lanka Turkey Pakistan Croatia Ethiopia Lebanon Ghana Romania Poland India

3 962 313 451 81 743 90 512 80 31 203 304 14 207 82 31

4 569 731 244 71 1 334 131 556 46 14 260 179 6 54 120 30

5 238 444 130 84 2 838 390 111 403 32 17 44 42 65 3 59 19 13

12 876 259 147 99 4 147 7 051 137 255 30 23 68 29 40 11 74 10 22

3 379 251 160 159 1 562 201 126 233 30 26 78 7 9 5 46 72 20

1 460 189 163 147 142 106 99 90 35 31 29 18 18 11 10 8 4

1. Excluding Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia from 1992. Source: Directorate of Immigration.

137

Labour migration Those who come to Norway to work must rst obtain a work permit which requires that they have either an offer of employment with an attestation from an employer or a standard service contract. According to the Regulations of the Immigration Act, the applicant must be either a highly skilled worker or have a special skill not available in Norway. Short-time work permits are issued for seasonal workers in agriculture for up to three months during the summer. The annual limit in 1994 was 5 000. In 1995 around 36 000 work permits were delivered of which 23 000 were renewals (see Table II.29). Permits were issued to 5 300 seasonal workers, of which more than 90 per cent were from Eastern Europe, mostly Poland. The gap between labour force participation rates among immigrants (dened as persons born abroad of a mother born abroad) and Norwegians is becoming larger every year. The former was 52 per cent in 1986 and continued to decline to 42 per cent in 1994 while the participation rate of the total population remained around 55 per cent over the same period. People from Eastern Europe, African and Asian countries show particularly low rates. For most immigrants, there is a clear correlation between the participation rate and the length of stay in Norway. The rate of those having stayed more than seven years is double that of those who have been in Norway less than four years. Immigrants accounted for 12 per cent of the total unemployment in 1995, compared to 10 per cent in the previous year. Half of the increase is due to refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina and former Yugoslavia. Unemployment among immigrant women rose more than among immigrant men. Recognition of qualications

Table II.29.

Work permits issued by category1 and by country or region of birth, 1995, Norway
Permits which may constitute a basis for settlement2 Permits delivered for specic work3 Family reunication permits5 Permits for humanitarian reasons

Non-renewable permits4

Renewals

Total

Eastern European countries Of which: Bosnia-Herzegovina Poland Former Yugoslavia Asia Of which: Sri Lanka Vietnam North America Middle East Of which: Iraq Iran European Union Of which: United Kingdom Africa Of which: Somalia South America Of which: Chile Others and stateless Total
1.

401 8 15 319 199 127 40 150 254 165 77 36 13 191 112 20 27 1 278

519 226 192 4 2 345 8 86 17 25 24 39 1 238

5 144 4 475 5 36 72 4 2 5 10 6 26 5 303

484 11 109 63 1 096 138 71 276 186 87 83 355 108 224 76 163 43 164 2 948

1 748 1 661 3 14 15 4 9 4 3 4 2 2 1 784

11 210 6 712 885 1 912 5 087 1 063 1 108 1 331 1 608 687 717 1 446 591 1 475 670 499 153 708 23 364

19 506 8 393 5 713 2 314 6 625 1 336 1 221 2 183 2 060 939 879 1 932 733 1 929 859 714 204 966 35 915

Work permits (including the self-employed) generally granted for one year but no longer than 18 months, work permits with a time limit and renewals. Nationals of Nordic countries do not need a work permit. 2. Permits granted under certain conditions and which may constitute the basis for a settlement permit later on. 3. Renewable permits. The total length of stay must not exceed two years. 4. Permits granted for three months mainly to seasonal workers. 5. Permits granted to spouses and children (older than 15) of Norwegians, of citizens from other Nordic countries or of foreigners (except if they only have a residence permit or a work permit with restrictions). Source: Directorate of Immigration.

138

and diplomas from other countries is often difcult in Norway. Immigrants may experience a disparity between their qualications and their work. Measures have been carried out by the Ministry of Local Government and Labour, in part based on proposals set out by a government committee in 1993, to increase employment of immigrants through more skills and language training and to reduce the disparity between work and qualications. The Ministry of Local Government and Labour has also commissioned a three-year study on the barriers and processes concerning immigrants and the labour market. Moreover, the government submitted a proposal prohibiting racial discrimination on the labour market. Illegal migration A central illegal immigration intelligence unit was established in the National Bureau of Crime Investigation and became operational in 1994. The unit is responsible for collecting, processing and recording information on illegal immigration provided by other authorities. In 1995, 1 100 persons were rejected upon arrival, along with 360 rejections after arrival (not including asylum seekers) and 450 foreigners were expulsed. Policy development In line with the four other Nordic countries in the Nordic free circulation area, Norway signed a co-operation agreement with the Schengen countries in December 1996. Norway and Iceland, as they are not members of the European Union, have the particular status of an associated country in the agreement. New policy on refugees was recently implemented in Norway after broad parliamentary support. It focuses on the international dimension of refugee policy and specically seeks to prevent situations arising which cause people to ee their country and to assist and protect countries neighbouring refugee countries. Under the new policy, the instrument of collective protection will be used in the case of large-scale refugee ows and will offer temporary protection after consultation with the UNHCR and the affected country. In principle, those granted collective protection will be accorded the same rights as those granted refugee status, including family reunication and the right to work and to receive education and social security payments. As persons granted collective protection in Norway are expected to return to their country of origin when conditions allow, the repatriation programme has recently been reinforced. Priority will be given to projects to maintain or develop vocational and language skills of the refugees, together with special measures for children, youth and women. In addition, a three-year study has been undertaken with the hope of shedding light on the effects of the different policies used in the Nordic countries regarding the acceptance of Bosnian refugees. Several other areas have been targeted in the governments long-term planning programme for 1994-97. The idea that legal migrants should be guaranteed the same opportunities, rights and obligations as the rest of the population was re-afrmed. Based on this idea, the Government provides education for immigrants, in particular Norwegian language training for all age groups, assists with access to the labour market and continues its efforts to erase racism and ethnic discrimination.

POLAND
Introduction The Polish economy has remained on a steady course of growth since 1992 with GDP growing by 5.2 per cent in 1994 and 7 per cent in 1995. Ination is subsiding but more slowly than expected. Unemployment declined in 1995 to 14.9 from 16 per cent in 1994 and young people still make up a high proportion of the unemployed (35 per cent). This is signicant as emigrants tend to be young and, upon departure, either economically inactive or unemployed. Emigration Permanent emigration Between 1990 and 1993, the number of ofcial emigrants (registered permanent departures) has uctuated between 18 000 and 22 000. In 1994 and 1995 emigration was slightly higher with 25 900 and 26 300 persons respectively. However, many emigrants do not report their departure (see Table II.30).
139

Table II.30. Permanent immigration and emigration, 1992-1996, Poland

1992 1993 1994 1995 19961

Permanent immigration by region or country of origin2 Europe Germany Former USSR Other Europe Americas United States Canada Other America Other regions Total Of which: women Permanent residence permits issued by nationality3 Ukraine Russia Kazakhstan Vietnam Belarus Other countries Permanent emigration by country of destination4 Europe Germany Other Europe Americas United States Canada Other America Other regions Total Of which: women
1. 2.

4 1 1 1 1 1

299 432 087 780 421 031 308 82 792

3 951 1 484 833 1 634 1 297 982 265 50 676 5 924 2 878 1 964 285 219 16 70 146 1 228 17 15 1 3 2 1 022 333 689 987 592 373 22 367

4 1 1 1 1 1

469 843 115 511 606 175 348 83 832

4 866 1 965 .. 2 901 2 366 1 356 956 54 889 8 121 3 800 3 060 585 343 237 200 225 1 470 20 18 2 4 3 1 979 161 818 905 181 677 47 460

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 415 283 147 136 136 123 590 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

6 512 3 044 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 14 12 1 3 1 1 491 851 640 202 960 232 10 422

6 907 3 338 2 457 515 283 44 105 145 1 365 21 18 2 4 2 1 186 876 310 238 767 457 14 480

18 115 9 052

21 376 10 773

25 904 10 659

26 344 13 039

First half of the year. Persons who entered Poland (including returning Polish emigrants) and registered in the Central Population Register (PESEL) after obtaining a permanent residence permit. Counts in the table may be underestimated since not all children accompanying immigrants are registered. 3. Data on permanent residence permits issued are not linked with data from the Central Population Register and therefore are not comparable. 4. Only departures of permanent residents registered in the Central Population Register are included. Sources: Central Statistical Ofce and Ofce for Migration and Refugee Affairs.

This increase in the outow was accompanied by the continued concentration of emigration ows to three countries (Germany, the United States and Canada). Seventy per cent of all emigrants went to Germany and 18 per cent to the United States and Canada. The recent rise in ows to the United States is due to high numbers of Poles obtaining visas through the United Statess Diversity Lottery Program (a programme aimed at increasing the diversity of countries sending immigrants to the United States). Flows to Austria and Sweden are also rising rapidly. Since 1988, there is a growing majority of emigrants who have only an elementary education, reaching almost 75 per cent in 1995. Temporary emigration The Polish quarterly labour force survey (LFS) provides an estimate of the size and basic socio-characteristics of the number of Poles who were either short-term (more than two months but less than one year) or longterm migrants (over one year) abroad. This survey, which began in May 1993, covers only those households where at least one person was actually residing in Poland at the time of inquiry. Thus, it does not account for those Polish migrants who stayed abroad in the company of all other members of their households and most likely underestimates the number of emigrants. Results show that the number of Polish permanent residents living abroad has been steadily declining since its peak of 207 000 in 1994. As of May 1996, the survey counted 168 000 Polish citizens living abroad, of which 80 000 were short-term migrants and 88 000 were long-term migrants. Roughly 75 per cent of both groups are estimated to be working. The level of education of emigrants who retained their permanent residence in Poland
140

was higher than that of emigrants leaving Poland with an intention to settle abroad. Germany, the United States and Italy were listed as the three most important receiving countries of temporary Polish emigrants.

Immigration Polish statistics on immigration inows do not distinguish between citizens of Poland (mostly returning former emigrants) and foreigners. The rising trend of inows to Poland, which was briey interrupted in 1993, continued in 1994 and 1995 with 6 900 and 8 100 people entering respectively (see Table II.30). As in previous years, more than half of the immigrants came from Germany, the United States, Canada or Ukraine. The number of foreigners who were granted a permanent residence permit is growing, from less than 2 000 in 1993 to over 3 000 in 1995. Most come from Ukraine, Russia and Belarus and some are ethnic Poles (with no Polish citizenship) (see Table II.30). The numbers from Vietnam and Kazakhstan are relatively small but growing. In the latter case, this is partly due to a new community-based programme to assist the repatriation of ethnic Poles from Kazakhstan (see below).

Labour migration Polish workers abroad In 1993 the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy estimated that between 250 000 to 300 000 Poles were legally employed abroad. This estimate still stands for both 1994 and 1995. This range, however, is down from the 1992 estimate of 350 000. Seasonal employment in Germany is a major component of the Ministrys estimate, accounting for roughly half of the total number of workers abroad in 1995. German data show an increase of Polish seasonal workers between 1994 and 1995, with 155 000 and 180 000 respectively. In addition to seasonal employment in Germany, a substantial number of Polish workers are employed with Polish rms abroad under project-tied employment (mainly in construction). According to German data, this number, which reached a high of 46 000 in 1992, dropped sharply in 1993 to less than 7 000 but has since started to grow again. Intergovernmental agreements between Poland and eight other countries (Germany, the Czech Republic, France, Russia, Belgium, Libya, Switzerland and Ukraine) also provide employment opportunities for Polish workers, including seasonal work, although the numbers are much lower than those cited above. The only exception is the Czech Republic which received over 12 500 Polish workers in the rst half of 1996. Also in the rst half of 1996, Russia hosted a signicant number of Polish workers (2 500) for the rst time. Foreign workers in Poland Labour migration to Poland is a new development that emerged in the 1990s. Few statistics exist on the number of foreigners legally employed in Poland. The only statistical record on foreign citizens working in Poland pertain to specic temporary permits issued (visa 06). The data do not include foreign citizens who possess a permanent resident permit and are thus allowed to work or foreigners, such as students with a temporary residence permit other than visa 06 who may legally work in some professions. In the past four years between 10 000 to 12 000 permits have been issued annually (11 000 in 1994 and 10 500 in 1995). This can be compared to 1991, when the number of work permits issued barely exceeded 4 000. The majority went to Ukrainians, followed by Vietnamese, Belarussians, British and Russians. Most were for between 6 and 11 months of employment (70 per cent) and the remainder for two to ve months of employment. Out of the total, 80 per cent were newly issued permits. The largest numbers of foreign workers are managers (23 per cent) followed by owners and co-owners of Poland-based rms (15 per cent). Unskilled workers represent 10 per cent of the total. Europeans work mainly in construction (in particular Ukrainians), transportation and telecommunications, manufacturing, and in art, health and sports related activities. Asians predominate in the trade and catering sectors. The illegal employment of foreigners appears to be a growing trend in Poland. These migrants are mostly from the former Soviet Union, and to a lesser degree, Bulgaria, Romania and some Asian countries (e.g. Vietnam). Whereas in 1992 the size of this population was estimated at 55 000, a more recent estimate in August 1995 by the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy claimed it could be nearer to 100 000.
141

Refugees and asylum seekers Poland is not an important target country for asylum seekers. The number reached a high of 2 000 in 1990, and then dropped to 600 in 1994 and 850 in 1995. Although Armenians account for the highest number of applications, in recent years the number from South Asian countries is growing. Preliminary data for 1996, however, point to a sharp rise. It should be noted that in 1995 close to 50 refugee applicants were also persons readmitted to Poland after being expelled from Germany in accordance with readmission agreements. Illegal and transit migration Poland, in part due to its long border with Germany, has become an attractive country for migrants in transit to Western countries. Statistics gathered on border offences or refusals of entry show that the offenders come from a wide range of countries: Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Romania, Lithuania, Germany, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, former Yugoslavia, Latvia, Armenia, Turkey, Vietnam and Iraq. It is thought that border apprehensions may be only 20-30 per cent of actual illegal crossings. In 1995, there were 3 200 deportation cases, a rise of 75 per cent on 1994. Most were from Ukraine, Romania and Armenia. Policy developments A draft of an Aliens Law, the rst of its kind in Poland, was presented and discussed by the Polish Government in 1994. In 1995, it was approved by the Council of Ministers and then submitted to the Parliament for endorsement, where it is still pending. The only legislative addition was made on 14 May 1996. This amendment concerned the principles guiding repatriation policy of ethnic Poles from Kazakhstan. The programme, which is designed to both facilitate and channel the movement, relies on community initiatives and resources to receive the migrants and provide housing and employment for them and their families. The Act of 14 December 1994 on Employment and the Prevention of Unemployment addresses several issues concerning the employment of both Poles abroad and foreigners in Poland. One change is that labour ofces now have the authority to enforce compliance with the Act, including the terms of employment of foreign workers in Poland as well to counsel Polish citizens who wish to work abroad for foreign employers. Since 1990 Poland has entered into a number of international agreements concerning employment, refugees and readmission. Recently, new bilateral agreements concerning the exchange of workers, access to the labour market and conditions of work were concluded with Lithuania (September 1994), Russia (March 1994) and Ukraine (February 1994). In addition, an agreement between Libya and Poland was renewed in October 1994. Readmission agreements were signed in 1994 with Croatia, Greece, Hungary and Moldova.

PORTUGAL
Introduction As in other southern European countries, emigration decreased signicantly in Portugal during the 1980s and both return movements of former emigrants and immigration from developing countries has started. In the early 1990s, a regularisation programme was carried out but with results much lower than expected. A second regularisation programme took place during the second half of 1996 and is expected to involve about 35 000 people, mostly from Portuguese-speaking African countries. Emigration and Portuguese communities abroad In the second half of the 1970s, the emigration of Portuguese nationals decreased, a trend that became a great deal more pronounced during the 1980s. In 1980, approximately 18 000 permanent departures (for more than one year) were recorded, compared with only 9 500 in 1988. Departures after 1988 are not comparable and do not allow for the detailed evaluation of the outow of Portuguese nationals, since the type of passport on which the earlier data were based was abolished in 1988. Free movement of Portuguese nationals within the European Union as of 1992 does not seem to have produced any signicant upturn in permanent emigration to Member countries. Since 1993, the National Statistical Institute has been conducting a sample survey to estimate outows. Results indicate that approximately 28 200 Portuguese nationals emigrated in 1994, over 20 000 of
142

Table II.31. Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force in Portugal
Figures in thousands unless otherwise indicated
1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995

Emigration1 Of which: women Emigration according to the anticipated duration of stay abroad Less than a year More than a year Emigration by region of destination Europe Africa North America Other Returns of nationals (estimates) First requests for a permit of permanent residence by region or country of residence EU Of which: United Kingdom Germany Brazil Other Total population Total labour force Activity rate Unemployed Unemployment rate Foreign population By region of residence Region of Lisboa Region of Setubal Other regions By region of origin3 Africa Europe South America North America Other regions
2

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 36.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. 9 345.1 4 527.6 48.4 186.9 4.1 122.3 64.0 11.2 47.1 52.0 34.7 20.0 9.4 6.2

33.2 10.5 17.6 15.6 25.1 2.8 2.2 3.2 31.7 9.9 1.8 0.5 0.4 1.8 6.3 9 350.5 4 503.5 48.2 248.4 5.5 131.6 70.6 11.9 49.1 55.8 37.2 21.9 10.5 6.2

29.1 6.9 21.3 7.8 25.5 1.5 1.3 0.7 20.3 5.7 2.3 0.6 0.6 .. 3.4 9 350.4 4 563.7 48.8 312.2 6.8 157.1 85.5 13.8 57.7 72.6 41.8 24.8 10.7 7.1

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 17.4 5.0 2.5 0.7 0.6 0.7 1.8 9 356.5 4 550.6 48.6 325.4 7.2 168.3 92.4 15.5 60.3 79.2 44.9 25.9 10.9 7.5

Acquisition of Portuguese nationality Mixed marriages % of total marriages Regularisation programmes of foreigners by country of origin Angola Cape Verde Guinea-Bissau Mozambique Brazil Pakistan China Sao Tome and Principe Other Foreign labour force5 By main industry division Agriculture, forestry, shing Mining and quarrying Manufacturing Electricity, gas and water supply Construction Sale, hotels and restaurants Other6 By professional status Self-employed Wage earners

0.1 1.5 2.3 39.2 12.5 6.8 6.9 0.8 5.3 .. 1.4 1.4 4.1 59.2 15.0 4.1 2.8 4.7 2.6 0.9 29.1 15.3 43.9

0.1 1.6 2.3 63.1 16.2 4.3 3.0 5.2 3.1 0.9 30.4 15.7 47.3

0.1 1.6 2.4 77.6 18.5 4.6 3.2 6.2 5.3 1.0 38.7 16.2 61.4

0.1 1.5 2.2 35.14 9.3 6.9 5.3 0.4 2.3 1.7 1.6 1.5 6.0 84.4 19.8 4.8 3.4 6.8 6.7 1.1 41.8 16.6 67.8

143

1. Results of a special survey (INE). 2. Figures include all foreigners who hold a valid residence permit. In 1994 and 1995, data include 39 200 permits delivered following the 1992-1993 regularisation programme. 3. See details by main nationality in Statistical Annex B1. 4. These gures are for 1996 and represent the number of applications issued between 11 June and 15 December 1996. 5. Workers who hold a valid residence permit (including the unemployed). Data include workers who beneted from the 1992-1993 regularisation programme. See details by main nationality in Statistical Annex B2. 6. Including the following economic activities: Transport, storage and communications; Financial intermediation, insurance and business services; Community, social and personal services. Sources: Survey on outows (INE); Labour Force Survey (INE); Ministry of the Interior.

these for less than one year (see Table II.31). The main destinations were Switzerland, Germany and France. These estimates indicate outows roughly 2 500 down on the total gures for the previous year, with a more pronounced decline in permanent emigration. Temporary emigration has generally increased over the last decade. The major sectors employing temporary migrants (agriculture, the hotel industry and construction) are all sectors which experience strong seasonal and cyclical uctuations in demand for labour. At the end of August 1995, close to 24 000 Portuguese seasonal workers were employed in Switzerland, mainly in the hotel industry and construction. Alongside the slowdown in permanent emigration, the trend for Portuguese migrants to return home that started in the 1980s continues. In 1994, there were slightly over 20 000 returns, 60 per cent from European Union countries (mostly France) and 25 per cent from Switzerland and South Africa. The estimated gures for 1995 are lower (17 400 returns) (see Table II.31). At the beginning of 1995, the Portuguese community abroad totalled about 4.6 million, of which more than a quarter are in Brazil. The other major countries of residence are France (17 per cent of the total), followed by South Africa, Canada and the United States (11 per cent in each) and Venezuela (9 per cent). Remittances from Portuguese nationals abroad are very high, amounting in 1995 to nearly 4 per cent of GDP, the majority coming from France, Switzerland, the United States and Germany. Although Portuguese communities abroad are highly adaptable, they are nonetheless being affected increasingly by unemployment, even though sometimes to a lesser degree than other foreigners and even nationals themselves. Immigration and the resident foreign population For 1994, inows of new immigrants have been estimated at roughly 20 000, a big increase on the previous year (8 000). Two-thirds of migrants, mainly men, come from the Portuguese-speaking African countries and the same proportion (about 12 per cent) from Brazil and European Union countries. According to a survey by the National Statistical Institute, nearly 5 000 immigrants made an initial application for a permanent residence permit in 1995, 1 000 less than in the previous year (see Table II.31). Over half of these people are thought to have entered Portugal for the rst time in 1995. Most of the new holders of residence permits are concentrated in the Lisbon area, the Tagus valley and the Algarve. Half are less than 30 years of age. Overall, nationals of OECD Member countries account for nearly 60 per cent of these new residents. The other immigrants come mainly from Brazil (14 per cent) and Portuguese-speaking African countries (6 per cent, for Cape Verde and the same percentage for Angola). The total population of Portugal stood at nearly 10 million at 31 December 1995. The increase on the 1994 gure was very small due to a combination of two factors: net migration gain (5 000 people) and natural increase (3 600 people). As of the same date, roughly 170 000 foreigners were legally resident in Portugal, or 1.7 per cent of the total population (see Statistical Annex, Table B1). Nearly 50 per cent of foreigners resident in Portugal come from the Portuguese-speaking African countries and one-third from OECD Member countries, while the third group is made up of South American nationals (mainly from Brazil). By nationality, Cape Verde nationals are the most numerous, followed by Brazilians and Angolans. Of the OECD Member countries, British nationals are the most numerous, followed by Spanish, American and German nationals. Portuguese law has allowed dual nationality since 1981, but the number of naturalisations still remains low (see Table II.31). Mixed marriages accounted for just over 2 per cent of all marriages in 1995. The majority (about 60 per cent) were between Portuguese women and foreign men. Regularisation of illegal immigrants Portugal has recently carried out a second exercise to regularise foreigners in irregular situations. It started on 11 June 1996 and lasted for six months. The eligibility requirements were simplied compared with the previous exercise (October 1992-March 1993), in particular concerning the testimony of these foreigners on their economic situation. In addition, the social partners and immigrant associations were widely involved in the regularisation procedures. Foreigners in an irregular situation had to prove that they had entered Portugal before 31 December 1995 (if they were from Angola, Cape Verde, Guinea-Bissau, Mozambique and S ao Tom e and Principe) and before 25 March 1995 if they were from other non-European Union countries. Available results show that 35 000 people took advantage of the regularisation programme. Among these persons, nationals from Angola, Cape Verde and Guinea-Bissau were the most numerous, followed by those from Brazil, Pakistan and China (see Table II.31).
144

Refugees and asylum seekers Portugal experienced an exceptional increase in the ow of asylum seekers in 1993 (about 2 000 people), with Romanians accounting for nearly two-thirds of the total and Angolans for 20 per cent. Out of a total of 642 cases examined in 1993, only 340 were accepted. Fewer requests for asylum were made in 1994 and 1995 (767 and 457, respectively). Only 12 people were granted refugee status in 1995. Foreigners and the labour market The employment of foreign workers in Portugal is governed by the Decree-Law of 17 March 1974 under which the number of foreigners employed in rms with ve or more employees must not exceed 10 per cent of the total workforce. This rule does not apply to nationals of European Economic Area countries, nor to nationals of countries which have bilateral agreements with Portugal (notably Brazil and Cape Verde). The rules governing the employment of foreigners are however under review with the aim of eliminating work quotas, improving their legal status and combating illegal employment. In December 1995, the foreign labour force represented about 54 per cent of the total foreign population. Most foreign workers are engaged in four types of activity: agriculture, manufacturing industry, building and civil engineering, and services. Europeans are employed mainly in scientic professions and service jobs, whereas the vast majority of Africans are employed in industry and construction. Most Brazilians are employed in services (teaching, health and other scientic and technical professions). Two-thirds of foreign workers are wage earners. Self-employed workers are mainly Europeans followed by Brazil nationals (see Table II.32).

Table II.32. Stock of foreign workers1 in Portugal by region or country of origin and by professional status, 1990-1995
Thousands
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Europe Wage earners Self-employed Cape Verde Wage earners Self-employed Brazil Wage earners Self-employed Angola Wage earners Self-employed Guinea-Bissau Wage earners Self-employed S ao Tom e and Principe Wage earners Self-employed Mozambique Wage earners Self-employed Other Wage earners Self-employed Total Wage earners Self-employed
1.

16.7 8.3 8.4 16.6 16.4 0.2 4.7 2.6 2.1 1.6 1.3 0.3 1.8 1.5 0.3 0.8 0.7 0.1 1.6 1.3 0.3 8.1 4.9 3.2 51.8 37.0 14.8

17.5 9.0 8.5 16.9 16.7 0.2 5.4 3.2 2.2 1.7 1.4 0.3 2.3 2.1 0.3 0.8 0.7 0.1 1.6 1.3 0.3 8.7 5.5 3.2 54.9 39.9 15.0

18.9 10.1 8.8 17.7 17.5 0.2 6.3 4.0 2.3 1.9 1.6 0.3 3.1 2.8 0.3 1.0 0.9 0.1 1.7 1.4 0.3 8.7 5.6 3.1 59.2 43.9 15.3

20.3 11.4 9.0 18.1 17.8 0.2 7.2 4.8 2.4 2.3 2.0 0.3 3.5 3.3 0.3 1.2 1.0 0.1 1.7 1.4 0.3 8.9 5.7 3.1 63.1 47.3 15.7

22.2 13.0 9.2 20.6 20.3 0.2 8.9 6.4 2.5 6.6 6.2 0.3 6.0 5.7 0.3 1.7 1.6 0.1 1.8 1.6 0.3 9.8 6.6 3.2 77.6 61.4 16.2

23.8 14.3 9.5 21.8 21.6 0.3 9.6 7.1 2.5 8.0 7.6 0.4 7.0 6.7 0.3 1.9 1.8 0.1 1.9 1.6 0.3 10.3 7.1 3.2 84.4 67.8 16.6

Workers who hold a valid residence permit (including the unemployed). In 1994 and 1995, gures include workers beneting from the 1992-1993 regularisation procedures. Source: Ministry of the Interior.

145

Policy developments Migration policy in Portugal has two facets, one applicable to Portuguese residing abroad and the other applicable to immigrants in Portugal. The two aspects of this policy reect coherent goals and explain the focus on migrants rights, their political and social integration in the host country, and objective information concerning their contribution to development. Links with Portuguese nationals abroad Portuguese residents abroad are represented by directly elected deputies to the Parliament. Across the world there are about 2 000 associations created by migrants or by their descendants. The aim of emigration policy is to encourage political and social integration of Portuguese in the guest country with respect to their national identity and to maintain links with emigrant communities. Measures are therefore designed to safeguard and disseminate the Portuguese language, provide links between the communities, defend the interests and rights of Portuguese migrants. To this end, two approaches have been developed. They include assistance for the teaching of Portuguese, grants to associations, missions and other agencies working with foreign-resident Portuguese, the organisation of socio-cultural exchanges and vocational training programmes, co-funded by the European Social Fund. Other measures target Portuguese residing abroad and they consist in nancial assistance, legal, economic and social services, special bank accounts and preferential credit through an emigrant savings scheme which makes capital loans. Further measures were introduced in 1996, chiey focusing on developing and modernising the services of Portuguese consulates abroad and improving the dissemination of legal information to Portuguese communities abroad (using the Internet, for instance). In September 1996, Parliament unanimously passed a law setting up the Council of Portuguese Communities, a body to advise the government on policies for emigrant communities, which represents all Portuguese people living abroad who wish to be involved. This Council is formed by one hundred elected members. Immigration policy As in countries of long-standing immigration, one facet of policy in Portugal seeks to control the entry of foreigners more effectively through better border control, the strengthening of the police force and more systematic detection of falsied documents. The Act of 3 March 1993 describes conditions for the entry, residence, departure and expulsion of foreigners, with the goal of making all procedures clearer and more effective. This Act is currently under review. Moreover, there are plans to set up temporary centres to house foreigners attempting to enter Portugal illegally. In May 1996, Parliament unanimously passed a law on the regularisation of foreigners in an irregular situation (see above). Integration of immigrant populations Other measures and resolutions aim to facilitate the integration of foreigners by guaranteeing assistance and by ghting against social exclusion. As far as their political integration is concerned the Portuguese Constitution states that, subject to reciprocity, foreign residents may be granted political rights. In September 1996, Parliament unanimously passed a law enacting the European Union Directive on the participation of nationals of other Member States in local elections and granting the same right to other resident foreigners, subject to reciprocity. Finally, under the Nationality Act of 1981, Portuguese nationality can be obtained via declaration (minors, marriage), full adoption by a Portuguese national, or naturalisation after at least six years residence in Portugal without renouncement of their own nationality. In January 1996, a post of High Commissioner for Immigration and Ethnic Minorities was created under the direct authority of the Prime Minister with the main following terms of reference: to co-ordinate support for immigrant integration at interministerial level; to help to raise the living standards of immigrants in Portugal while respecting their identity and their own culture; to abolish any discrimination against immigrants and combat xenophobia and racism. Other measures adopted in 1996 concern the improvement of housing conditions, extending immigrants entitlement to social security services and the right of immigrant associations to interfere, as assistant parties, in penal procedures in cases of racial and xenophobic crimes. Migration and development Under the heading of co-operation policy, measures have recently been taken to assist in the development of university structures and vocational training centres in Portuguese-speaking African countries. Supporting the peace process and the consolidation of emerging democracies in Africa is another aspect of co-operation policy,
146

as well as the promotion of joint business ventures between Portuguese and African companies. Financial support is also extended to non-governmental organisations working with refugee populations or displaced persons in Africa.

ROMANIA
Introduction Over the last few years outows of those who are of both non-Romanian and Romanian origin has been the most notable characteristic of migration. A sizeable stock of former residents of Romania now live abroad. However, available data show that the outow has fallen substantially and the most recent gures imply that emigration may have stabilised. Although ofcial permanent immigration remains insignicant, there are perhaps signs of increasing de facto immigration to Romania through rising numbers of temporary migrants who are able to repeatedly renew their visa. Return migration is also showing signs of increasing, although the numbers recorded remain relatively small. Emigration Estimates of emigration made by the Ministry of Interior are based on two sources. First there are compulsory customs forms completed by those intending to leave the country on a permanent basis. Added to these gures are data on those already abroad who apply for passport renewals as Romanian citizens abroad. In 1995 total emigration was estimated to be 25 700, of which 45 per cent consisted of passport renewal requests and the remainder of those stating intent to leave the country on a permanent basis. The general impression from the Ministry of Interior data (see Table II.33) is of falling emigration from the high levels in the early 1990s with the composition shifting towards those of Romanian origin, younger age groups and also the more highly educated and skilled. This may be related to the fact that much of the emigration in the early 1990s was by ethnic Germans, Hungarians and Jews for whom emigration was more on the basis of cultural ties rather than economic motivation and opportunity. Despite a generally downward trend in emigration, the Ministry of Interior gure for 1995 indicates that emigration actually increased from the 1994 level. However, this is probably driven by the fact that in 1995 the stock of ve-year passports, initially issued in 1990, began to expire and led to a large increase in renewals of passports by Romanian citizens living abroad (hence increasing the Ministry of Interior gures). Available data on the rst half of 1996 seem to indicate the same level of emigration as 1995 which suggests that emigration may have stabilised. Data from the major destination country, Germany, of Romanian emigrants provides another perspective on the level and trends of emigration from Romania (see Table II.33). For example, between 1991 and 1995 German immigration data indicate a total inow of about 380 000 Romanian nationals and ethnic Germans from Romania. The total outow to Germany for the same period in the Ministry of Interior data is only about 55 000, thus indicating that these gures are likely to have considerably underestimated actual ows. Despite the differences in levels, the trend in the German immigration data conrms the slowing down of emigration seen in the Ministry of Interior data. Temporary emigration There are a number of forms of temporary emigration from Romania, mainly related to employment. For example, there are estimates of 4 000 seasonal workers and results of a survey indicate there to be about 9 500 employees hired by Romanian enterprises for employment abroad. However, there are unofcial estimates of temporary labour emigration which far exceed these gures. For example, it has been estimated that there are between 40 000 and 60 000 Romanian citizens working in Israel, mainly in construction. Immigration Almost all of the current immigration to Romania is in the form of individuals entering with temporary residence status. There is a small and declining number of those with permanent residence status (see Table II.34)
147

Table II.33. Estimates of emigration, by selected characteristics, 1990-1995, Romania

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

A. Permanent emigration1 (percentages) Sex Men Women Total Age 18 18-25 26-40 41-50 51-60 60 and over Total Ethnic group Romanian2 German Hungarian Other Total Destination country Germany Hungary United States Canada Austria France Other countries Total Educational attainment Post-Secondary Secondary Vocational Primary Other Total Total number (thousands) B. Migration ows between Romania and Germany Ethnic Germans from Romania Inows of Romanian nationals Outows of Romanian nationals Asylum seekers from Romania C. Stock of people from Romania in Germany Stock of Romanian nationals Acquisitions of German nationality by former Romanians

47.8 52.2 100.0 26.1 14.0 26.4 10.1 11.7 11.7 100.0 24.6 62.0 11.4 2.0 100.0 68.1 11.0 5.1 2.0 3.6 1.7 8.5 100.0 6.0 17.9 11.8 49.2 15.1 100.0 96.9 111.2 78.2 15.8 35.3 60.3 14.4

48.0 52.0 100.0 33.6 18.0 24.6 8.0 7.6 8.2 100.0 43.7 35.3 17.0 4.1 100.0 45.3 10.0 13.1 3.8 10.5 3.4 13.9 100.0 6.3 20.6 12.1 36.4 24.6 100.0 44.2 32.2 61.4 30.2 40.5 92.1 29.0

51.6 48.4 100.0 17.8 25.1 32.7 9.2 7.2 8.0 100.0 58.1 28.4 11.3 2.2 100.0 44.3 15.2 6.7 5.1 10.5 4.0 14.2 100.0 11.0 29.0 13.1 38.9 8.0 100.0 31.2 16.1 109.8 51.9 103.8 167.3 37.6

47.4 52.6 100.0 22.3 19.6 30.8 9.9 7.6 9.8 100.0 47.8 32.2 17.4 2.6 100.0 37.3 19.9 6.7 10.4 7.0 5.1 13.6 100.0 11.1 30.1 13.0 37.0 8.8 100.0 18.4 5.8 81.6 101.9 73.7 162.6 28.3

46.0 54.0 100.0 26.8 17.7 34.4 9.2 5.6 6.3 100.0 59.2 23.7 14.6 2.5 100.0 40.1 10.4 6.3 8.9 7.3 4.6 22.4 100.0 12.2 27.7 12.7 33.0 14.4 100.0 17.1 6.6 31.4 44.0 9.6 125.9 11.9

44.7 55.3 100.0 20.0 16.3 42.4 10.9 4.8 5.6 100.0 72.9 11.3 14.1 1.8 100.0 35.1 9.8 8.9 8.9 8.9 5.6 22.8 100.0 16.4 33.2 10.4 23.8 16.2 100.0 25.7 6.5 24.8 25.2 3.5 109.2 10.2

1. Estimates by the Romanian Ministry of the Interior. Persons having reported their intention to settle abroad. 2. Romanian nationals with no other declared ethnic afliation. Sources: Romanian Ministry of the Interior; German Ministry of the Interior.

consisting mainly of Greeks and those from the former Soviet Union. The 1992 Census indicates a stock of 136 000 persons born outside Romania however this is largely due to the migration of Bulgarians, Moldavians and Ukrainians just after the Second World War. Since 1989, temporary residence visas have been granted which give the right to residence for up to one year. The visas are relatively easily to re-new therefore allowing for longer periods of residence. In 1995 the total stock of those with temporary visas was about 55 000. The ve largest source countries are Republic of Moldova, Greece, Turkey, China and Syria which account for about 45 per cent of the total (see Table II.34). A large proportion of these temporary residence visas are granted to foreign investors, who enter on the basis of various criteria, including possession of business capital. In 1995 there were 49 000 foreign investors (not all of whom necessarily have temporary visas) registered with the Romanian Development Agency, an increase on the 1994 gure by about 14 per cent. The main countries of origin are Germany, Italy, Turkey, Syria
148

Table II.34. Current migration gures in Romania, 1993-1995

Thousands
1993 1994 1995

Immigration and settlement of foreigners Stock of persons with permanent residence status Stock of persons with temporary residence visas Of which: Republic of Moldova Greece Turkey China Syria Stock of foreign investors1 Of which: Germany Italy Turkey Syria China Stock of foreign citizens in education and training Of which: Former USSR Greece Israel Naturalisations Return migration Asylum seekers and refugees Refugee claims submitted Refugee status granted Illegal immigration Number detected at border Number detected within borders Estimated stock of illegal migrants2 Expulsions Romanian citizens expelled from other countries Foreigners expelled from Romania
1. 2.

2.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. 24.3 .. .. .. .. .. 20.7 6.0 4.7 1.7 0.3 3.3 0.9 1.6 .. 20.0 .. 0.2

1.8 .. .. .. .. .. .. 43.1 4.8 4.7 3.7 3.6 1.9 20.9 6.7 4.9 1.5 3.3 0.6 1.2 3.8 18.0 15.1 0.9

1.7 55.2 6.3 5.4 4.8 4.2 4.1 49.2 5.5 5.3 4.2 4.1 2.7 20.8 5.8 5.3 1.4 0.1 5.5 0.6 0.1 1.1 4.0 20.0 10.5 0.7

Data are from the register of foreign investors. Some of those registered hold temporary residence visas. Estimates based on the number of expulsions, the number of persons detected within Romania and at the border and estimates of foreign students who have ceased to engage in their studies but who continue to reside in Romania. Source: Ministry of the Interior.

and China which account for about 43 per cent of the total. There has been concern that some of the foreign investors are motivated primarily by a desire to migrate permanently, with the result that in October 1994 the Romanian Development Agency tightened the rules regarding entry by increasing the minimum investment capital to US$10 000. A second signicant group of temporary migrants enter for education and training, the majority being students in higher education. Numbers increased in the early 1990s and now appear to have stabilised at a stock of about 20 000, the majority of whom come from Europe (66 per cent) and Asia (22 per cent). Finally, there is provision for foreigners to obtain employer-specic work permits. However, to-date, relatively small numbers of these permits have been issued. For example, between 1990 and 1994 a total of only 3 500 permits were granted. The permits are issued for employment in a specic rm for a period of up to six months and are renewable. In practice, renewals are not common and therefore the work permits are typically only for short-term stays in Romania.
149

Return migration Data recording the voluntary return of Romanians indicates a rising number of return migrants with a total of 5 500 in 1995 (see Table II.34). A large number of returns may occur unofcially and therefore these gures are likely to be underestimates. Those forcibly returned to Romania under re-admission agreements with Austria, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary and Poland fell in 1995 to 10 530 (see Table II.34). It is reported that about 20 to 30 per cent of the total have been returned on several previous occasions. Asylum seekers Relatively few applications for asylum are made to Romania. For example, in 1995 about 600 applications were made and around 100 were accepted. In April 1996 a new law on asylum seekers and refugees was passed which further claries the procedure for processing applications (see below). Illegal immigration About 1 100 cases of illegal immigration were detected at borders in 1995 and a further 4 000 foreign citizens in illegal circumstances were detected by police authorities. It is estimated that the stock of illegal immigrants in 1995 is about 20 000, a slightly higher gure than that for 1994 (see Table II.34). These estimates includes both overstayers and those with no legal documents who probably succeeded in illegally crossing Romanias border. The largest group are Turks, representing about 25 per cent of the estimated gure. The origins of the people apprehended at the border (with Moldova and Ukraine in particular) suggest the existence of illicit trafcking with connections in the Middle and Far East. The available information suggests that more illegal immigrants cross the border from Ukraine or Moldova than from Bulgaria or via the Black Sea. Policy developments An interesting policy development is the encouragement of return migration. Return migrants do not have to pay import duty on goods acquired overseas and are given priority in purchasing a dwelling. In addition, student scholarships are available for study in Romania. Finally, a task force has been set up to strengthen relationships with emigrants. Until recently the legal position of foreign citizens was based on legislation passed in 1969. In 1995, new legislation was under discussion which included granting equal access to social benets to foreign citizens and the encouragement of foreign investors and contract workers. As yet the legislation has not been nalised. In 1996, new legislation on asylum seekers was passed. Of particular note is the setting of a six month limit for the processing of asylum applications during which time the asylum seekers are entitled to nancial support and accommodation provided by the government. Successful applicants receive refugee status for an initial period of three years. A two-year extension may be granted on the basis of a renewed application for refugee status. The general tone of the law appears to be one of increased clarication as to the processing and rights of asylum seekers, rather than a shift in attitude towards more or less lenient treatment of asylum cases. In May 1996 more restrictive visa requirements were placed on citizens applying from a total of 77 countries which are considered to be potential sources of illegal immigrants.

SLOVAK REPUBLIC
Introduction The Slovak Republic rst joined the SOPEMI network in 1995. For this reason the note begins with a brief overview of the demographic and economic situation in the Slovak Republic and provides general information on the conditions governing entry, residence, and employment of foreigners.
150

Table II.35.

Selected geographic, demographic and economic indicators, 1993-1995, Slovak Republic

Geographic indicators Total area (km2) Population density (persons/km2) Length of borders (km): Czech Republic Austria Hungary Ukraine Poland
1993

49 036 108 262 115 631 96 508

1994 1995

Demographic indicators Population (millions) Of which: women Live births (for 1 000 inhabitants) Deaths (for 1 000 inhabitants) Economic indicators GDP at current prices (billions Slovak koruny) Consumer prices (1990 = 100) Total employment (thousands) Unemployment rate (%) Industrial production (1990 = 100) Monthly earnings (Slovak koruny)

5.3 2.7 13.8 9.9 369.9 218.2 2 012 12.9 70.3 5 379

5.3 2.7 12.4 9.6 441.3 247.8 1 977 14.6 73.6 6 294

5.4 2.7 11.5 9.8 518.0 272.3 2 020 13.8 79.7 7 195

Sources: Short-term Economic Indicators, Transition Economies, OECD, 1996 and the Slovak Republic Employment Service.

Demographic and economic background The Slovak Republic was created on 1 January 1993, following the separation of the former Czech and Slovak Federal Republic (CSFR). The rst Czecho-Slovak Republic (CSR) was created in 1918. The country became socialist in 1948 and continued its existence as the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic (CSSR). The CSSR was federalised in 1968. Following the political changes in 1989, it was renamed the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic in 1990. The Slovak Republic is one of the smaller European countries in terms of both size and population (see Table II.35). It shares borders with ve other European countries: the Czech Republic, Austria, Hungary, Ukraine and Poland. The population structure by nationality or ethnic group as captured by the last population census in 1991 shows that out of the 5.3 million people resident in the Slovak Republic, the Slovak population represented 86 per cent. Hungarians, the largest minority, accounted for 11 per cent of the total population (see Table II.36). After four years of deep recession, the Slovak Republic is beginning to experience a marked improvement in its economic situation: GDP growth was almost 5 per cent in 1994 and 6.9 per cent in 1996. Foreign trade is the source of this growth, essentially due to the with recovery of domestic demand in trading partner countries, in

Table II.36. Structure of the Slovak population according to declared ethnic afliation, 1991
Percentages
Ethnic group 1991

Slovaks1 Hungarians Gypsies Czechs Others Total population (millions)

1. Slovaks with no other declared ethnic afliation. Source: Census, 1991.

85.7 10.8 1.4 1.0 1.1 5.3

151

particular the Czech Republic. Ination is decreasing (5.4 per cent in 1996 compared to 9.9 in 1995) and signicant improvements have been registered in the balance of payments and the budget decit. In contrast, the unemployment rate remains high despite a slight drop in 1996 (12.3 per cent) and the incidence of long-term unemployment is increasing. Rather than leading to the creation of additional jobs, output growth has translated so far only into labour productivity gains. In 1994, the number of Slovaks employed in the Czech Republic was twenty times higher, and in 1995 fty times higher, than the number of Czechs employed in the Slovak Republic. However, this may also be explained by the fact that a majority of the federal administration ofces and institutions (including universities), were located in the Czech Republic (mostly Prague) and many of the Slovak employees or students continued to work there after the division of its two republics. Recent legislation on international migration Emigration Recent legislative changes have dramatically affected the nature and magnitude of migration in the Slovak Republic. Slovak citizens now have the right to leave and return to the Slovak Republic as long as they are in possession of valid travel documents. Due to this liberalisation of travel abroad, those leaving the country are requested, but not required, to report their departure and thus the outow is thought to be underreported. Conditions of entry and residence of foreigners to the Slovak Republic The laws and procedures concerning the entry and stay of foreigners in the Slovak Republic are written down in the 1995 Act passed by the National Council of the Slovak Republic. Three types of residence permits exist for foreigners which are regulated and granted by the Ministry of the Interior or Slovak diplomatic and consular missions abroad: short-term residence permits are for a maximum of 180 days; long-term residence permits are issued for a maximum of one year (although repeated extensions are permitted) for employment, marriage, family reunication or humanitarian reasons; permanent residence permits are granted to foreigners for humanitarian reasons (including for family members) or when a national interest is involved. Employment of foreigners The laws and procedures governing the access of foreigners to the Slovak labour market are written down in the 1996 Act passed by the National Council of the Slovak Republic. Foreigners can work legally in the Slovak Republic in one of two ways: either they are individually issued a work permit as holders of a residence permit or they enter through a bilateral agreement on employment. Work permits are issued by regional ofces of the Employment Service. As of 1995, a denite work permit is issued only after the foreigner receives a preliminary work permit (the local labour ofce must verify that no suitable appliants are available among the registered unemployed) and a residence permit. Work permits are also required for foreigners employed by a foreign employer carrying out work in the Slovak Republic. Work permits can be issued for a maximum of one year with the possibility of repeated extensions, except for seasonal workers for whom the maximum is generally three months. The following categories are exempt from the work permit requirement: foreigners who have been granted refugee status and who have either resided in the Slovak Republic for at least three years; married a Slovak national; or had at least one child of Slovak nationality; permanent residents; Czech nationals with a residence permit (based on the 1992 agreement of mutual employment between the Slovak Republic and the Czech Republic); family members of diplomatic staff, consular staff, and employees of international governmental organisations (on a reciprocal basis). Bilateral Agreements Labour migration also occurs within the framework of bilateral intergovernmental agreements. Prior to 1989, these were almost exclusively limited to the nationals of socialist countries and developing countries (Angola,
152

Cuba, Laos, Mongolia, North Korea and Vietnam) but which have since been interrupted with the exception of Vietnam. Active agreements for labour migration exist with the Czech Republic, Hungary, Germany, Poland, the Russian Federation and Vietnam and are presently being negotiated with Austria, Switzerland, Ukraine, Romania and Hungary. Many of the agreements set quotas and objectives or restrictions ( e.g. skill development, language training or sector of employment) and are based on the principle of reciprocity which means that ows are two ways (the only unilateral agreement is with Vietnam), with Slovak workers also migrating temporarily for work to the other country. Workers entering the Slovak Republic through these agreements also need a residence permit. Legislation on refugees In autumn 1990 the Federal Assembly of the CSFR passed an Act on Refugees which established procedures for processing requests for refugee status. At the end of 1995 a new Act on refugees was passed by the National Council of the Slovak Republic. The main change was to accord a temporary asylum status for humanitarian reasons to persons who would not normally be eligible for refugee status. The status of refugee, granted by the Ministry of the Interior, is given for a period of ve years. The status is no longer valid if the refugee either obtains a permanent residence permit or acquires Slovak nationality. Refugees have equal rights and duties as Slovak citizens, with the exception of voting rights and military service. Naturalisations The acquisition of nationality is regulated by the Act on Nationality of January 1993. In order for a foreigner to be naturalised three requirements must be met: permanent residence for a continuous period of at least ve years; an adequate knowledge of the Slovak language; and the absence of penal convictions within the last ve years. Marriage to a Slovak national can serve as a waiver of the requirements. Naturalisation is granted by the Ministry of the Interior. After the split of the CSFR, the problem of the acquisition of the nationality was handled in different ways in the Slovak Republic and the Czech Republic. In the Slovak Republic, the Act on Nationality made it possible for all nationals of the CSFR to keep their previous nationality (either the Slovak Republic or the Czech Republic) and/or to opt for the nationality of the other Republic, thus permitting dual-nationality. The Czech Republic did not permit dual-nationality. Recent migration trends in the Slovak Republic Emigration As mentioned above, data do not provide an accurate picture of emigration as those leaving the country do not have to undergo any special administrative procedure. The only reliable gures on emigration refer to the outow to the Czech Republic in 1993. This is because a national of the Slovak Republic with dual nationality (Czech and Slovak) could not emigrate to the Czech Republic and be considered Czech unless they renounced their Slovak nationality. In that case, they had to rst register their change of residence with the Slovak authorities at which point they appeared in the statistics as emigrating to the Czech Republic. The data show that in 1993 roughly 7 000 left for the Czech Republic and less than one hundred for other destinations. By 1994 most Slovak nationals who wished to emigrate to the Czech Republic had done so with the result that departures (for all destinations combined) in both 1994 and 1995 numbered only a few hundred. Immigration The ows of migrants are monitored to some extent through the regular monitoring of the stocks and ows of population by the Statistical Ofce of the Slovak Republic. This is based on information about residence of persons in the Slovak Republic gathered from police departments and national administration ofces. If the intended stay is longer than 30 days, foreigners with either permanent or long-term residence are obliged within three days to announce their place of residence. The data do not capture commuting or travel which is unrelated to a change in permanent residence. Immigration ows (excluding those from the Czech Republic ) have almost doubled in 1995 from 1 800 persons in 1994 to over 3 000. Immigration from the Czech Republic has dropped sharply, from 7 000 persons in 1993, to 3 000 in 1994 and less than 1 500 in 1995. The monitoring system for immigration to the Slovak Republic is currently under reform (since June 1994). Thus it is not yet possible to report annual ows for residence permits issued and only a cumulative number is
153

available from the start of the system until the present. A breakdown of the data on long-term residents by country of origin (a total of 8 790 between June 1994 and October 1996) shows that the largest groups of migrants are from the Czech Republic, former Yugoslavia, Poland, Ukraine and Vietnam. Among OECD countries the largest numbers are from the United States, Germany, Austria and the United Kingdom. Most settle in Bratislava or the region of western Slovakia. Employment, entrepreneurial activities and study are the leading reasons for granting long-term residence permits. Permanent residence permits granted over the same period number 12 600 with the majority given to nationals from the Czech Republic, Ukraine, Poland and Hungary. Over 90 per cent were given for family reasons. Refugees and asylum seekers Data on asylum seekers and refugees are gathered by two sources: ofces of the border police which collect written declarations from foreigners who intend to apply for refugee status and give them to the Ministry of the Interior and by the humanitarian centres which receive asylum seekers. According to the statistics of the Ministry of the Interior, between 1993 and 1995 just under 500 applications for asylum were submitted of which 150 were accepted. These gures, however, underestimate the total numbers of asylum seekers in the Slovak Republic as many see their stay in the Slovak Republic as temporary and never apply for ofcial status. Data from the humanitarian centres show that 1 300 people passed through the centres between 1992 and 1995. In addition, over the past two years 480 Ukrainian nationals of Slovak origin were granted permanent residence status. The majority were from areas affected by the Chernobyl disaster. Employment of foreigners Data provided by the Employment Service based on work permits issued by labour ofces showed that the number of valid work permit holders, both newly granted permits and extensions, stabilised at approximately 2 700 at the end of 1995 (see Table II.37). Nationals from Ukraine, Poland, the United States and former Yugoslavia are the most numerous. Hungarians accounted for only 2 per cent. The low share of Hungarians in this context does not reect the share of Hungarians in the total labour force. The Hungarian minority does not appear in the statistics because as residents they do not need a work permit. The relatively low number of work permit holders can also be explained by the fact that foreigners employed on the basis of international governmental agreements do not need to request work permits. The same is true for Czech nationals.

Table II.37.

Stock of foreign workers in the Slovak Republic, by country of origin, 1994-19961

1994 1995 1996

Work permit holders2 Ukraine Poland United States United Kingdom Former Yugoslavia Germany Romania Russia Others Total work permit holders Estimates of Czech workers3
1. 2. 3.

540 390 220 170 230 100 190 120 780 2 740 1 200

400 290 190 170 200 130 110 180 1 020 2 690 1 200

520 380 270 210 180 140 120 100 440 2 820 ..

31 December of each year except in 1996 (30 June). Work permits are delivered for up to 1 year. Figures include renewals. Under a bilateral agreement signed by the Czech and Slovak Republics in 1992, nationals of each Republic have free access to both labour markets. Estimates by the Ministry of Labour. Sources: Ministry of Labour and the Slovak Republic Employment Service.

154

Policy developments Since January 1993, several legislative measures have been adopted to progressively align Slovak legislation on emigration, immigration and refugees, with those in place in the European Union. The Slovak Republic remains a country of emigration, but over the last few years, immigration has developed which has led to increased attention to dening legislation on the entry, stay and employment of foreigners in the Slovak Republic. Bilateral agreements govern, to a large extent, both the employment of Slovak nationals abroad as well as that of nationals of signatory countries working in the Slovak Republic. These kinds of agreements have been signed with Germany, the Czech Republic, Poland and the Russian Federation and are currently being negotiated with Austria, Ukraine, Romania and Hungary. In addition, other agreements exist for training exchanges between countries (with Switzerland, Luxembourg, Finland and Austria).

SPAIN
Introduction A number of policy measures have had an impact on the recent trend of migration ows in Spain. It has been made easier for immigrants of Spanish nationality or origin to return to Spain, a quota for the number of new migrant workers admitted has been established and the legislation on the right of asylum has been amended so as to make the criteria for eligibility more stringent. Lastly, Spain implemented a third regularisation programme between 23 April and 23 August 1996. Emigration The number of Spaniards emigrating as recorded by the Directorate-General for Migration has been falling steadily since the 1980s; in 1995 it was only about 15 000 (see Table II.38). Only 40 per cent of these individuals emigrated to a European country. Most of these new migrants do not wish to settle in the host country, and generally hold temporary or seasonal jobs, mainly in agriculture and construction. The number of Spaniards returning to Spain, most of whom had settled in a nearby country (Switzerland, Germany, France) has stabilised at around 20 000 since 1993 and fell slightly in 1995 (18 500). At the same time, there has been an increase in the number of people who have recovered their Spanish nationality (15 500 in 1995 as compared with 3 200 in 1993), which shows that these returning emigrants clearly wish to be integrated into Spanish society. Immigration and the foreign population Foreigners must rst obtain a legal right of establishment (not required for EU nationals) before a residence permit may be issued. The number of residence permits granted rose from 12 300 in 1993 to 15 700 in 1994. These gures give only an approximate indication of inows since EU nationals are not counted and exemptions from the residence permit requirement (11 000 in 1994) are generally granted to individuals already living in Spain. At the end of 1995, some 500 000 foreigners held residence permits (see Table II.38), of whom nearly 60 per cent were either nationals of one of the 15 EU member countries or relatives of a foreigner who was an EU national (this gure does not include permits valid for less than six months and those granted to students). The growth of the relative share of EU nationals in relation to the total foreign population shows both the increase in trade with neighbouring countries (France and Portugal, but also Germany and the United Kingdom) and the tighter immigration policy regarding non-EU nationals. Moroccan immigrants are the largest single group (75 000), followed by the English (65 000), Germans (42 000), Portuguese (37 000) and French (31 000). A third of these foreign residents live in Madrid and Barcelona alone. Although Spain has become a country of immigration, the share of foreigners remains relatively small (1.2 per cent of the total population in 1995). Asylum seekers The number of persons applying for asylum in 1995 (5 700) fell by half compared with the previous year. The more restrictive measures that entered into force in mid-1994 were no doubt the reason for this. Applicants were from 120 different countries, the largest groups being Romanians, Cubans and Iranians.
155

Table II.38. Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force in Spain
Thousands
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Outows of nationals Of which: outows to a European country Returns of nationals Stock of foreign residents1 By region of origin2 Europe America Africa Asia Oceania Stateless Not specied By region of residence Madrid Barcelona Alicante Other Acquisition and recovery of Spanish nationality Applications for recovering Spanish nationality Applications for acquiring Spanish nationality Grants of Spanish nationality (excluding persons recovering their Spanish nationality)

39.1 34.3 25.3 360.7 181.4 83.3 62.8 32.1 0.7 0.4 .. .. ..

20.4 14.5 32.2 393.1 197.0 89.3 71.3 33.9 0.7 0.9 .. .. ..

13.0 8.8 21.0 430.4 217.5 96.8 79.3 34.9 0.8 1.1 86.1 57.7 36.6 250.1

12.1 6.6 20.4 461.4 238.5 103.3 82.6 35.7 0.8 0.3 93.7 65.1 38.8 263.9

14.4 9.1 18.5 499.8 254.5 108.9 95.8 38.5 0.9 0.3 0.9 93.0 78.0 39.5 289.4

Regularisation programmes of foreigners in an irregular situation according to the kind of permit granted 108.4 Combined residence and work permits granted by industry division 108.4 Agriculture 15.5 Industry 8.4 Construction 16.6 Personal services 23.3 Hotel 13.6 Trade 9.3 Transport 1.2 Other services 16.8 Other 3.8 Residence permits granted Total work permits granted4 Of which: women By industry division Agriculture Industry Building Services Not specied By region of origin Africa Central and South America Asia Europe (except EU since 1992)5 North America Oceania and other Stock of foreign workers6 126.1 41.5 13.7 13.1 15.6 83.6 58.7 36.8 15.8 10.7 3.9 0.3 171.0

95.0 26.8 11.7 8.5 13.5 61.3 47.2 24.9 12.1 7.8 2.8 0.3 139.4

93.7 26.4 13.2 9.0 12.6 58.9 49.3 22.8 11.3 8.1 2.1 0.2 117.4

88.6 25.3 18.7 6.9 9.4 50.6 3.1 49.5 20.2 11.0 6.1 1.7 0.2 121.8

16.83 13.5 1.7 0.5 2.1 3.1 2.2 1.6 0.3 1.7 0.3 3.3 100.0 29.6 18.7 7.4 10.4 57.3 6.2 56.9 22.8 11.8 6.7 1.6 0.2 138.7

6.1 7.4 3.8

10.5 7.9 5.3

9.7 8.8 8.4

8.3 10.9 7.8

6.6 12.7 6.8

156

Stock of foreigners who hold a residence permit. Permits of short duration (less than 6 months) as well as students are excluded. Data refer to the population on 31 December of the years indicated. Data include 108 372 permits delivered following the 1991 regularisation programme. 2. See details by nationality in Statistical Annex B1. 3. These gures are provisional and refer to the 1996 regularisation programme. During this programme, two kinds of permits could be issued: a two-year combined residence and work permit without restriction on geographical or professional mobility. A three-year permit could be issued if the worker who is in an irregular situation could prove that he had held a C or a E permit (which allow to work as a wage earner and self-employed respectively without any geographical restriction). The duration of the permit is limited to one year for the members of the family; a residence permit which does not allow to work. 4. Total permits issued, including seasonal and cross-border workers and renewals of permits. Provisional gures for 1995. 5. Since 1 January 1992, the nationals of the European Union do not need a work permit. 6. Data are for 31 December of each year and are counts of valid work permits. From 1992 onwards, workers from the EU are not included. Data include work permits delivered following the 1991 regularisation programme. Provisional data for 1995. See details by nationality in Statistical Annex B2. Sources: General Directorate on Migration; Ministry of Labour and Social Security; Ministry of Justice.

1.

Foreigners and the labour market Some 100 000 work permits were issued in 1995 (according to preliminary data), including permits for seasonal and cross-border workers and renewals. After following a downward trend since 1991, the number of permits rose by approximately 10 per cent in 1995 and, because of the regularisation programme carried out in 1996, this upward trend should continue (see Table II.38). It should also be mentioned that since 1992 EU nationals are no longer required to have work permits. The downward trend referred to earlier can be explained not only by the slowdown in economic activity from the beginning of the 1990s, but also by the drop in the number of permits granted. Lastly, it must be pointed out that the gures for 1995 are still provisional and do not include all the data on the annual quota of new workers. The initial estimates of the quotas effects show that the number of permits issued was considerably higher than that projected for mid-year, particularly in the sectors of domestic services and in agriculture. Of the 100 000 foreigners who obtained a permit in 1995 (or whose permit was renewed), over half came from Africa (primarily from Morocco) and nearly a quarter from Latin America (Dominican Republic, Peru). Among the nationals of Asian countries, the Chinese and Filipinos were most numerous, and from non-EU European countries, the Poles were the largest group. More work permits were granted to women than to men for nationals of the Dominican Republic, Peru, the Philippines and Colombia. Between 1994 and 1995, the total number of foreign workers holding a valid work permit rose by over 10 per cent. Holders of work permits are primarily employed in hotels and in domestic or social services, followed by the construction, transport and agricultural sectors.

Table II.39. Foreigners who beneted from the 1991 regularisation programme and whose residence permits were renewed, 1994, Spain
Number of foreigners regularised 1991 Permits renewed

1994 % of foreigners regularised in 1991

Numbers

Numbers

Total Breakdown by sex Men Women Breakdown by country of origin Morocco Argentina Peru Dominican Republic China Poland Others Breakdown by economic sector Services to private households Construction Agriculture Hotel Business Services to enterprises Others
Source:

110 113 78 808 31 305 49 7 5 5 4 3 34 23 16 15 13 8 8 23 155 474 708 548 153 339 736 289 784 719 437 685 997 202

81 906 58 770 23 136 38 4 4 4 3 2 22 16 13 9 11 5 6 18 972 768 939 718 281 593 635 254 303 977 124 389 950 909

74.4 74.5 73.9 79.3 63.8 86.5 85.0 79.0 77.7 65.2 69.8 79.3 63.5 82.8 62.0 77.2 81.5

General Directorate on Migration; Ministry of Labour and Social Security.

157

Policy developments New legislation on the right of asylum entered into force in June 1994. Its main objective is to bring the legislation into line with international standards. The distinction between asylum seekers and refugees was abolished, while the rights of refugees (as dened by the Geneva Convention) with respect to residence and work were strengthened. The processing of applications has been speeded up in order to eliminate delays. A more stringent link between the refusal to grant an application and the expulsion of the individual concerned has been established. The Act of 2 November 1995 amended the legislation regarding the recovery of Spanish nationality. Prior to this Act returning emigrants who wished to recover their Spanish nationality had to obtain an exemption from the ten-year legal residence requirement. This formality is no longer required. Under the new Aliens Act (February 1996), a programme of regularisation was implemented between April and August 1996. The programme largely beneted foreigners who had not been able to renew their residence or work permit. In fact, one quarter of foreigners participating in the 1991 regularisation programme did not obtain the renewal of their permit in 1994 (see Table II.39).

SWEDEN
Introduction Following strong growth in inows of foreigners in the early 1990s, the gures for 1995 registered a decline. This decline is due, in large part, to fewer entries from the former Yugoslavia. Labour market conditions in Sweden continued to improve with a falling, but still relatively high, unemployment rate (7.7 per cent in 1995). Migration ows of foreigners Inows of foreign nationals, including Nordic citizens and refugees, grew between 1992 and 1994. In 1994, the number of entries reached 75 000, a 35 per cent increase on the previous year (see Table II.40). It then dropped in 1995 to 36 000. These uctuations were mainly due to changes in inows from Bosnia-Herzegovina and other regions of the former Yugoslavia (41 500 in 1994 and 7 100 in 1995). When examining inows by region of origin, the level of entries of Nordic country nationals has been low since 1991 (between 5 100 to 6 800) when compared with the large inows of the 1980s (more than 10 000 each year). Inows from European countries showed a substantial decline from 48 500 in 1994 to 15 000 in 1995, again, due to a fall in the number of nationals from former Yugoslavia (see Table II.40). Inows from other European countries, however, have remained relatively stable for a decade. Even with the recent decline, ows from European countries still account for 40 per cent of total inows in 1995. Flows from outside Europe are mainly from Asia and although this number decreased slightly between 1994 and 1995 it still represents a quarter of total inows. In 1994 and 1995 roughly 79 000 and 32 000 people respectively obtained residence permits. In both years family and refugee migration accounted for over 80 per cent of all permits. The largest group of foreigners receiving permits for family reunication was from former Yugoslavia, followed by nationals of Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Turkey and Poland. Permits granted to EU nationals on the basis of the European Economic Area (EEA) agreement accounted for 6 000 in 1994 and 4 700 in 1995 (see Table II.40). Refugees and asylum seekers Asylum claims continued to decline with 18 600 and 9 000 applications recorded in 1994 and 1995 respectively (see Table II.40). This can be compared with the peak gure of 84 000 in 1992. Asylum seekers from former Yugoslavia still account for a large share of the total, although actual numbers have dropped sharply (69 400 in 1992, 10 600 in 1994 and 2 300 in 1995). This decline was due not only to the improved situation in Bosnia but also to the introduction of visas for nationals of Bosnia-Herzegovina to enter Sweden as of June 1993. Similar measures were taken during 1993 for nationals of Serbia-Montenegro and former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and in 1994 for people from Haiti (although these measures were later abolished), the Ivory Coast, the Gambia, Niger, Togo and Uganda. In 1994, approximately 45 000 asylum seekers were granted permanent residence, either as Convention refugees, de facto refugees, quota refugees or on humanitarian grounds (see Table II.40). Between 1994 and
158

Table II.40.

Current gures on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Sweden
Thousands
1992 1993 1994 1995

Inows of foreigners by region and country of origin Nordic countries Finland Denmark Norway Other Europe Of which: Bosnia Herzegovina2 Asia North America Other America Africa Other regions

39.6 6.0 2.7 1.3 1.9 7.2 1.8 15.6 1.1 2.2 4.7 2.9 13.2 8.3 3.1 3.4 1.8 1.8 0.2 0.5 0.6 0.9 0.2 1.1 84.0 69.4 3.2 34.9 19.7 12.8 1.2 0.9 0.2 499.1

54.9 5.2 2.5 1.2 1.5 28.4 20.7 8.9 0.8 1.9 3.8 5.8 14.8 7.4 2.9 2.9 1.6 2.8 0.6 0.9 1.5 0.3 1.3 37.6 28.8 2.3 58.9 19.8 36.5 1.6 0.9 0.2 507.5 1 163.6 869.1 455.6 413.4 294.5 200.4 94.1 221.0

74.8 6.2 2.8 1.8 1.6 48.5 25.7 10.8 0.9 2.0 5.0 1.4 15.8 6.6 2.6 2.4 1.6 3.4 0.9 1.1 2.3 0.5 1.0 18.6 10.6 1.7 79.1 26.0 44.9 6.0 1.1 0.9 0.1 537.4 1 598.5 922.1 477.9 444.2 676.5 583.2 93.2 213.0

36.1 6.3 2.8 1.8 1.7 14.9 4.6 9.0 1.5 1.3 2.3 0.8 15.4 6.7 2.9 2.2 1.6 2.6 1.0 0.5 1.1 0.3 3.3 9.0 2.3 1.8 32.4 19.7 5.6 4.7 1.5 0.8 0.2 531.8 1 630.1 936.0 497.3 438.7 694.0 613.8 80.2 220.0

Outows of foreigners by region and country of origin1 Nordic countries Finland Norway Denmark Other Europe Of which: Bosnia Herzegovina2 North America Other America Asia Africa Other regions Inows of asylum seekers Of which: Former Yugoslavia Iraq Number of permanent permits by category of admission3 Family reunication Refugees EEA-agreement Foreign students Adopted children Employment Stock of foreign population4 Estimates of persons with foreign background Foreign-born Swedish citizens Foreigners Born in Sweden Swedish citizens6 Foreigners Stock of foreign labour7
1.
5

1 120.8 834.5 430.8 403.7 286.3 190.9 95.4 233.0

Data are from population registers and refer to persons who declare their intention to stay in Sweden for longer than one year. Figures do not include asylum seekers who are waiting for decisions and temporary workers. 2. Former Yugoslavia in 1992. 3. Residence permits are not required for Nordic citizens. 4. Data are from population registers and refer to the population on 31 December of the years indicated. See details by nationality in Statistical Annex B1. 5. Foreign background, rst or second generation immigrant only. 6. Young persons (up to 17) with at least one parent born abroad. 7. Annual average from the Labour Force Survey. Sources: Swedish Immigration Board and Statistics Sweden.

159

1995, the permits issued to quota refugees decreased from 7 400 to 2 000 and on humanitarian grounds from 33 600 to 2 100. Following a government decision in April 1994, some 20 000 Kosovo Albanians who entered Sweden as asylum seekers before 1 January 1993 were granted permanent residence permits on humanitarian grounds. In 1995 the total number of refugees granted permanent residence decreased to 5 600. Labour migration The immigration of non-Nordic citizens to specically enter the labour market in Sweden is restricted. Permits are given only to highly skilled workers, including employees of multinational companies. Permanent residence permits issued for purposes of work numbered about 5 700 annually during the 1980s and early 1990s, or roughly 1 per cent of all permanent residence permits over the same period. In 1994 the number of work permits granted fell to 130. This was the lowest number recorded since the beginning of the 1970s. In 1995, it increased slightly to 190 with approximately 70 permits granted to Asians (of which China accounted for half) and 40 permits to persons from North America. Furthermore, among 4 600 residence permit holders, under the EEA agreement, 1 900 were given access to the Swedish labour market as either a self-employed or salaried worker in 1995. In addition to permanent residence permits, temporary work permits are granted to meet temporary shortages of qualied labour. These temporary permits are granted only to educated and/or experienced persons and are restricted to a specic time period, occupational branch and employer. Between 1982 and 1992 an average of 12 500 permits were granted each year, half of which were granted to artists and musicians. In 1994 some 7 200 temporary permits were issued. Holders of temporary work permits are not included in the annual immigration statistics (although students staying one year or more are counted as immigrants). Seasonal work permits (non-renewable) can be granted for short-term employment (for only three months between May and October), mainly in agriculture and horticulture. There were 3 400 seasonal workers in 1994 and 4 500 in 1995.

Emigration of foreigners Outows of foreigners ranged between 11 000 to 16 000 since the late 1980s. In 1994 and 1995 they were 15 800 and 15 400 respectively. Return migration is especially characteristic of Nordic citizens and in 1995 close to 7 000 Nordic nationals departed. The outows of non-Europeans have been stable since the late 1960s. Foreign population In 1995, roughly 532 000 foreigners were living in Sweden (5.2 per cent of the total population), of which 85 per cent were born abroad (see Table II.40). In spite of the growth in the share of the non-Nordic foreign population in the 1990s, one-third of foreign citizens were from a Nordic country, the majority from Finland. Another third were from European countries, notably from former Yugoslavia. Asians, mostly from Iraq, Iran and Turkey, represent the third largest group. While 50 per cent of immigrants born in Nordic countries have been settled in Sweden for over 10 years, the majority of those born in non-European countries have arrived within the last ve years. The number of people in Sweden who were born in a foreign country was 922 000 in 1994 and 936 000 in 1995. Of these, half were naturalised Swedes. Persons born in a Nordic country are more often naturalised than those born in another European country. If the number of Swedes with a foreign background (people born in Sweden with at least one parent born abroad) is added to the number of foreign-born, the gure reaches 1.6 million. Naturalisations Access to Swedish nationality is relatively easy and is ofcially encouraged. In 1994 about 35 000 foreigners acquired Swedish citizenship, a decline of 8 000 from the previous year. In 1995, the number again dropped to 32 000. Although the number is decreasing, it is still twice the level before 1990. The number of naturalisations in 1995 was close to 7 per cent of the foreign resident population, a relatively high rate when compared with other OECD European countries.
160

Foreigners and the labour market Approximately 220 000 foreigners were estimated to be in the labour force in Sweden in 1995 (see Table II.40). The number was slightly higher in the late 1980s and in the early 1990s but it has stabilised since 1993. The participation rate of foreigners is relatively low compared with that of nationals, which was 74 per cent in 1995. It is particularly low for nationals from non-Nordic countries, at 36 per cent, while the rate for nationals of other Nordic countries stands at 62 per cent. Those from Turkey, Syria, Greece, Italy, Tunisia and Morocco are more likely to start their own business and become self-employed. Between 1990 and 1993, the unemployment rate of foreigners from both Nordic and non-Nordic countries grew, from under 4 to 12 per cent for the former and from approximately 5 to 28 per cent for the latter. The unemployment rate of Swedish nationals rose from less than 2 per cent to just under 8 per cent over the same period. Although the Swedish unemployment rate has declined since 1994, the rate for foreigners from both Nordic countries and non-Nordic countries has continued to rise. For foreigners from former Yugoslavia (in particular from Bosnia-Herzegovina), Iraq, Iran and Africa, unemployment rates are notably high.

Policy developments As of March 1996, the administration of migration policy and integration policy has been divided between two ministries. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is now in charge of migration policy and integration policy became the responsibility of a new ministry, the Ministry of the Interior. A new immigration law was adopted in November 1996 based on the report submitted by the Parliamentary Refugee Policy Commission. The new law will apply a broader interpretation of the Geneva Convention with regard to providing protection to asylum seekers. However, at the same time, the right to asylum will be restricted to war refugees and the current protection category of de facto refugees will disappear. Moreover, the immigration of relatives will be restricted to married couples, cohabitants and unmarried children under the age of 18. One of the concerns of the Swedish Government has been to adapt its integration policy to recent changes brought about by the large inows of asylum seekers. In April 1996, the Parliamentary Commission on Immigration Policy, appointed by the government in 1994, reported that the current policy had not been successful in avoiding ethnic segregation. It also recommended that all persons with the right to permanent residence in Sweden must have equal rights and opportunities, no matter whether they have immigrated to Sweden or were born in Sweden. However, special integration policy for newcomers should be available for a restricted period of up to ve years. Taking account of the report, a new government Bill on integration will be submitted to Parliament in 1997. Other questions to be considered are the living conditions of immigrants in urban areas and the process and importance of Swedish language acquisition. A Bill concerning the living conditions of immigrants and the increasing ethnic segregation in urban areas will be submitted to Parliament in 1997. The National Agency for Education has commissioned a research centre at Stockholm University to evaluate the efciency and effectiveness in Swedish language education. Along with four other Nordic countries in the Nordic free-circulation area, Sweden signed a co-operation agreement with the Schengen countries in December 1996. The free-circulation area will thus be extended from Nordic countries to the Schengen area after ratication by the Swedish Parliament.

SWITZERLAND
Introduction The economic upturn which began in Switzerland in 1994 did not continue in 1995. Annual GDP growth fell from 2.1 per cent in 1994 to 0.1 per cent in 1995. In the same year, the consumer price index, which was distorted by the introduction of the value added tax, rose by 1.8 per cent (or double the gure for the previous year). The situation on the labour market improved slightly, with a decline in unemployment to an average annual rate of 4.2 per cent (against 4.7 per cent in 1994).
161

Migration and settlement Switzerlands resident foreign population, i.e. foreigners holding a permanent or one-year permit, continued to rise in 1995, albeit at a slower pace (2.3 per cent). At the end of 1995 this population totalled 1 330 600, or 18.9 per cent of the countrys entire population, which was an all-time high. Overall, the number of new arrivals with resident status and the number of seasonal workers whose temporary permits were converted into one-year or permanent permits decreased by 9 per cent between 1994 and 1995, with a much sharper fall for permit conversions (see Table II.41). Outows, which had been declining since 1992, were again up in 1995. The decrease in net migration was, however, more pronounced in 1995, even though it was still positive (26 800 against 39 400 in 1994). The composition by nationality was quite similar to that of 1994, with two main characteristics. Former Yugoslavia accounted for 60 per cent of net migration, followed by Portugal (11 per cent). The difference between the exits and entries of Italian and Spanish nationals continued to widen. Refugees and asylum-seekers After a sharp fall (35 per cent between 1993 and 1994), the number of asylum applications rose slightly to 17 000 in 1995. In the last two years, most asylum applications were made by the nationals of former Yugoslavia (46 per cent in 1994 and 55 per cent in 1995), followed by those of Sri Lanka, Turkey and Angola. The number of persons who were granted refugee status in 1995 represented 15 per cent of all applications on which a decision had been reached at the rst court hearing (against 4.5 per cent in 1992). This acceptance rate, which varied with the applicants nationality, was distorted by the fact that many applicants (8 300) did not wait for the decision on their application. They either left the country or remain in Switzerland illegally. Employment of foreigners In 1995 the labour force included 976 000 foreigners (annual average), or slightly fewer than in 1994. They represented 26 per cent of the total labour force. This high percentage illustrates the degree to which the Swiss labour market and economy are dependent on foreign labour. In 1995, close to 80 per cent of foreign workers had permanent resident status in Switzerland (holders of either a settlement or annual permit). The remainder consisted mainly of cross-border workers (16 per cent) and seasonal workers (5 per cent) (see Table II.42). However, these percentages (calculated at the end of December) vary over the year depending on the uctuations in demand from sectors using seasonal labour (hotels/catering, construction/civil engineering and agriculture). For example in August, the peak month for seasonal labour, the proportion of seasonal workers was 5.7 per cent in 1995 (6.5 per cent in 1994, see Chart II.14). Foreigners are more likely to be unemployed than Swiss citizens, and their share in the total unemployed has grown. It was 45 per cent in December 1995, or 6 points more than in 1993. Remittances by foreign workers amounted to SF 11.5 million, including 8.3 billion by cross-border workers. Policy developments Since 1994, an important issue in Switzerland has been the social integration of foreigners. The Federal Commission for Foreigners (CFE) is to a large extent responsible for this activity, which was extended in 1995 to the integration of refugees. The CFE has organised national study days on migrants health and the integration of the Islamic community and founded a magazine in order to improve mutual understanding between foreign and Swiss nationals. On the legislative side, this objective of social integration resulted in December 1995 in a proposal for full revision of the law on asylum and a partial revision of the law on the residence and settlement of foreigners. In this context, a Federal Anti-Racism Commission was set up in March 1995 to combat all forms of racial discrimination. Since 19 October 1994, under an Act on the entry of seasonal workers, seasonal permits have been limited to the nationals of traditional recruitment countries from the European Union and EFTA and only in special cases to nationals of other traditional recruitment countries (before, only new work permits had been subject to this rule). The restriction was to be lifted at the end of 1996. The consequences of this measure explain the fall in the total number of seasonal workers, which in over 90 per cent of cases involves the nationals of former Yugoslavia. Since October 1995, the immigration of skilled workers has been encouraged under legislation which facilitates access by family members to the labour market and permits the entry of service providers on a temporary basis. Lastly, the conversion of seasonal permits into one-year or permanent permits is still under discussion. The ban on family reunication and on occupational and geographical mobility and the requirement
162

Table II.41. Components of change in the foreign population,1 1988-1995, Switzerland

Population movements 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Stock at end December Increase between 1 January and 31 December of each year Of which: Entries into Switzerland Conversions2 Births Other3 Decrease between 1 January and 31 December of each year Of which: Exits from Switzerland Acquisition of Swiss nationality Deaths Other Net change over the year

1 006 530 98 813 76 080 10 468 12 259 6 71 020 55 854 11 243 3 912 11 27 793

1 040 325 105 555 80 397 12 592 12 466 100 71 760 57 546 10 203 3 999 12 33 795

1 100 262 132 231 101 372 16 339 14 471 49 72 294 59 587 8 508 4 158 41 59 937

1 163 233 142 228 109 756 16 889 15 567 16 79 257 66 424 8 603 4 221 9 62 971

1 213 463 146 380 112 100 16 083 18 178 19 96 150 80 373 11 172 4 587 18 50 230

1 260 283 135 372 103 954 13 682 17 718 18 88 552 71 164 13 576 4 410 52 46 820

1 300 089 122 206 91 688 11 925 18 573 20 82 400 64 188 13 756 4 410 46 39 806

1 330 574 119 910 87 894 6 374 18 037 7 6053 89 425 67 461 16 795 4 730 439 30 485

1. The foreign population includes only foreigners with annual or settlement permits. 2. Conversions of seasonal permits to annual permits. 3. The sharp rise in the category other increases between 1994 and 1995 is due to an updating of gures following the introduction of a new data processing system. Source: Ofce f e d eral des e trangers.

163

Table II.42. Foreign labour force by industry division, by type of residence permit and by sex, 31 December 1995,1 Switzerland
Thousands
Type of permit Industry Settlement permit Total Women Annual permit Total Women Cross-border workers Total Women Seasonal workers Total

Agriculture, hunting, forestry and shing Electricity, gas and water supply Extractive and processing industries of non-energy minerals and derived products; chemical industry Metal industries and manufacture of precision metal products Other manufacturing industries Building Trade, hotels and restaurants Transport and communications Finance, insurance, business services and real estate Public administration Other services of which: Education, culture, health and personal services Not specied Total

9.4 1.2 16.3 110.7 60.8 68.5 118.5 22.4 43.0 6.4 76.2 9.4 542.9

2.6 0.2 3.8 22.8 23.6 2.3 54.6 5.5 18.0 3.3 50.1 4.6 191.5

5.4 0.1 4.5 20.6 17.1 25.7 54.5 4.5 14.1 1.3 37.4 0.5 185.7

1.0 1.0 4.0 6.3 0.6 27.1 0.8 4.1 0.6 24.0 0.2 69.8

1.3 0.4 12.6 36.8 19.4 13.8 31.2 7.2 10.3 0.6 17.4 151.0

0.4 3.5 7.4 7.1 0.5 15.0 1.4 4.0 0.2 12.5 52.0

7.4 0.8 0.9 0.9 19.0 23.4 0.4 0.2 0.8 53.7

1. End of December except for seasonal workers for whom gures refer to the end of August 1995. Source: Ofce f e d eral des e trangers.

Chart II.14. Foreign labour force by type of residence permit,1 1970-1995, Switzerland Thousands
Settlement permits Annual permits Permits delivered to cross-border workers Permits delivered to seasonal workers

1 000

Permits delivered to seasonal workers: - at the end of August of each year - at the end of December of each year

1 000

800

800

600

600

400

400

200

200

0 1970

72

74

76

78

80

82

84

86

88

90

92

94

1. Stock on 31 December of the given year. Source: Registre central des trangers.

164

to leave Switzerland for a stay of at least three months a year in the home country make the status of seasonal worker a very restrictive one that results in social problems and may cause labour market distortions. Changes to this legislation are planned in response to these problems.

TURKEY
Introduction The upward trend of GNP that began in 1994 continued in 1995 (8.1 per cent). However, ination continues to remain high (approximately 80 per cent during the rst six months of 1996). The trade decit worsened in 1995, and slightly less than half of it was offset by remittances of Turks living abroad (US$5 billion in 1995). Because of the high rate of unemployment, combined with underemployment, at the end of 1995 some 700 000 Turkish workers were registered with the Turkish Employment Ofce in the hope of obtaining a job abroad. Emigration and trends of the Turkish population abroad Legal migration to Western Europe has fallen sharply in recent years and mainly consists of ows due to family reunication. The new outlets for Turkish emigrants, who are mainly blue-collar workers, are the countries of the New Independent States (NIS), North Africa and the Middle East. At the same time, in Western Europe there continue to be large numbers of Turkish asylum seekers (30 000 in 1995, 25 000 of whom were in Germany) and illegal Turkish immigrants. The annual emigration ow of Turkish workers has stabilised at approximately 60 000 since 1992 (see Table II.43). The most important change in this regard in 1995 was a shift in the destination of ows. While in 1993, 60 per cent of the workers recruited by the Turkish Employment Ofce went to the Middle East (mainly Saudi Arabia) and North Africa, only one-third now go to this region. Most of the other workers are employed in countries of the former Soviet Union. The ow of workers to Western European countries represents slightly over 4 per cent of all such ows. The most salient feature of recent Turkish labour migration is the predominance of ows linked to public works projects carried out abroad by Turkish or foreign rms. Because of its temporary and job-specic nature, this movement is unlikely to result in family reunication and permanent settlement abroad. Given the contraction of labour demand in Saudi Arabia, the Turkish government is actively trying to identify new possibilities for

Table II.43. Number of Turkish workers sent abroad by the National Employment and Placement Ofce, by country or region of destination, 1991-1995, Turkey
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

New Independent States Saudi Arabia Israel EU countries1 Libya United States Romania Kuwait2 Australia Cyprus Germany Other countries Total

4 716 40 782 .. 630 4 728 115 .. 189 308 804 .. 1 552 53 020

6 708 46 467 .. 1 734 2 432 .. .. 465 208 727 .. 2 016 60 030

21 436 35 826 .. 2 021 2 549 .. .. 255 166 209 1 989 998 63 244

41 837 13 050 .. 2 062 1 869 .. .. 58 139 63 .. 2 130 61 145

35 14 3 2 1

792 529 123 607 753 294 292 256 248 .. .. 589

59 483

1. In 1995, the data also include the other countries of the Economic European Area. 2. In 1992, the data also include the other Gulf states. Source: Ministry of Labour and Social Security, General Directorate of Workers Abroad.

165

workers, and it is also trying to reach social security agreements with the countries of the NIS so that Turkish workers already there will be covered. The Turkish population abroad The number of Turks living abroad at the end of 1995 is estimated by Turkish consulates abroad, to be nearly 3.4 million, which represents 5.2 per cent of Turkeys total population. Compared with the Turkish labour force, the percentage of Turkish workers employed abroad is somewhat higher (6 per cent). The Turkish population living abroad has grown steadily for a number of years, partly due to new inows, but primarily because of the large number of births (nearly 44 000 in Germany in 1995, out of a total of 60 000 in all countries of residence). Nearly 90 per cent of Turkish migrant workers (1.3 million) live in countries of the European Economic Area (EEA), primarily in Germany (60 per cent), France, the Netherlands, Austria, Switzerland, Belgium and Sweden. The unemployment rate of Turks living abroad is much higher than that of nationals, but also than that of most other migrants. Turks continue to be more vulnerable to unemployment in EU countries despite the fact that the association agreements signed between Turkey and EU member countries in 1976 gives Turkish workers priority for jobs vacancies not lled by workers from the EU. Naturalisations Until the end of the 1980s, Turkish nationals abroad rarely applied for naturalisation. This can be explained by the fact that some host countries, in particular Germany, have restrictive legislation that makes naturalisation difcult. Furthermore, many Turks harbour the hope of returning permanently to Turkey one day. Lastly, in most cases applicants were required to renounce their Turkish nationality upon acquiring the nationality of another country, which led to the loss of property rights in Turkey. In 1995, Turkish legislation governing nationality was amended, and now all Turkish nationals who acquire the nationality of another country may continue to own property in Turkey. This change should encourage a larger number of Turks living abroad to choose the nationality of their host country. Since the beginning of the 1990s, the number of naturalisations has grown, especially in Germany and the Netherlands. In the case of Germany, this is probably because of the recent changes in German legislation on naturalisation. Return migration Return migration by Turkish emigrants is relatively low. There are many reasons why Turks choose to remain in host countries: their family has already joined them abroad, second and third-generation children speak the language of the host country uently and health care and medical services are more highly developed than in Turkey. Lastly, because of the performance of the Turkish economy, prospects of nding a job in Turkey are not promising at present, especially for young people of the second or third-generation. Immigration Although Turkey is not generally considered to be a host country, the political upheavals that have taken place in neighbouring countries (Bulgaria, former Yugoslavia, Iraq and Iran, for example), together with more restrictive immigration policies in the other Western European countries, have led a growing number of migrants to settle in Turkey. However, because of the scant information available, it is difcult to provide gures on the entry and stock of foreign residents in Turkey. A growing number of migrants, particularly from Romania and countries of the New Independent States, initially come to Turkey as tourists and then, when they are unable to enter Western European countries, stay on and try to nd a job in Turkey. The current legislation allows foreigners to stay in Turkey provided they have a job or nancial means to support themselves. Since work permits are granted by a number of different institutions, it is not possible to evaluate and verify correctly the number of foreigners working in Turkey. Asylum seekers During the past ten years, three major groups of asylum seekers have entered Turkey: ethnic Turks from Bulgaria, Iraqis and nationals of former Yugoslavia. Although Turkey is a signatory to the 1951 Geneva Convention and the 1967 New York Protocol, it has imposed a geographic restriction on refugees they may only come from Europe. Other asylum seekers primarily Iraqis and Iranians are authorised to remain in
166

Turkey on a temporary basis. After the Gulf War, more than 450 000 Iraqis from Northern Iraq took refuge in Turkey, the great majority of whom have since returned.

UNITED KINGDOM
Introduction The upward trend in migration which began in the early 1990s continued in 1995. In 1996 the data indicate a fall in the number of asylum seekers due to recent reforms in legislation, however data are not yet available to show whether this will be reected in immigration as a whole. There are signs of a slowdown in the growth of the UK economy, for example, GDP rose at a rate of 2.5 per cent in 1995 but only at 2 per cent in the rst half of 1996, which may dampen migratory ows. Migration and settlement Flows of migrants Data on immigration and emigration ows for the United Kingdom are taken from the International Passenger Survey (IPS), a sample survey of passengers arriving at and leaving airports and seaports in the United Kingdom who state their intention of either residing in or out of the United Kingdom for more than one year. A large proportion of the IPS data are accounted for by ows of British citizens, typically characterised by net emigration. However, it is important to note that the survey does not include those travelling to and from the Republic of Ireland. The IPS data for 1995 show continuation of an upward trend in inows of non-British citizens which began in the early 1990s. The inow of 154 000 in 1995 was in fact a little under the peak level reached in 1990 (see Chart II.15). The data in Table II.44 show that ows to and from EU countries (excluding Ireland) are relatively small compared to non-EU countries. Note that the 1995 gures include Austria, Finland and Sweden within the EU total, whilst in previous years these countries were included in the non-EU total. A continuing fall in outows of non-British citizens is shown in the IPS data. Combined with the rising inows, this has resulted in the 1995 gure of 81 000 for net ows being the highest recorded in the data since at least 1981 (see Chart II.15). Including ows of British citizens implies a total net migration gure of 54 000. It is thought that the IPS gures for net migration are inaccurate due to the fact that the survey reects intended rather than actual lengths of stay. For example, for 1995 it is estimated that the actual net migration gure is around 100 000, some 48 000 greater than the IPS gure. Settlement in the United Kingdom Settlement in the context of migration in the United Kingdom refers to individuals who acquire permanent residence status within the United Kingdom. Most of these individuals have already been resident in the United Kingdom for a period of time in order to full qualifying periods of residence and are mostly accepted for settlement on the basis of family ties with other UK residents. The remainder are accepted for employment and business reasons or as refugees. Of the 56 000 accepted for settlement in 1995, more than 80 per cent were spouses and dependants and most of these are were accepted on the basis of having completed qualifying periods of residence in the United Kingdom. Given the nature of the settlement process, the settlement data should be viewed as an indication of longer term trends in permanent migration to the United Kingdom and there is likely to be a lag between increased inows of migrants and increases in settlement. Settlement data over the last ve years have been very stable, uctuating between 53 000 and 56 000 per year. However, within this context, the composition of those being accepted for settlement has changed, with noticeable increases in the proportion of those from Africa, non-EEA Europe and East Asia. One interesting feature of the 1994 and 1995 data is that only small increases and even some decreases in settlement were recorded for these regions (see Chart II.16 and Table II.44). Naturalisations Some 40 500 people were granted British citizenship in the United Kingdom in 1995, part of a downward trend since 1989. However, there has been a rising trend in applications and an increase in the number of staff responsible for processing, therefore there is likely to be an increase in the gures for 1996. About 55 per cent of
167

Table II.44. Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force in the United Kingdom
All gures in thousands unless otherwise indicated
1993 1994 1995 1993 1994 1995 1996

Migration ows Total inows Inows of non-British citizens Of which: EU non-EU Inows of British citizens Total outows Outows of non-British citizens Of which: EU non-EU Outows of British citizens Net migration Non-British Of which: EU Non-EU British citizens

209 120 22 98 89 213 88 21 67 124 4 32 1 31 35 55.6 1.4 3.6 7.6 10.9 14.1 2.8 8.9 2.7 3.6 7.3 44.3 4.0

251 133 28 105 117 190 82 22 60 108 61 51 6 45 9 55.1 0.6 4.0 7.9 11.9 14.1 2.6 9.2 2.9 1.9 7.8 43.4 3.9

245 154 41 113 91 192 74 20 54 118 53 80 21 59 27 55.5 0.2 4.0 8.2 12.0 14.5 2.9 9.0 3.5 1.3 6.4 44.9 4.2

Stock of foreign population Total population Total number of British citizens Total number of foreign nationals, by region or country of origin Europe Ireland EU (excluding Ireland) Other Europe Americas North America West Indies Rest of Americas Africa Asia Middle East and Turkey Indian Sub-continent and Sri Lanka Rest of Asia Oceania Total grants of citizenship in the UK, by region or country of origin Indian Sub-continent and Sri Lanka Africa Americas North America West Indies Rest of Americas British Dependent Territories citizens Europe European Economic Area (excluding Ireland) Ireland Other Europe Middle East and Turkey Oceania Other Grants of citizenship in Hong Kong

56 948 54 937 2 001 866 465 255 146 266 147 106 13 205 569 77 346 146 75 45.8 13.2 5.1 4.7 2.1 1.9 0.7 4.2 4.1 1.1 0.1 2.9 4.3 1.7 8.5 41.8

57 169 55 126 1 946 935 473 319 143 207 114 88 5 190 545 85 306 154 69 44.0 12.2 5.4 4.5 2.0 1.8 0.7 4.2 4.0 1.3 0.1 2.6 4.3 1.7 7.7 5.9

57 55 2 1

406 442 060 027 443 459 125 234 146 82 6 205 451 59 268 124 71 40.5 10.9 5.2 4.1 1.8 1.6 0.7 3.8 3.7 1.1 0.2 2.4 3.5 1.7 7.6 26.0

57 624 55 680 1 972 904 441 352 111 220 136 80 4 220 461 72 272 117 88 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

168

Acceptances for settlement2 By region of origin European Economic Area (EEA) Other European countries Americas Africa Indian Sub-continent Middle East Remainder of Asia (mainly East Asia) Oceania Other By category of acceptance Accepted in own right Spouses and dependents Other

Table II.44. Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force in the United Kingdom (cont.)
All gures in thousands unless otherwise indicated
1993 1994 1995 1996 1993 1994 1995 1996

Asylum seekers (total applications received) By region of origin Europe Africa Asia Other According to the place where the application was received At port In country Illegal immigration statistics Persons against whom enforcement action taken Persons removed from country Available sources on inows of foreign workers Labour Force Survey International Passenger Survey Department of Social Security Work Permits Of which Short-term Long-term Trainees

22.4 4.5 10.3 6.7 0.8 7.3 15.1 10.4 6.1 37.0 51.6 108.0 29.3 13.3 12.5 3.5

32.8 5.3 17.0 9.5 1.1 10.2 22.6 13.2 5.1 46.0 65.7 125.8 30.1 12.9 13.4 3.8

44.0 7.1 22.5 13.0 1.4 12.1 28.6 16.0 4.9 51.0 77.0 133.9 35.5 15.6 15.5 4.4

28.7 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

Total stock of employment Total population Total number of British citizens Total number of foreign nationals Europe Ireland EU (excluding Ireland) Other Europe Americas North America West Indies Rest of Americas Africa Asia Middle East and Turkey Indian Sub-continent and Sri Lanka Rest of Asia Oceania Employment to population ratios (%) Total population Total number of British citizens Total number of foreign nationals Europe Ireland EU (excluding Ireland) Other Europe Americas North America West Indies Rest of Americas Africa Asia Middle East and Turkey Indian Sub-continent and Sri Lanka Rest of Asia Oceania

25 097 24 232 862 414 222 137 55 123 68 50 5 78 191 .. 113 .. 53 44.1 44.1 43.1 47.8 47.7 53.7 37.7 46.2 46.3 47.2 .. 38.0 33.6 .. 32.7 .. 70.7

25 278 24 411 847 468 241 172 55 92 51 37 4 72 171 .. 81 .. 45 44.2 44.3 43.5 50.1 51.0 53.9 38.5 44.4 44.7 42.0 .. 37.9 31.4 .. 26.5 .. 65.2

25 699 24 835 899 487 216 225 46 108 68 17 23 83 152 .. 80 .. 53 44.8 44.8 43.6 47.4 48.8 49.0 36.8 46.2 46.6 20.7 .. 40.5 33.7 .. 29.9 .. 74.6

25 962 25 095 878 432 218 176 38 111 66 41 4 92 158 .. 75 .. 58 45.1 45.1 44.5 47.8 49.4 50.0 34.2 50.5 48.5 51.3 .. 41.8 34.3 .. 27.6 .. 65.9

169

Note: European Union totals from 1995 onwards include the new member countries (Austria, Finland and Sweden). 1. Data are from the International Passenger Survey. Movements between the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom are not recorded. 2. An acceptance of settlement is not required for EU citizens. 3. Data are from the national Labour Force Survey and exclude gures less than 10 000. 4. The 1996 gure is an estimation based on a gure of 21 520 applications between January and September. Sources: International Passenger Survey; Home Ofce Statistical Bulletin; Control of Immigration Statistics; National Labour Force Survey.

Chart II.15. Migration flows, 1980-1995, United Kingdom Thousands

200 150 100 50 0 -50 -100 1980 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95
Source: International Passenger Survey.
Net migration (British citizens) Total net migration Inflows (non-British citizens) Net migration (non-British citizens) Outflows (non-British citizens)

Chart II.16. Acceptances for settlement by category of acceptance, 1986-1995, United Kingdom Thousands
200 150 100 50 0 -50 -100 0 1986 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 0
Source: Home Office.

20
Other regions Indian Sub-continent

20

15
Africa East Asia Americas

15

10

10

5
Europe

170

Chart II.17. Flows of asylum seekers1 by region of origin, 1984-1995, United Kingdom Thousands
30 25
Africa

Chart II.18. Flows of foreign workers, different sources available, 1986-1995, United Kingdom Thousands
30 25 20 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
Labour Force Survey Department of Social Security1 International Passenger Survey

20 15 10
Europe Asia

15 10 5

Work permits2

5
Other regions

1986

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0

1984

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

1. Excluding dependants. Source: Home Office Statistical Bulletin.

1. Data are based on the issue of a national insurance card to all new workers. 2. Figures include holders of a first permission (long and short-term) and trainees (Training and work experience scheme, TWES). Data do not include EU foreign nationals.

grants are on the basis of family ties, most of the remainder being on the basis of qualications and employment. In the past a large proportion of naturalisations were acquired automatically though entitlement rather than discretionary procedures, however the number has dropped, accounting for only 15 per cent of total naturalisations in 1995. Naturalisations are also granted under the British Nationality (Hong Kong) Act (1990) with 26 000 grants of citizenship in 1995 compared to 6 000 in 1994. The increase in numbers reects the onset of the second phase of the British Nationality (Hong Kong) Selection Scheme. Asylum seekers In 1995 the number of asylum applications (excluding dependants) rose by over 11 000 to reach 44 000, a 33 per cent increase on 1994 and the highest number since 1991 when measures were introduced to deter multiple applications and other fraudulent requests (see Chart II.17). This increase is thought to be due to three factors: the result of migrant trafckers targeting the United Kingdom; more people trying the asylum route as stricter migration controls were put into place; and historic ties with countries now in the throes of civil strife. Provisional data for 1996 suggest that the number of asylum seekers is now declining with 21 250 applications in the rst three quarters of 1996. This may be related to the tightening of policy with regard to asylum seekers (see policy section). As in previous years, in 1995 a majority of asylum applications (around two-thirds) were made from within the United Kingdom by people who had already entered in some other capacity. The main increase in applications was from Africa (half of all applications) notably from Nigeria, Somalia and Ghana, possibly in anticipation of visa controls (see Chart II.17). The number of requests by nationals of former Yugoslavia has fallen substantially since 1993 even though the gure rose slightly in 1995. Only 5 per cent (1 300) of the decisions made in 1995 on pending applications from earlier years recognised the applicants as refugees with full Convention status. However, 15 per cent (4 400) were granted exceptional leave to remain. Both percentages are lower than those for 1993 when 7 per cent were granted full refugee status and almost 50 per cent were granted exceptional leave. Population and employment of foreign nationals in the United Kingdom In 1996, as in the previous two years, the Labour Force Survey reported close to 2 million foreign nationals living in the United Kingdom, or about 3.5 per cent of the total population. The 1996 gure is about 90 000 lower than the 1995 gure, representing a 4 per cent decrease in the stock of foreign nationals. This may be a sign of falling immigration however the stock may also be affected by demographic factors and naturalisations. The composition of the foreign population has shown relatively minor uctuation since 1992 with the 1996 gures showing that 40 per cent are European Union nationals, the majority from the Republic of Ireland. Those from Asia are the next largest group with 23 per cent of the total. Africa and the Americas account for approximately 10 per cent each. In evaluating these proportions the diversity in rates of naturalisation must be considered. For example, there are very few naturalisations amongst those from the Republic of Ireland, but a relatively high number from the Indian Sub Continent (see Table II.44). According to the Labour Force Survey, there were 878 000 foreign nationals working in the United Kingdom in 1996 (about 3.5 per cent of total employment), which is a slight decrease from 1994 but still reects the relatively stable trend since 1988. Comparing the population and employment gures across different groups of foreign nationals reects a diverse incidence of employment (see Table II.44). For example the 1996 gures show an employment to population ratio for Irish nationals of 49 per cent, higher than the average for British citizens, and ratio of 28 per cent for nationals from the Indian sub-continent and Sri Lanka, much lower than the average for British citizens. The differences between employment to population ratios are driven by demographic factors, varying rates of participation in the labour force and varying rates of unemployment within the labour force. It is difcult to establish the exact numbers of foreign labour inows into the United Kingdom. For example, data from the Department of Social Security indicate that in 1995 there were about 150 000 cases of non-UK nationals arriving from abroad who registered or re-registered for national insurance purposes (see Chart II.18). At the other end of the spectrum in the same year only 36 000 work permits were issued to non-EU nationals. Perhaps the closest measure to the standard concept of migration is the Labour Force Survey data which indicates the number of individuals who were living and working abroad one year previously, in this case the gure for 1995 is 51 000. The data obviously capture different aspects of labour inows and therefore the disparities in the results are not surprising. Leaving the question of the levels of inows of foreign workers to one side, Chart II.18
171

shows that there is some commonality in the trends: except for the work permit data, all of the series show an upward trend in inows of foreign workers since 1992 or 1993 which has continued until 1995. Employment situation of ethnic minorities The Labour Force Survey includes a question about the ethnic background of respondents. According to the 1995 data some 2.2 million people of working age in private households belonged to ethnic minority groups. Of these, 73 per cent were not born in the United Kingdom. Among ethnic minority groups, the proportion of the economically active was lower (66 per cent) than for the total population of the same age group (79 per cent). After the ethnic minority unemployment rate improved during the late 1980s in comparison with the overall rate for the United Kingdom, in the early 1990s it again began to rise. In 1995, it was more than double the national rate (19 per cent and 8 per cent respectively). Particularly high rates of unemployment are found in Bangladeshi men and Africans.

Policy developments In July 1996 a new Asylum and Immigration Act was passed, amidst a certain amount of controversy. The main points of the Act are: Withdrawing eligibility to non-contributory benets from asylum seekers who did not lodge their application at the port of entry or who are appealing on a negative decision on their claim. This aspect of the Act generated the greatest debate and resulted in a High Court judgement in October 1996 which established that local authorities have a duty under the National Assistance Act to provide services to asylum seekers with no other means of support. Making it a criminal offence to employ a person with no right to work in the United Kingdom but giving employers a statutory defence if they can prove that they tried to establish the immigration status of their employees. Designation of safe countries where asylum applications are now unlikely to be successful. Speeding up of the asylums procedure including increasing use of the asylum fast track decision process. In a further attempt to stem the increasing number of unrecognised asylum claims, visa requirements were introduced for entry into the United Kingdom by Tanzanian and Kenyan nationals in 1996. In the same year a further 14 countries were added to the list of countries requiring visas as a result of the EU common visa list, these are: Bahrain, Dominican Republic, Fiji, Guyana, Kuwait, the Maldives, Mauritius, Niger, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Qatar, Surinam, United Arab Emirates and Zambia.

UNITED STATES

Introduction Immigration to the United States continued its downward trend to reach 720 000 in 1995 from its 1991 peak of 1.8 million. Much of the decline during this period can be attributed to the winding down of the legalisation programmes initiated in 1986. However, as the high numbers of people who entered in the early 1990s become eligible to obtain US citizenship and are thus allowed to bring in immediate relatives, it is expected that immigration will again increase in coming years. The years 1995 and 1996 were important in the United States with regard to new legislative developments inuencing immigration. In addition to stricter controls for illegal migration, particularly at the southern border, asylum seekers no longer have immediate access to the United States labour market, legal immigrants are no longer eligible for certain social benets, and the sponsoring income level was increased for family and some employment-based immigration. These developments took place against a background of considerable debate in the United States focusing on the economic impacts of immigration, both legal and illegal.
172

Migration and settlement Immigration In the United States, an immigrant is dened as a person to whom lawful permanent residence is granted and who is eligible for eventual United States citizenship. The number of immigrants in a particular year can thus include persons who have actually been in the country for some time, but were only granted the right of permanent residence in that year. For example, a foreign student who has been studying in the United States for several years on a non-immigrant (temporary) visa might adjust to permanent immigrant status if he or she marries a United States citizen. In 1995 nearly half (47 per cent) of the immigrants were already living in the United States and adjusted to permanent resident status from a non-immigrant status compared to nearly 40 per cent in 1994. In 1995 immigration declined for the fourth year in a row, from 804 000 in 1994. The steady decline between 1991 and 1994 was largely due to sharp drops in the number of immigrants who obtained a permanent resident permit following legalisation under the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA). For example, in 1991, approximately 1.1 million out of 1.8 million total immigration were legalised immigrants whereas in 1994 only 6 000 of the total were legalised immigrants. The decline in immigration from 1994 to 1995, however, can be attributed to two factors: the end of a 3-year programme for spouses and minor children of IRCA-legalised aliens; and a decline in employment-based immigration, resulting, in part, from the end of admissions under the Chinese Student Protection Act. Annual immigration levels have been projected to increase to at least 800 000 (excluding refugees and asylum seekers) over the next three years (1996 to 1998). This is primarily a result of increased immigration petitions led for immediate relatives (spouses, children and parents) of United States citizens by those persons who received immigrant status under IRCA and who recently became United States citizens. Permanent residence by entry class and country or region of origin Family migration has remained relatively stable and continued to be the most common entry category, accounting for close to two-thirds of all permanent entries in 1994 and 1995 (see Statistical Annex, C2, United States inows of permanent settlers by entry class). Employment-based permanent immigration further declined to 85 000, after dropping in 1994 from close to 150 000 in 1993. Out of the 85 000, over half were dependants. Roughly 115 000 refugees and asylum seekers were granted permanent residence accounting for 16 per cent of all immigration. Although the number of immigrants entering through the Diversity Immigrant Visa Lottery (a permanent programme with a ceiling of 55 000 visas aimed at increasing the diversity of countries sending immigrants to the United States) is relatively low, the interest in the programme is enormous and 6.5 million applications were received during the one month application period. Mexico remains the primary sending country for the United States with 90 000, accounting for 12 per cent of all immigration in 1995, down from 50 per cent in 1991. The latter gure, however, includes the impact of illegal residents who obtained permanent residence status that year. Other countries with signicant immigration in 1995 (in the range of 35 to 55 000) are the former Soviet Union, the Philippines, Vietnam, the Dominican Republic and China. This group of top sending countries has not changed from 1994. By region, Asians account for 37 per cent of the overall total, a proportion which has remained relatively stable over the past few years (see Chart II.19). Although the numbers of Europeans doubled between 1985 (65 000) and 1995 (128 000), Europeans still account for only a small share of total inows. The increase since 1990 is largely due to higher inows from the former Soviet Union, Poland and Ireland. Refugees and asylum seekers Refugee and asylum admissions continued to be important immigration issues in 1994 and 1995, especially with the exodus of Haitians and Cubans eeing to the United States. The maximum number of refugee admissions is set annually by the President, after consultation with the Congress, although the ceiling can be increased during the year to accommodate additional refugees. These ceilings are not meant as targets and actual admissions are often lower. In 1995, for example, 99 000 refugees were admitted to the United States under a ceiling of 112 000. Ceilings had been increased steadily since 1986 but starting in 1993 they have been gradually decreased with the 1997 ceiling set at 78 000 (compared to a high of 142 000 in 1992). Under United States law, refugees only obtain permanent residence status after one year of residence.
173

Chart II.19. Inflows of permanent settlers by region of birth,1 1985-1995, United States Thousands
Europe Asia Africa and Oceania Americas2 (excluding the United States)

1 800 1 600 1 400 1 200 1 000 800 600 400 200 0 1985
Excluding persons from the Americas2 legalized under IRCA legalization programme Persons from the Americas2 legalized under IRCA legalization programme

1 800 1 600 1 400 1 200 1 000 800 600 400 200 0

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

1. Data from 1989 to 1995 include respectively 478 814, 880 372, 1 123 162, 163 342, 24 278, 6 022 and 4 267 immigrants who obtained a permanent residence permit following legalization under the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act. Most of them were bom in the Americas (excluding the United States). 2. Permanent settlers bom in Canada, Mexico, the Caribbean, Central or South America. Source: U.S. Department of Justice, 1995 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

In September 1994 an agreement was reached between Cuba and the United States under which the United States guaranteed that a minimum of 20 000 Cubans could migrate legally to the United States each year, although specic conditions were laid out for the selection of potential migrants. There have been several major developments regarding asylum seekers in the past two years. First the stafng level of the asylum corps was increased which brought the United States more in line with the staff levels of other countries having similar asylum programmes (the 1994 stafng of 150 asylum ofces had faced nearly 150 000 new applications). Second, new INS regulations implemented in January 1995 made two changes: it provided for a more efcient integrated processing system and it removed the links between work authorisation and the asylum process by withholding work authorisation until asylum is granted or until a claim remains pending for 180 days. Since asylum reform went into effect in January 1995, asylum ofces have been able to complete over 150 000 of the backlog cases (the backlog stood at 450 000 as of 30 September 1996) as well as keeping current with new receipts. From October 1995 to June 1996 roughly 110 000 asylum applications were led in the United States of which only about one-third were new receipts. The remainder were from the settlement of an outstanding lawsuit which required the INS to readjudicate the asylum claims of certain Salvadorans and Guatemalans present in the United States as of 1990.
174

Immigrant visa waiting list Most categories of immigrants, with the notable exception of immediate relatives of United States citizens, are subject to numerical limits. Often, the number of qualifying aliens exceeds the legislated numerical limit of a particular immigrant category. As of January 1995, the immigrant waiting list stood at 3.7 million. The majority on the list are brothers and sisters of adult citizens (1.6 million) and spouses and unmarried children under the age of 21 of permanent residents (approximately 1 million). When these permanent residents are granted United States citizenship (ve-year residency requirement), their spouses and children will then be able to enter under numerically unrestricted categories. The expansion of employment-based immigration under the Immigration Act of 1990 increased the annual allotment from 54 000 to 140 000 (including visas for accompanying dependants). This has eliminated queues for most countries in most of the employment-based preferences. As of November 1996, only the unskilled worker preferences category (limited to 10 000) continued to have a waiting list. Foreign-born population Beginning in January 1994, the monthly Current Population Survey (CPS) of US households by the Bureau of the Census included questions on place of origin, citizenship, year-of-immigration and parental place of origin as part of its regular questionnaire. In 1996, according to this survey, the foreign population was estimated at 24.6 million or 9.3 per cent of the total population. This can be compared to the results from the 1990 census which show that the foreign-born population was 19.8 million (7.9 per cent of the total population). Between 1970 and 1990 substantial changes have occurred in the geographical origin of the foreign-born: in 1970, nearly 60 per cent had been born in Europe; in 1990 it was only 22 per cent. Central America and Mexico account for the largest numbers of foreign-born and the numbers from Asia now also exceed those from Europe. The foreign-born labour force The foreign born have played a growing role in the US labour force over the past twenty-ve years. According to 1994 CPS data, the foreign-born accounted for 10 per cent of the labour force, compared to 5 per cent in 1970. Foreign males in particular have high participation rates (86 per cent) and are more likely than natives to work full time. At the same time, the foreign-born have slightly higher unemployment rates than natives. Level of education, English language skills and length of time in the United States all play a role and there are marked differences between immigrant by country of origin and ethnicity. Naturalisations Both 1994 and 1995 saw strong growth in naturalisations with 400 000 and 450 000 respectively, and the number for 1996 is estimated to surge to over 1 million. This can be compared to 1992 when less than 250 000 people were naturalised. Mexico is the leading country for naturalisations in both 1994 and 1995, accounting for 10 per cent of the total in 1994 and 15 per cent in 1995. Several reasons may explain the sudden increase: more persons are eligible to become citizens due to recent high immigration levels; a new green card replacement programme has provided an incentive for legal aliens to become US citizens rather than face the burden of renewing their card; and recently passed legislation denies legal immigrants access to many federally funded social programmes, thus increasing the incentive to become a United States citizen. A new programme was implemented to handle this upsurge called Citizenship USA. The programme assigned more staff, expanded INS facilities and streamlined procedures for acquiring US citizenship. There have been concerns, however, that in the effort to facilitate the citizenship process some procedures may have been inappropriately relaxed by certain private contractors. Naturalisation rates (calculated in the United States as the proportion of an immigrant group admitted over a specic time period who subsequently become citizens) differ among different immigrant groups. Immigrants who are young adults when they arrive or who come from distant parts of the world such as Asia and Africa often have high naturalisation rates. For example, among immigrants admitted during the 1970s and acquiring citizenship by 1994, Vietnamese, Chinese and Filipinos have the highest naturalisation rates with 93 per cent, 68 per cent and 66 per cent respectively. In comparison, approximately 17 per cent of Canadians and 19 per cent of Mexicans acquired United States citizenship by 1994.
175

Temporary migration Non-immigrants (that is, temporary migrants) are playing an increasing role in the US labour market. Numbers admitted in any given year with the right to work may even underestimate the impact since many temporary visas allow stays of longer than one year, and in some cases as long as six years. Most visa classes have no numerical limitations. The main groups of temporary workers are treaty traders, investors and their dependants; speciality occupations (mainly professionals), and intracompany transferees (see Table II.45). Recently the Department of Labor discovered several abuses of the H-1B visa category for speciality occupations. This category which was conceived as a means to meet temporary business needs for highly skilled professionals from abroad, was in fact being used by some employers to bring in relatively large numbers of foreign workers who may well be displacing US workers. To counter these abuses, reforms have been proposed. Employers seeking to use the H-1B visa would be required to prove that they have not laid off US workers in the occupations for which they seek foreign workers and that they rst attempted to recruit US workers. An additional proposal is to reduce the allowable period of stay from six to three years to better reect the temporary nature of the labour shortage.

Table II.45.

Non-immigrants1 admitted by class of admission, scal years 1993-1995, United States

1993 1994 1995

Foreign government ofcials, spouses and children Temporary visitors for business Temporary visitors for pleasure Transit aliens Students Vocational students Spouses and children of students International representatives, spouses and children Temporary workers Of which: Registered nurses Professionals Temporary agricultural workers Temporary nonagricultural workers Industrial trainees Professional workers: North American Free Trade Agreement Workers with extraordinary ability Workers accompanying the workers with extraordinary ability Athletes and entertainers International cultural exchange Workers in non-prot religious organisations Intracompany transferees Treaty traders and investors and dependents Spouses and children of temporary workers Spouses and children of intracompany transferees Representatives of foreign information media and dependents Exchange visitors Spouses and children of exchange visitors Fianc e(es) of US citizens Children of anc e(es) NATO ofcials, their spouses and children Unknown Total
1.

102 173 2 961 775 16 900 459 331 362 7 32 72 208 700 920 652 755

105 299 3 164 099 17 154 834 330 386 7 33 74 936 157 844 720 722

103 606 3 275 334 17 611 533 320 356 7 31 71 333 585 635 260 982

406 836 6 92 14 14 3 16 3 21 4 82 144 506 795 628 847 126 610 105 964 567 994 444 606 644

450 044 6 105 13 15 3 24 5 1 28 1 5 98 141 106 899 185 687 075 837 029 455 055 546 951 189 030

464 565 6 117 11 14 2 23 5 1 28 1 6 112 131 512 574 394 193 787 904 974 813 372 399 742 124 777

42 090 49 537 21 032 196 782 42 623 8 541 816 8 902 446 21 566 404

49 240 56 048 27 691 216 610 42 561 8 124 764 9 135 878 22 118 706

53 582 61 621 24 220 201 095 39 269 7 793 768 8 579 779 22 640 539

Non-immigrants are visitors, persons in transit or persons granted temporary residence permits. Data may be overestimated as they include multiple entries by the same person over time. Source: US Department of Justice, 1995 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

176

Illegal migration Illegal migrants are either foreigners who enter the United States without inspection or who are admitted legally for a temporary period and either fail to depart (non-immigrant overstayers) or violate other terms of their temporary visa. Although in October 1996 the undocumented population was estimated at 5 million (4.8 million in 1986), it is generally thought that the legalisation of over 2.5 million undocumented migrants through IRCAs provisions, negated a decades worth of growth of the undocumented immigrant population. Mexico remains the leading source country for illegal migration (most recent estimates indicate about 50 per cent). Other source countries include El Salvador, Guatemala, Canada, Poland, the Philippines and Haiti. In response to the rising number of border patrol apprehensions, a shift in strategy for controlling illegal entries from Mexico was initiated in September 1993 for El Paso, Texas and in September 1994 for San Diego, California. The new programmes aim at discouraging potential crossers before they enter the United States through a more visible presence of agents directly on the border. Findings from the evaluation of the El Paso programme showed that illegal crossings were substantially deterred although the deterrent effect appears to have diminished the longer the Operation has lasted. It is also suspected that some labour migrants have simply shifted their crossing points to other locations along the border. A complicating factor in evaluation is the recent economic crisis in Mexico which caused rising unemployment which in turn increased migratory pressure within Mexico. The second major development regarding illegal migration to the United States is the new awareness of the important role of visa overstayers. Current estimates by the INS indicate that approximately 43 per cent of the illegal residents in recent years have been visa overstayers. This new awareness has several policy implications, among which is the need for increased attention to the authorisations of temporary visas, particularly to nationals of countries with high overstay rates. Policy developments Two new far-reaching pieces of legislation affecting immigrants were passed in 1996. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 often referred to as the Welfare Act was signed on August 22. It restricts benets for nearly all categories of legal permanent residents to two major Federal assistance programmes, Food Stamps, which is the main food and assistance programme for the poor, and Supplemental Security Income which is a cash assistance programme for low income persons who are aged, blind and disabled. It was projected that 44 per cent of the overall savings would result from the restriction of benets to legal immigrants. The legislation also give States the option of barring or limiting non-citizens from other Federal programmes administered at the State level. Several groups of immigrants are exempt from the restrictions including refugees and asylum seekers. These restrictions and others in the new Welfare Act are an important change from prior law which had treated immigrants to the United States (lawful permanent residents) in the same manner as United States citizens. The imposition of these restrictions will undoubtedly increase the numbers of persons seeking naturalisation in the near future. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) was signed by President Clinton on 30 September 1996. The controversial clause which would have allowed States to deny public education to undocumented alien children was omitted. Most provisions are aimed at controlling illegal migration although one provision increases the legal immigration sponsoring income level to 125 per cent of poverty level and strengthens its enforcement. The initiatives of the IIRIRA aimed at controlling illegal migration include stricter border control through more agents at the border and the building of 14 miles of fencing and creating a bar on admissibility for individuals who were unlawfully present in the United States for a period of time of up to 10 years. The IIRIRA legislation originally included reform of the US admissions system concerning both legal permanent residents and temporary migrants. The legal immigration provisions were dropped because widespread disagreement threatened to derail the entire bill, jeopardising legislative efforts aimed at controlling illegal migration.

177

Part III

IMMIGRATION AND SOCIAL TRANSFERS: ANALYTICAL ISSUES AND RECENT RESULTS*

Introduction One of the most controversial issues in the debate on migration policy concerns the impact of immigrants on social protection systems in OECD countries. Some argue that immigration places a serious burden on social protection systems since the existence of these systems is a factor enticing immigrants to take advantage of them. Others argue, however, that immigrants, far from being a burden on such systems, are indeed net contributors to them, thereby easing the nancial burden on national tax payers. Attempting to calculate the net impact of immigration on social transfers in any country with precision is a very complicated task. This report does not seek to provide a denitive answer on this topic. Instead, it has a more modest aim. On the basis of a review of the existing empirical literature and some elementary modelling, this report will discuss the key analytical issues involved in calculating the impact of immigration on net social transfers. In this regard there is a focus on the methods used in calculations at the national, rather than the local or regional level and also a focus on those studies which take into account the effect of immigration on tax revenue as well as expenditure on social benets. The report is divided into four sections: Section I examines the main elements to be considered when evaluating the effects of immigration on social transfers. This is followed by a review of some recent empirical studies carried out on immigration and social transfers for the United States, Canada and Australia. Section III investigates the relationship between immigration and intergenerational transfers of taxes and benets. The nal section provides a brief conclusion and discusses the limitations of current studies with the aim of highlighting some of the avenues that need to be explored in the future. 1. Measuring the impact of immigration on social transfers

The most straightforward method of measuring the impact of immigration on net social transfers is to perform an accounting exercise in which, for a given period of time, tax payments and social transfers are calculated for immigrants. The resulting balance indicates the extent to which those contributions to the transfer system covered by the accounting exercise exceed, or are lower than, the value of government expenditures covered by the calculations. It is common to present similar calculations for non-immigrants to provide a point of comparison. There are three general criticisms of the accounting approach. First, in practice, the accounting period is often relatively short and this snapshot of the current stock of immigrants can be misleading. If the characteristics of the immigrant population remain stable over time, then the results will remain valid for other time periods. However if, for example, there is ageing in the population of immigrants, the snapshot is no longer representative for other time periods, hence diluting the signicance of the result. An alternative approach is to project the accounts based on known trends in key characteristics of the immigrant population, such as its demographic structure. Second, an accounting exercise of the sort described above does not include the effects immigrants may have on wages, prices and aggregate output and the consequent effects on the taxes and benets for both immigrants and nationals. For example, if immigrants are of working age, they can be expected to contribute to
* This chapter was drafted by the Secretariat on the basis of a study by Didier Blanchet, consultant to the OECD and researcher at the Institut national d etudes d emographiques de Paris.

179

the increase of employment and aggregate output. However, the increase in labour supply may also serve to affect real and relative wages and may do so in complex ways depending on the skill mix of the immigrant workers. In order to deal comprehensively with these issues, a general equilibrium approach should be used which takes full account of the effects immigrants have on labour and capital markets in the economy. However, some accounting exercises try to take partial account of market effects by, for example, estimating the scal effects of falling wages or by assuming that the arrival of immigrants, to a certain extent, displaces native workers from jobs. Finally, the straightforward accounting approach does not consider how the benets, or costs, of immigration may be distributed amongst the native population. For example, under certain assumptions, immigration may allow reduced taxation to the working generation, increased education to the younger generation or increased pensions to the older generation. These, and other intergenerational issues are discussed in Section III. As the accounting approach forms the basis of the majority of empirical studies reviewed below it is worth discussing some of the issues involved in more detail. Estimation techniques in the accounting approach Estimates based on the accounting approach use two methods. The rst makes use of available data (whether in the form of surveys, censuses or administrative records) which give direct estimates of taxes paid by immigrants and transfer payments received by them. The second method relies upon inferential techniques. For example, an estimate of the average benet amount for all recipients may be combined with an estimate of the proportion of immigrants who receive the benet. If the information can be disaggregated into socio-economic groups or age groups, then more accurate estimates can be made. One problem of the inferential approach is that the socio-economic variables may not capture some of the special conditions that apply to migrants in terms of benets or taxes. For example, entitlement to some benets may be limited due to length of stay in the country. Or, restrictions may relate to the foreigners status; for example the entitlement and tax position of illegal immigrants is usually quite different from that of legal immigrants or nationals. Immigrants may also have access to certain types of social assistance targeted specically to them which, if not accounted for, will underestimate the amount of benets immigrants receive. In addition, there may be different behaviour between nationals and immigrants with regard to use of the benet system and the payment of taxes. A body of literature has developed in the United States which tries to explain differences between immigrants and non-immigrants in the use of welfare programmes. This is, in part, a response to observations that welfare participation by immigrants in the United States has increased in absolute terms and relative to non-immigrants (Borjas, 1994). One nding is that, once socio-economic factors are taken into account, migrants use the system less and take smaller amounts from it than nationals (Blau, 1984). There also appears to be a period of assimilation into the use of welfare (Borjas, 1994) which further points to the dangers of using population-wide estimates of participation in welfare programmes in calculating the amount of benets received by the immigrant population. Factors inuencing the results of the accounting approach A small number of factors are likely to inuence signicantly the results of empirical studies based on the accounting approach. One such factor is the demographic structure of the immigrant population. For example, if the migrant population is over-represented in the working-age cohorts, a net positive contribution to the social transfer system will typically result. The presence of a large number of children will attenuate this result to the extent that the social protection system provides for family-related transfers and if the costs incurred by the educational system are taken into account. A second important factor is the relative position immigrants occupy in the income distribution. The more concentrated the immigrant population is in lower income strata, the more likely they are to be net beneciaries rather than net contributors to social transfers. This will also relate to the extent of re-distribution in the social transfer system itself. Some systems are, in a general sense, more heavily weighted toward relating an individuals benets to the amount they have contributed and hence tend to be less re-distributive when compared with social protection systems where there is less of a link between contributions and benets. In systems where contributions are proportional to wages, a greater burden is placed on unskilled labour, whereas a tax-based scheme tends to penalise those with high incomes an important point to remember when studying net transfers by country. The existence of progressive contribution schemes also means that to obtain an accurate accounting of transfers, average income data for nationals and foreigners are not sufcient; income distributions are necessary.
180

Finally, aspects of the redistribution system are related to population structure, as family-related transfers are often means-tested, family policy being, in fact, a common means of vertical redistribution (by income level) as well as horizontal (by size of family). These preliminary remarks illustrate that the impact of immigrants on the social transfer system is difcult to assess, even using a basic accounting approach. This, combined with the fact that available data are often from a variety of sources and do not cover all of the required inputs to the calculation, has resulted in a wide range of empirical estimates and considerable debate about the methods used. 2. Immigration and social transfers in the United States, Canada and Australia

This section reviews empirical studies on immigration and social transfers in the United States, Canada and Australia which examine the issue of whether immigrants generate a net scal surplus, or are a net scal burden with regard to social transfers. Hence the focus is placed on studies which evaluate both benets and taxes. Immigration and social transfers: United States studies A survey of the literature by Rothman and Espenshade (1992) provides a useful entry point to the debate on the cost of immigration to social transfer systems in the United States. Table III.1 presents a summary of studies covered in their review. The table illustrates that widespread interest in the United States in this topic began in the mid-1980s. In addition, the following points emerge: All of the studies use the accounting approach described above. As discussed later in this text, Simons (1984) study is unique in that it takes a longitudinal, rather than a cross-sectional approach. Also, all of the studies, in some way, take account of special conditions that apply to immigrants entitlement to benets or behaviour towards the benet system (as discussed above), pointing to the importance of including such elements in the calculation. Economic impacts are not generally considered. For example, none of the studies in Table III.1 use a general equilibrium framework to evaluate the impact of immigrants on social transfers. However, some studies do try to take partial account of economic effects, for example, by making assumptions about the degree to which immigrants displace non-immigrant workers from jobs. Whilst a wide range of results emerge from the studies (see Table III.1, last column), it is interesting to note that it is only state and local studies which conclude that migrants are net beneciaries of the social transfer system (however, this conclusion only applies to four of the twelve studies listed). With the exception of Simon (1984), the national studies are far less conclusive as to the overall result of their evidence. The majority of studies surveyed in Table III.1 examine benets only (Blau, 1984; Tienda and Jensen, 1986; Heer, 1990; Borjas and Trejo, 1991), or limit attention to illegal immigrants (North and Houstoun, 1976). Only one study, Simon (1984), generates a national estimate which is based on the whole migrant population and takes into account both taxes and benets. In more recent years, interest in generating national results which take full account of both taxes and benets has increased, with calculations by Huddle (1993), Passel (1994) and Borjas (1994). Detailed discussion of these, as well as Simons (1984) study, are presented below. In addition, by way of example, a recent study based on local evidence by Clark and Passel (1993) is also discussed. National estimates Using the Survey on Income and Education (Bureau of the Census, 1976), Simon (1984) evaluates government expenditure and taxation for the immigrant households in 1975 for the whole of the US. The immigrant population is dened as being those born overseas and Simon calculates the per household taxes paid and benets received for a series of migrant cohorts based on their date of arrival. Hence, assuming migrant cohorts to have been reasonably homogenous, a life-cycle interpretation can be placed on the results: progressively earlier dates of arrival representing progressively more advanced stages in the life-cycle. In his analysis, Simon compares the cohorts with estimates for all native-born households in the sample. A range of government transfer systems are included in the calculations, including those covering schooling, unemployment benets, social security (pensions), medical services and public welfare. Income tax paid is calculated as a uniform proportion of total family earnings. The results of this exercise are summed up in Table III.2, which are based on a more comprehensive version of the results presented in Simon (1996). A number of observations can be made: First, the pattern of benets and
181

Table III.1.

A summary of US studies1
Factors included Account for entitlement or behaviour differences with regard to benets

Author(s)

Geographical coverage

Population studied

Benets only or balance

Longitudinal aspects

Economic impacts

Source and mode of assessment

Results2

North and Houstoun (1976) Simon (1984)

National National

Illegal aliens, 1975 All foreign born, 1976

Balance (via participation rate only) Balance

Yes Yes

No Yes

No No

Special survey SIE,3 direct measurement of benets, estimate of contributions SIE3 Census Census Special survey Special survey Census and local sources Census and local sources Census and local sources Census and local sources Various local sources Various local sources Previous studies and local sources Previous studies and local sources Census and local sources Census and local sources

+/0 +

Blau (1984) Tienda and Jensen (1986) Borjas and Trejo (1991) Heer (1990) Weintraub and Cardenas (1984) Muller and Espenshade (1985) McCarthy and Valdez (1986) Collins (1991) Ofce for Refugees and Immigrants (1990) Community Research Associates (1980) Muller and Espenshade (1985) South. California Association of Governments (1984) Los Angeles County (1991) Bogen (1987) Collins (1991)

National National National National State State State State State Local Local Local Local Local Local

Immigrant families, 1976 Immigrant households, 1980 Native and immigrant households, 1970 and 1980 Families of foreign origin, Los Angeles, 1980 Undocumented aliens, Texas, 1982 Households headed by Mexican immigrant, 1980 Mexican immigrants in California, 1982 Immigrant households, New Jersey, 1980 Foreign residents, Massachusetts, 1987 Undocumented workers and their families, San Diego, 1980 Households headed by Mexican immigrant, 1980 Immigrants in 6 counties, South California, 1980 Undocumented aliens, Los Angeles, 1990-1991 New York City immigrants, 1980 Foreign-born, New Jersey, 1980

Benets only Benets only Benets only Benets (via participation rate only) Balance Balance Balance Balance Balance Benets (estimate of incomplete contributions) Balance Balance Balance Contributions relative to expenditures and income Balance

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No

No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No

? ? ? ? + /0 + ? (?) ? ?

182

1. Recent studies are discussed in detail in the text. 2. +: migrants are net contributors; : migrants are net beneciaries; 0: neutral; ?: indeterminate. 3. Survey of Income and Education, Bureau of the Census, 1976. Source: Based on Rothman and Espenshade (1992, Table 19).

Table III.2.

Taxes and transfers per household in the United States in 19751

Transfers Income tax Other c Total d(= a + b + c) Taxes less transfers Excess over native-born Without adjustment for public goods g(= f 922) With adjustment for public goods2

Schooling a

Social Security b

f(= e d)

Year of entry of immigrants 1970-74 1965-69 1960-64 1950-59 1920-49 Before 1920 Native-born
1.

831 1 068 1 237 1 237 859

24 152 326 424 2 229 3 090 735

539 721 684 631 358 369 685

1 1 2 2 2 3

394 941 247 292 587 459

3 3 4 3 2

048 552 064 927 245 633

1 654 1 611 1 817 1 635 342 2 826 922

732 689 895 713 1 264 3 748 0

1 372 1 329 1 535 1 353 624 3 108 0

2 279

3 201

All data are in 1975 US dollars. Simon (1996) includes data for earlier cohorts which were not included in Simon (1984). Calculations are based on the 1976 Survey of Income and Education. The data for 1970-74 have been calculated by taking a weighted average of annual results in Simon (1996). 2. Adjustment for public goods is based on the assumption that 20 per cent of taxation is paid towards public goods and that the immigrants contribution can be considered as surplus above the funding required for the provision of these goods. As a result, the excess over the native born shown in column g is increased by the equivalent of 20 per cent of native-born income tax ($640). Source: Simon (1984 and 1996).

183

taxes across cohorts conforms to what one would expect, assuming that they represent increasingly older agegroups as the vintage of the cohorts increases. Benets more or less rise over time and tax payments rst increase for recent cohorts and then begin to decrease for the earliest cohorts, reecting the usual pattern of benets and income tax from younger to older age groups. Second, benets received by immigrants per household only begin to surpass the average for native-born households for cohorts of immigrants who arrived before 1960 (column d). The lower benets amongst immigrant households in the recent cohorts are almost entirely due to lower social security payments (column b). Income tax paid is greater for all cohorts compared with the native-born, except for those who arrived in the 1970s and those who arrived before 1950, once again a reection of the life-cycle pattern of earnings (column e). Finally, overall, there is a surplus of taxes paid over benets for all cohorts of immigrants who arrived after 1950 (column f), and furthermore, this surplus is always greater than that for the native-born (column g). A similar estimate is made in column h which includes a crude adjustment for the additional benet derived from immigrants contributing to the nancing of pure public goods. This calculation is based on an estimate that 20 per cent of income tax revenue goes towards the nancing of pure public goods. This implies that only 80 per cent of income tax can be ascribed to social transfers for both immigrants and non-immigrants. However, the contribution to pure public goods made by immigrants can be seen as an additional benet to the native-born as this is surplus to the amount required to fund these goods. The net effect of these adjustments is to increase the excess over the native-born shown in column g by an amount equal to 20 per cent of the income tax of the native-born. A number of minor criticisms have been made of Simons estimates, for instance, the way migrants of different origins are grouped together and the use of a uniform average taxation rate to calculate contributions of foreigners and nationals alike. However, the major criticism is that in his initial presentation of the results, only data for those cohorts who arrived after 1950 were shown, giving a more favourable perspective on the scal position of immigrants as a whole. In response, in Simon (1996), he re-emphasises that the older age groups were purposefully omitted from the original analysis. His argument is that the low tax income and large social benet payments for older cohorts can be viewed as being offset by the net contributions made by the children of these immigrants. As he is unable to include such second-generation effects in his calculations, he considers it reasonable not to place much emphasis on the net cost of the older cohorts of immigrants. However, it can be argued that similar complexities arise for the native-born and the fact remains that Simon bases his conclusion on the comparison of an immigrant population which excludes a large number of pensioners to a native-born population which includes all pensioners. The study by Simon is unique amongst US studies in its evaluation of the pattern of average household taxes and transfers over the life-cycle of the immigrant population. Other national assessments typically calculate the gross scal balance for all immigrants and do not evaluate the scal position of different cohorts. In this regard, Huddle (1993) estimates the scal impact of immigrants for the year 1992. His estimates cover legal immigrants who arrived since 1970, illegal immigrants, and immigrants included under the 1986 legalisation programme. In calculating the value of transfers to immigrants, the government costs per beneciary are taken from a special survey of recent and undocumented migrants by the Los Angeles County Internal Service Division (the so-called ISD survey). These are then applied to estimated proportions of beneciaries within the population of immigrants. Account is taken of the more limited access to benets by illegal immigrants and those included in the legalisation programme. Taxes are based on application of income tax rates to the estimated income of immigrants between 1980 and 1990. In addition, Huddle assumes that immigrants displace 2 million non-immigrants in the labour market, creating additional welfare costs for the native population which are added to the scal costs of the immigrant population. Overall, it is estimated that immigrants impose a net cost to social transfers of 43 billion dollars. Huddle also makes a number of projections of the future scal impact of immigrants. According to one scenario, if immigration ows remain constant at 810 000 for legal entries and 300 000 for illegal entries, the annual net scal cost of immigrants could be 50 billion dollars per year between 1993 and 2002. Huddles results have been heavily criticised by Passel (1994) for overestimating the scal cost of immigrants. First, the estimates of per capita benets from the ISD survey are considered to be rather high and Huddles estimate of the proportion of immigrants who receive benet is also argued to be too high. Second, it is argued that Huddle should have used estimates of immigrant incomes for 1970 to 1990, rather than 1980 to 1990, which would have included a greater proportion of high-income earners due to life-cycle effects. Finally, the estimate of the number of displaced workers is viewed as being high and no account is taken of more positive economic effects such as increased output. Using data and methods similar to Huddles, Passel (1994) arrives at a completely different result. He nds that Huddle underestimated taxes by $50 billion and overestimated the cost of social services and displaced workers by $22 billion. As a result, he concludes that immigrants generated a net surplus of about $30 billion
184

which contrasts sharply with the net decit of $43 billion estimated by Huddle. Others have also commented on these results. For example, Vernez and McCarthy (1995), in an assessment of the evidence, agree that Huddle underestimated taxes, but argue that he did not overestimate the value of benets received by immigrants. The wide gap in estimates between Huddle and Passel prompted Borjas (1994) to present his own calculations based on data for 1990, largely to illustrate the sensitivity of such calculations to key elements in an accounting exercise. The cost of immigrants in terms of welfare benets is calculated as follows: data indicate that 13 per cent of cash-benet programmes go to immigrants; applying this proportion to total expenditure ($181 billion) for all means-tested entitlement programmes therefore gives an estimated $24 billion welfare cost for immigrants. Based on an assessment of the income distribution from census data and recent estimates of federal tax rates, Borjas estimates that the average tax burden on immigrants is about 30 per cent. These rates are applied to the total income (excluding welfare) for the immigrant population and the result is an estimated tax contribution by immigrants of $85 billion. Calculating the difference between taxes and welfare costs therefore results in a surplus of $61 billion. At this stage however, Borjas points out that the additional costs that immigrants may generate for other forms of government expenditure have not been taken into account. He estimates that 91 per cent of all taxes were used to pay for programmes other than means-tested entitlement benets. If it is assumed that immigrants have to make the same percentage contribution in order to remain revenue-neutral with respect to these other forms of expenditure, then only 9 per cent of their taxes can go towards the means-tested welfare benets. This drastically reduces the tax contributions that can be ascribed to welfare to $8 billion (9 per cent of $81 billion). Using these tax estimates, immigrants are now seen as placing a scal burden on the welfare system of $16 billion. Borjas admits to having omitted some signicant areas of government expenditure, such as schooling and pensions from his calculations, however, his calculations illustrate the sensitivity of results to different assumptions about the impact of immigrants on government costs which are not explicitly included in the accounting exercise. As seen above, his particular approach is to assume that, if x per cent of nationals taxes are used to fund non-welfare expenditure (e.g. defence, administration), then immigrants must also contribute x per cent in order to remain revenue-neutral with regard to non-welfare expenditure. However, in fact, there is no strong case for this approach being appropriate or otherwise. Local studies for Los Angeles County One of the local studies that has appeared since Rothman and Espenshades (1992) review is by Clark and Passel (1993) who quantify the costs and benets generated by immigrants for the public social welfare system in Los Angeles County. This study was, in part, carried out in response to a study by Los Angeles County Internal Services Division (1992) which, using data from their own survey (the ISD survey), concluded that immigrants were a scal burden to the County. Clark and Passel criticise the way in which the County study used the ISD survey to calculate benets: total public health and welfare costs to all legal migrants were used in their calculations whilst the data only cover recent and undocumented migrants. Clark and Passel attempt to correct for this by making calculations based on three scenarios: i) that the average cost of supplying these services to each recent immigrant is the same as the average cost in the case of each long-term immigrant; ii) that it is twice as high; and iii) that it is three times as high. The total costs obtained are lower in all three cases compared with the ISD-based study by between 23 and 39 per cent. The ISD data is also considered to underestimate taxes. Clark and Passel make alternative estimates based on a micro-simulation model and income data from the March 1990 Current Population Survey. The results show that immigrants contribute only 28 per cent of total revenue despite representing 33 per cent of the Countys population; this result is largely due to their lower income. More importantly, if the calculations are limited to recent immigrants, the total amount paid in tax is found to be signicantly higher than the total obtained in the ISD-based study. Despite estimates of higher tax payments and lower transfer payments, Clark and Passel also nd that immigrants cost the County more than they contribute. However, the decit is much less than that estimated by the ISD-based study. They suggest that three factors need to be developed in subsequent studies on the subject. First, account must be taken of immigrants who have been resident for longer periods as they generally have a higher income, with the result that their situation in terms of their net contribution to the state budget is more favourable. Second, the fact that the ISD-based study shows decits for recent immigrants but not for the other categories of the population may give the impression that long-term immigrants and persons born in the United States are in credit vis-` a-vis the County, whereas this is not the case. Lastly, the methods used to calculate the
185

costs and benets, particularly in the case of taxes not levied directly on individuals (e.g. sales tax), need to be looked at more closely. Immigration and social transfers: Canadian studies The benets of immigration to Canada: evidence on taxes and public services (Akbari, 1989) Using the 1981 Canadian Census, Akbari (1989) takes a pseudo longitudinal approach similar to that of Simon (1984). The immigrants are placed in cohorts according to their date of arrival and the vintage of each cohort can be viewed as representing part of the life-cycle of the immigrant population. Data relating to households as well as individuals are used because consumption of social income and tax payments are largely determined by the number of dependent persons, and immigrants tend to either arrive already accompanied by a family or start a family upon their arrival. Three items of government expenditure are considered: transfer payments, education and healthcare, which together accounted for about half the total government expenditure in Canada in 1980. Actual data for transfer payments are used, whilst estimates for education are based on assuming that education expenditure covers all children between the ages of 6 and 17. Healthcare gures are derived from estimates for the use of medical services according to age and sex. Average expenditure on each cohort is compared with the average value of expenditure on the native-born. Taxes are estimated on the basis of annual income, using a schedule of taxation by income level calculated by Pipes and Walker (1982). The estimates of government expenditure and taxation show typical life-cycle characteristics. Expenditure per capita for both government transfer payments and healthcare rises with earlier year of entry of immigrants and per capita expenditure on education shows a rising and then falling relationship through the life-cycle. Taxes paid by immigrants generally rise with earlier arrival times, with an abrupt fall for those who arrived before 1946, presumably a reection of a growing proportion of pensioners in this cohort. The average per capita tax revenue in 1980 for the whole immigrant population is estimated to be C$ 9 498 compared with C$ 8 896 for non-immigrants, a difference of C$ 602. This difference is attributable to a higher average income in the immigrant population. However, the per capita government expenditure is also greater for the immigrant population, C$ 4 244 compared with C$ 3 651, implying a higher expenditure on migrants by C$ 593. Additional consumption of government transfer and health services by immigrants accounts for most of this difference. One clue to both the higher average income tax and higher expenditure for the immigrant population appears to be due to differences in demographic structure; in Akbaris data, 26 per cent of the heads of immigrant households are aged over 65, compared with only 12 per cent for the non-immigrant population. On balance, the tax contribution of immigrants, net of government expenditure, marginally exceeds that of the non-immigrant population by C$ 9 (C$ 602 less C$ 593). On the basis of this result, there appears to be no difference between the immigrant and native-born populations in terms of their impact on social transfers. Needless to say, when individual cohorts of immigrants are compared with the average for all non-immigrants, there is considerable variation in this gure. It is interesting to note that there remains a positive net balance of C$ 1 717 per capita for all migrants who arrived after 1946 compared to all non-immigrants and a negative net balance of $6 381 per capital for those who arrived before 1946. If nothing else, this reects the dominant effect of falling tax revenues and increased government expenditures amongst older age groups, a result that is also seen in Simon (1984). As in Simons approach, the extent to which the results can be interpreted as indicating life-cycle patterns of benets and taxes is determined by the extent to which the socio-economic characteristics of immigrant cohorts have remained stable over time. In both the United States and Canada, the immigrant population has changed considerably over time and therefore the life-cycle interpretation should be treated with some caution. Nevertheless, the study highlights the importance of looking at the whole of the immigrant population and also of taking into account the variation in tax revenue and government expenditure that takes place over the lifecycle. For example, if the study had been restricted to migrants arriving after 1946, a very favourable view of the scal impact of immigration would have been found. Economic and social impact of immigration: a report for the Economic Council of Canada (Swan et al., 1991) This report examines the economic and social impacts of immigration and includes an analysis of the potential for immigration to reduce the scal burden that is forecast due to Canadas ageing population. In doing so, a slightly different approach to estimating the impact of immigration on social transfers is taken.
186

Three demographic scenarios are considered. From a base-line estimated population of 25 million in 1986, the authors consider a scenario based on no immigration in which the population rises steadily to 28 million in 2015 and then falls gradually in subsequent time periods. The other two scenarios assume low and high migration inows which forecast populations of 35 and 44 million, respectively, by the year 2040. Under all three of the scenarios, the Canadian population continues to age, although less so in the scenarios which assume immigration. The number of dependent persons (young and old) for each member of the population is in fact predicted to remain virtually unchanged in all three scenarios as the increasing number of senior citizens is offset by falling numbers of young people. Public spending and revenue estimates are made according to sex and age. Covering a wide range of public expenditure including education, health and public pension schemes, the per capita spending pyramid is found to have a fairly wide base (annual per capita spending for young people equals 5 000 dollars), is very narrow in the middle, then broadens beyond the age of 65 with over 20 000 dollars annual per capita spending for the over-85s. Calculations for public revenue show that this is concentrated between those aged 35 and 50, with men accounting for a greater proportion of revenue than women. These spending and revenue estimates are used to project public nance under each of the demographic scenarios. Some additional costs of immigration, such as welfare payments to refugees and aid to enable them to acquire language skills, are also factored into the calculations. The results show an increase in per capita public expenditure (net of tax) as a result of ageing in the population under all three scenarios, although the increase is less with the introduction of immigration due to the fact that immigrants are assumed to be largely of working age. For example, in 2015 the high-immigration scenario results in reduced per capita public expenditure (net of tax) by C$ 86 compared with the low-immigration scenario. Hence, according to these projections increased immigration could have a positive, but marginal effect on net public expenditure. Immigration and social transfers: Australian studies Immigrants and the social security system in Australia (Whiteford, 1991) This study considers the costs and benets generated by immigrants, with a focus on the differences that exist between immigrants of various nationalities. Also, the question of whether immigration can be used to ameliorate projected increases in public spending due to ageing is addressed. Estimates of the ratio of taxes to benets indicate only a slight difference between nationals and those born overseas, with ratios of 2.3 and 2.2 respectively. However, there are appreciable differences between nationalities within the foreign-born population, e.g. in the case of Asians the ratio is 1.7 whilst for immigrants from Oceania (New Zealanders in particular) the ratio is much higher. Whiteford argues that these results may be largely accounted for by differences in demographic structure amongst immigrant groups by national origin. Interestingly, Whiteford nds that the length of stay in Australia appears to inuence the transfer payments received by immigrants. The general trend is for benets received either to remain stable or to increase with the length of stay. However, it is not possible to know whether the differences between recent immigrants and longer-term immigrants are due to the settlement process per se or to differences in the characteristics of the various immigration waves. This conrms results found by Borjas (1994) for the United States. With regard to the impact of immigration in reducing the projected scal costs of Australias ageing population, Whiteford notes that Tulpul e (1984) simulated several immigration scenarios and found that immigration appeared to reduce the relative costs of social transfers. Whitefords own calculations only indicate a marginal effect. On the basis of stable fertility and death rates, coupled with an assumed net inux of 100 000 immigrants per year, he predicts that welfare spending could rise from 20 per cent of GDP in 1985 to 22.6 per cent in 2025. If net immigration were to be doubled to 200 000 per year, welfare spending is projected to be 21.6 per cent of GDP in 2025, only 1 percentage point less than in the scenario assuming 100 000 immigrants. Whiteford points out that other economic factors likely to be far more inuential in reducing welfare spending. For example, he estimates that a 1 per cent annual increase in labour productivity would cause welfare to fall as a percentage of GDP to 15.2 per cent in 2025. Immigration and the Commonwealth budget (Centre for International Economics, 1992) The main part of this report evaluates the scal effects of immigration based on analysing the impact of the wave of immigrants who arrived in the scal year 1989-1990. Two approaches are taken: i) an accounting exercise is conducted in which the additional government spending in 1989-90 is calculated; and ii) an applied general equilibrium model (ORANI) is used to calculate the scal effects of the 1989-1990 wave of migration in
187

the short, medium and longer term. In this respect the study is one of the few which calculates the scal effects of immigration while taking full account of economic effects. The accounting exercise makes an extremely detailed analysis of the government budget and the characteristics of the 121 000 immigrants who entered Australia in 1989-90. The resulting estimate is that an additional A$ 687 million was spent on these immigrants by government in the year of their arrival, equivalent to 0.7 per cent of federal spending and about A$ 5 700 per immigrant. This estimate must be qualied by the fact that some of the cost is recovered, due to fees charged for residency applications. However, account must also be taken of illegal immigrants, who have access to some services (at an estimated cost of A$ 36 million per year) but who also contribute through payment of indirect taxes. Using the ORANI model, the scal effects of the immigrant wave are evaluated, based on various assumptions about immigrants labour market characteristics (unemployment rates and participation rates). In addition, some account is taken of the eligibility of migrants for certain transfer payments. Three scenarios are considered within the ORANI model: a short-term scenario (1 to 2 years), where investment and capital stock remain stable; a medium-term scenario (3 to 4 years), where immigration leads to increased investment which can create new jobs; the whole cost of this investment is assumed to be borne by the government; a long-term scenario (approximately 10 years), where the capital stock in industry is able to adapt to the arrival of the immigrants and rates of return revert to their previous level without immigration. Under the short-run scenario, the increase in the federal decit caused by the wave of immigrants totals A$ 57 million. On the revenue side, reduced wage levels lead to a fall in income from taxation (reduction in the tax rate and tax base), but this is offset by the growth in indirect taxation and revenue from trade. On the spending side, federal expenditure increases, but at a moderate rate, in order to adjust to the increase in the population. The main costs are generated by the increase in pension payments, followed by sickness and unemployment benets. With the assumptions made about investment in the medium-term scenario, the scal impact of immigration is more favourable. In the long term, with a reversion of the rates of return to investment to pre-immigration levels, the effect of the 1989-1990 immigrants wave is to reduce the federal decit by A$ 317 million over the 10-year period considered. Further comments on the literature This literature review has so far looked at a selection of studies evaluating the scal impact of immigration, covering a wide range of methods producing a wide range of results. This range is seen most vividly in the literature for the United States where, for example, Huddle (1993), Passel (1994) and Borjas (1994) arrive at very different estimates, even with similar methodology and data sources. One of the major problems of the estimates reviewed in this chapter is that they typically only cover transfer mechanisms which account for a limited proportion of all government expenditure. As Borjas (1994) points out, a variety of assumptions can be made about the effect of immigrants presence on those government expenditures which are not covered in the accounting exercise. This is made even more complex by the fact that these other expenditures typically consist of a mixture of pure and quasi-public goods. Unfortunately, if, and how this issue is dealt with appears to strongly inuence the results. The approach taken by Simon (1984) and Akbari (1989) is interesting in that it evaluates the scal impact of successive cohorts of immigrants. There are inevitable questions as to what extent these can be viewed as estimates of life-cycle patterns of the scal position of immigrants due to the variations in age, nationality, etc. of immigrant cohorts thorough time. Nevertheless, both studies highlight the fact that transfers to older immigrants in the form of pensions are a signicant issue in any calculus of the overall scal impact of immigration. However, as Simon points out, this then raises the issue as to whether the contribution of the offspring of immigrants should be included in the calculations or not. This touches on the issue of intergenerational transfers which are examined in the next section. As a nal note, both studies make comparisons between immigrant cohorts and the whole of the non-immigrant population. It would have been preferable if they had generated cohort-based data for the non-immigrant population too and compared these with equivalent immigrant cohorts. Most of the evaluations of the scal impact of immigrants are based on recent or historical data. Implicitly, these studies assume that the main features of their calculations are relatively stable such that the results can be regarded as relevant for both the present and future waves of immigrants. However, previous sections have examined two studies Swan et. al. (1991) for Canada and Whiteford (1991) for Australia where projections have been made of the scal impact of immigration. Both studies were motivated, in part, by an investigation of the scal implications of population pressures projected to arise as a result of ageing populations. The studies
188

both use tax and benet schedules by age and sex groups and then apply these to various demographic projections for the immigrant population. The value of such scenarios obviously depends, to a large extent, on how stable the tax and benet schedules are considered to be over time and on the reliability of the demographic projections. Incorporation of labour, product and capital market effects within an accounting framework is rare. When it does occur it is usually based on limited information and fairly simple and sometimes debatable assumptions about how markets respond to immigration. For example, Huddles assumption that immigrant workers displace native-born workers in the labour market is not a view held by all researchers in this area. The Australian study by the Centre for International Economics (1992) is the only case where estimates of the scal effects of immigration have been made within a general equilibrium framework. The approach is fairly straightforward, consisting of generating different projections of taxes and benets by making different assumptions about labour supply in an existing model. It is surprising that a similar approach has not been used in other studies. This literature review has concentrated mainly on national studies. However, some broad lessons can be drawn from the local and state studies. Vernez and McCarthy (1995) suggest that, on balance, the local and state studies tend to imply greater impacts (either positive or negative) by immigrants on the scal system compared with national studies. One reason for this is that the studies are usually based on regions with high concentrations of immigrants and therefore the volumes of tax revenue and benet expenditure are relatively high. Negative results may arise because it is difcult to quantify precisely the contribution to taxation at the state level by immigrants as much of tax revenue is gathered at the federal level. In addition, the re-distribution mechanism to the states is too complex to be fully incorporated in the calculations. For these reasons, the local and state studies are not representative of the national picture, and inferences about the scal impact of immigration at a national level should not be drawn from them. The review by Rothman and Espenshade (1992) points out that differences among immigrants by national origin can explain a certain number of differences between the results of studies at the local level, as the composition of the foreign or foreign-born population varies signicantly from one place to another. However, it has been suggested that differences in national origins may simply be serving as a proxy for other unobserved characteristics of the immigrant population. Overall, the studies reviewed in this chapter do not provide a denitive answer to the question of whether immigrants generate a net scal surplus or are a net scal burden to the social transfer system. The last column in Table III.1 gives a general impression of the situation in the United States. Literature covered in Rothman and Espenshades review and the more recent evidence has only served to add to the debate. The relatively small number of studies for Australia and Canada are probably insufcient to permit one to draw a more denitive conclusion for these countries. 3. Generational accounting

One technique for assessing the impact of immigration on social transfers that has not so far been considered in the literature is that of generational accounting. This method is aimed at assessing the total scal balance (i.e. taxes less benets, or vice versa) of a typical member of each generation over their lifetime. This is a particularly useful way of examining types of social transfers which have intergenerational features. For example, in most countries, the education of the younger generation and the pensions of the older generation are in fact funded by the tax revenues of the currently working generation. Simon (1984) encountered this issue with regard to the exclusion of older immigrants in his analysis; in one sense he seems to be incorrect in arguing that the older workers should be excluded from the analysis, in another he is correct in that there is effectively an intergenerational transfer between the offspring of the older migrants that funds their parents pensions. Intergenerational accounting is able to fully incorporate such effects by calculating the lifetime scal balance for a series of overlapping generations. An example of generational accounting One basic intuition about the scal effect of immigrants on social transfers is that, ceteris paribus, if immigrants are of working age on arrival they will tend to contribute, over their lifetimes, more to social transfers than the native-born population. The reason for this is that the host country does not incur education costs for immigrants but does so for nationals. Here, results are presented based on an intergenerational accounting model which examines how the benets of this process may be distributed across generations. Account is also taken of the effects of high fertility amongst immigrants and the dampening of wages due to the increased labour supply created by immigration. Although this is a simulation exercise, there is no reason why similar models should not be applied to real-world data. (A detailed description of the simulation is provided in the Annex.)
189

The simulation uses as its starting point, a world in which, without immigration, population is constant through time and there is a social transfer system in which the income tax levied on those of working age funds transfer payments to the young (family allowances) and the old (pensions). Annual family allowances are assumed to be equivalent to 25 per cent of the annual wage and pensions to 50 per cent of the annual wage. There are no other forms of social transfer, and those of working age are assumed to all be in employment (i.e. there is a 100 per cent participation rate). Taxes and benets are always such that tax revenue exactly funds government expenditure, i.e. a government budget balance of zero is always maintained. Further details of this initial steadystate may be seen in Table III.3.

Table III.3. Initial assumptions of the simulation

Age Survival function Fertility distribution by age Migration distribution by age Wage level Family allowance and pension Total contributions

0-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-99

1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.833 0.667 0.500 0.333 0.167

0.000 0.000 0.330 0.500 0.170 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

0.000 0.100 0.400 0.400 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

0.000 0.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

0.250 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500

0.000 0.000 0.348 0.348 0.348 0.348 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

The effects of a wave of immigration that is assumed to last for 30 years are introduced into this steady-state environment, the immigration ow being constant and equal to 10 per cent of the population in each decade (i.e. an inow equal to about 1 per cent of the population per year). Therefore, immigration alone is assumed to have increased the population by about 30 per cent by the end of the immigration wave. (This is a scenario of very high immigration by world standards.) In Chart III.1, it is assumed that, like the native population, immigrant fertility is such that the immigrant population replicates itself, i.e. the total population returns to a steady state after the wave of immigration has ended. The horizontal axis in Chart III.1 is marked off in decades, with the wave of immigration assumed to start at the beginning of decade 10 and nish at the end of decade 12. The vertical axis indicates the excess of total transfers less total taxes over the lifetime of an individual born in the decade indicated on the horizontal axis. The units of measurement are multiples of gross annual earnings. The model is such that immigration presents an opportunity for a positive departure from the steady-state as the arrival of the working-age immigrants effectively represents a windfall gain in human capital. Three scenarios are considered: maintenance of taxes at the same level, which allows benets to rise; maintenance of benets at the same level, so that contributions can be lowered; a proportional redistribution between increased benets and reduced contributions. The results show that, when benets are adjusted, the gain is mainly for the generations bracketing the migration wave, whether in the form of increased pensions for the preceding generations or (less markedly) of improved family allowances for succeeding ones. For example, those aged 50 when the migration wave begins (i.e. those born in decade 5) enjoy two annual incomes worth of additional benets over the taxes they pay in their lifetimes due to increased pensions. When contributions are changed, those generations whose working life coincides with the migration wave are the ones to benet. Simultaneous adjustment of both contributions and benets gives a result intermediate between these two cases. The intuition behind the results is that because social transfers are based on a pay as you go system, nationals benet from the arrival of an economically active wave of migrants and are able to distribute these benets either in the form of increased benets to the noneconomically active, or as reduced contributions by the existing working population. Over time, the migrant population takes on the same characteristics as those of nationals and hence the benets of the migration wave are not permanent, i.e. they do not benet all future generations.
190

Chart III.1. The effects of alternative transfer adjustment scenarios Migrants net reproductive rate (NRR) = 1.0, no capital dilution
Contribution adjustment Multiple of annual wage Benefit adjustment Mixed adjustment Multiple of annual wage

2.5

2.5

1.5

1.5

0.5

0.5

10
Decade

15

20

Chart III.2. The effects of higher fertility and capital dilution Simultaneous adjustment of benefits and contributions
Migrants NRR = 1.0 Migrants NRR = 1.0 (with dilution of capital) Multiple of annual wage Migrants NRR = 1.5 Migrants NRR = 1.5 (with dilution of capital) Multiple of annual wage

1.5

1.5

0.5

0.5

10
Decade

15

20

Source: Calculations made by Didier Blanchet.

191

The results of alternative scenarios, which introduce high migrant fertility and lower wages are shown in Chart III.2. The latter is generated by the fact that immigration can be viewed as reducing the marginal product of labour as more labour is combined with the capital stock, a process referred to as capital dilution. The benets of migration have been distributed such that both contributions and benets are adjusted as in the third scenario of Chart III.1. Also, as in Chart III.1, the results are based on the migrants arriving in decades 10 to 12. From Chart III.2, the following is shown: When migrants are more fertile than nationals (a fertility rate of 1.5 is assumed, rather than 1) and remain so in succeeding generations, the scenario is one of continuing population growth. The higher fertility of the migrants permanently increases the proportion of the population who are economically active and therefore, unlike the case where fertility is the same as nationals, the effects of migration are permanent. Assuming migrants fertility rate to be identical to that of nationals, capital dilution leads to an abatement of some 30 per cent in the advantage derived by the generation most favoured from the presence of immigrants. When capital dilution is combined with high fertility, there appears to be only a modest transitory gain, largely during the period of the migration wave. Note that it is merely coincident that the effect of increased fertility is virtually offset by that of lower wages through capital dilution. Simulations using alternative parameter values would not necessarily show this result. In summary, this simulation exercise shows that, under certain assumptions, immigration can result in a net gain in transfers over individuals lifetimes for at least some generations of nationals. The net gain can be distributed in a variety of ways depending on whether the gain is realised in reduced taxes or increased benets. The net gain is weakened if wages are lowered through capital dilution and a permanent net gain for all future generations is only possible if immigrants are assumed to have relatively high fertility. This approach could be pursued further by investigating a wider range of demographic possibilities and congurations of social transfers which conform to the situation existing in a variety of real-world economies. In addition, the model could be expanded in a number of ways, for example by inclusion of transfers to the working population itself. The advantage of this approach is that it attempts an evaluation of the scal impact of immigration with full consideration of contributions over the life-cycle and also demonstrates the distribution of the impact across generations of nationals. Concluding remarks This report has examined the principle factors that need to be taken into account in calculating the net effect of immigration on social transfers and has also critically reviewed the results of several studies. These studies have used a variety of methods and this has been accompanied by a wide variety of results which, in sum, appear to provide no denitive answer as to whether immigrants are a net burden on the social transfer system or a net cost. Nevertheless, the results of such calculations may be widely publicised and may be inuential in policy debate. Therefore, when evaluating the value and usefulness of the information provided, the following should be borne in mind: Such calculations are often based on data for recent, and sometimes not so recent, time periods and may not reect the current state of the immigrant population with regard to social transfers. In addition, any inference that the situation for the current stock of immigrants is a good guide for future immigrants must be made with due consideration to the past and present developments in immigration ows. The calculations do not commonly introduce the effects that immigrants may have on labour and product markets. If they do, then they are often based on fairly rudimentary and debatable assumptions. This may also be said of attempts to account for the scal position of migrants with regard to government expenditure on items other than social transfers. Accounting for public and quasi-public government expenditure is difcult and a variety of assumptions can be made which may strongly inuence the results. Use of population-wide estimates of benets per capita may give misleading results since they fail to take account of differences in entitlement to the benet system and different behaviour in use of the benet system between immigrants and nationals. Results of local and regional-level studies should not be taken as a reection of the situation at the national level due to the fact that, at least as far as the United States literature is concerned, these studies are usually conducted in states and localities where immigrant concentration is high. Even if some studies suggest, explicitly or implicitly, that the position of immigrants within the system of taxes and social transfers should change, it is not clear how easy this may be to achieve politically, or to what extent savings in government expenditure may be realised as a result of the change. For example,
192

policies which aim to make budgetary savings by restricting entitlement to benets for foreign residents may be offset by a rise in naturalisations as immigrants attempt to maintain their entitlement to benet. There is obviously no correct way to evaluate the impact of immigration on social transfers, this depends partly on the precise question being addressed and the available data. However, what does seem appropriate is that researchers should adopt a number of approaches which may help them to evaluate the impact of immigration across various dimensions. Within the accounting approach it seems important to explore a variety of possibilities when allowing for government expenditure on public and quasi-public goods as well as a variety of possible scenarios with regard to the effect immigrants may have on labour and product markets. One way in which market effects can be fully incorporated is through the use of applied general-equilibrium models. This, in part, depends on whether such models are amenable to addressing the scal effects of demographic change. For example, some existing models have fairly simple labour supply structures that may not easily allow the simulation of a wave of immigration specied by age group. The results from such an exercise must inevitably be qualied by the character of the general-equilibrium model itself. For example, some models may assume very rapid labour market adjustment compared to others; thus, in turn, affecting the way in which wages and hence tax revenues change as a result of increased labour supply due to immigration. Finally, as discussed in the third section, generational accounting may provide some new perspectives on the impact of immigration on social transfers, especially if there is a desire to incorporate the effects of immigration in the longer term. The approach requires broad generalisations and inevitable simplications about the complex structure of the social transfer systems. Despite this, it does take more explicit account of the overall impact of immigrants over the life-cycle. In addition, the generational accounting approach allows consideration of how the net benets or costs of immigration may be distributed amongst generations of nationals.

193

Annex

AN EXAMPLE OF THE GENERATIONAL ACCOUNTING APPROACH

This model illustrates the effect of introducing a wave of migrants, largely of working age, on the lifetime net transfers of the national population. The model is disaggregated such that the effects on different generations of the national population can be calculated. The social transfer system is such that transfer payments are always exactly funded by current tax revenue, i.e. there is no saving or borrowing in the public budget and there is no link between what each individual contributes in taxes over time and what they receive by way of transfer payments. By construction, migration will typically be of net benet for at least some generations of the national population. This is because the migrants are assumed to be initially of working age and therefore, at least temporarily, there is an increase in the ratio of tax-payers to those living on transfer payments (the young and the old). This allows the national population to benet from either reduced taxes, increased benets or a mixture of both. The model also considers the possibility that migrants may lower wages through capital dilution, thus reducing the benets to nationals. In addition, the possibility of a permanent effect on lifetime transfers is illustrated through assuming that the migrant population has a higher fertility rate compared with the national population. Without migration, the model is set up such that the national population remains constant and the social transfer system is stable, in other words there is no need for adjustment in either the system of taxes or contributions to maintain the social transfer system. As can be seen in Table III.3 in the main text, it is assumed that there are 10 age groups, each spanning 10 years and four of which are of working age. Those of working age earn wages, w, set equal to 1 of which 34.8 per cent is paid in contributions. The other age groups receive social transfers whose total value is equal to the value of the contributions made by the working population at a given point in time. Under these initial stationary conditions each age group, a, has a particular contribution rate c(a,1) and amount of benet p(a,1). With the introduction of the migrant population, the total amount of contributions and benets at an arbitrary time t, ex ante (i.e. assuming the tax rates and benets are those without migration) may be written as:

C 0 (t ) = w(t ) c( a,1)( n(a, t ) + m(a, t ))

a= 3

P 0 (t ) = p( a,1)( n(a, t ) + m(a, t ))

a =1

10

In the above, C and P are total contributions and benets, and n(a,t) and m(a,t) refer to the population of nationals and immigrants of age group a at time t, respectively. Note that since contributions are only made by the working population, only age groups 3 to 6 are relevant in the calculation of total contributions. Under this hypothetical scenario, there may not be a balanced budget, therefore the contribution rates and benets must be adjusted somehow to bring the budget back into balance. Three scenarios are considered:

1.

Adjustment of contributions

The contribution rate of each age group is adjusted by the ratio of the ex ante benets to contributions and benets remain unchanged:

c (a, t ) = c (a,1)

P0 ( t) C 0 (t ) p( a, t ) = p( a,1)

2.

Adjustment of benets

The benet to each age group is adjusted by the ratio of the ex ante contributions to benets and benets remain unchanged:

c (a, t ) = c (a,1) p( a, t ) = p( a,1) C 0 (t ) P 0 (t )

195

3.

Simultaneous adjustment
Both benets and contributions are adjusted by the ratio of either ex ante benets or contributions to their average: 0 2 P (t ) c (a, t ) = c (a,1) 0 0 C (t ) + P (t )

p( a, t ) = p( a,1)

2C 0 (t ) C (t ) + P 0 (t )
0

These three scenarios are considered in Chart III.1 of the text where it is also assumed that the migrants net reproductive rate equals that of the national population and there is no capital dilution, i.e. average wages remain constant. Chart III.1 depicts the effect of introducing migrants over three decades, those indicated by t = 10, 11 and 12 and shows the net benet over the lifetimes of each generation, g, born between decade 0 and decade 20. The benet for each generation, g, is given by:

B(g ) = s( a)[ p(a, g + a) c (a, g + a)w(g + a)]

a =1

10

where s(a) is the survival function. This gives a direct measure of the effect of migration on social transfers for nationals, since the net balance under stationary equilibrium without migration is equal to zero. Note that in this case the wage w(g+a), is constant over time and equal to 1. Taking the case of the simultaneous adjustment described above, a further four simulations are calculated which combine different assumptions about the fertility of the migrant population and the possibility of capital dilution. A case of increased migrant fertility is considered such that the migrants net reproduction rate is 1.5 compared with that of 1 for the national population. Capital dilution is modelled by considering the development of wages through time based on the following Cobb-Douglas production function: Y(t) = cK(t)L(t)1 Assuming the labour market to operate such that the market wage rate equals the marginal product of labour then: w(t) = (1 )Y(t)/L(t) In order to calculate w(t), values of c, , K(t) and L(t) are required. L(t) is simply the value ascribed to the size of the working population at time t. The value of is taken to be 0.25, implying that total income is distributed such that 25 per cent always goes to capital and the rest to labour. Capital is assumed to last for two time periods. Therefore, the capital stock at any one point in time is the sum of additions to the capital stock (savings) over the previous two time periods. It is assumed that these savings equal a proportion of total output. Therefore: K(t) = [Y(t 1) + Y(t 2)] In the simulation, is assumed to take the value of 0.25. Finally, the value of c and the initial value of K are chosen such that, given the values of , and the initial stationary value of L, the wage in the initial stationary state equals 1. Chart III.2 in the text presents the results of four simulations which combine the two demographic scenarios (the migrant population having the same net reproduction rate as the national population and the migrant population having a higher net reproduction rate) with the two economic scenarios (there being no capital dilution and there being capital dilution as described above). The results in Chart III.2 represent the benets to generations from three decades of migration as described above.

196

BIBLIOGRAPHY

AKBARI, A.M. (1989), The benets of immigrants to Canada: evidence on taxes and public services, Canadian Public Policy, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 424-435. ALFANDARI, E. (ed.) (1987), Immigration et protection sociale, No. 2 de la Revue de droit sanitaire et social, Sirey, Paris. ARTHUR, W.B. and McNICOLL, G. (1978), Samuelson, population and intergenerational transfers, International Economic Review, No. 19, pp. 241-246. AUERBACH, A.J., GOKHALE, J. and KOTLIKOFF, L.J. (1991) Generational accounting: a meaningful alternative to decit accounting, in Bradford, D. (ed.) Tax Policy and the Economy, NBER, Vol. 5, pp. 55-110. BLANCHET, D. (1988a), Age structure and capital dilution effects in neo-classical growth models, Journal of Population Economics, No. 1, pp. 183-194. BLANCHET, D. (1988b), Immigration et r egulation de la structure par a ge dune population, Population, Vol. 43, No. 2, pp. 293-309. BLANCHET, D. and MARCHAND, O. (1991), Au-del` a de lan 2000, sajuster a ` une p enurie de main-duvre ?, Economie et Statistiques, No. 243, pp. 61-68. BLAU, F. (1984), The use of transfer payments by immigrants, Industrial and Labour Relations Review, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 222-239. BOGEN, E. (1987), Immigration in New York, Praeger, New York. BORJAS, G.J. (1991), Immigrants in the US labor market: 1940-80, American Economic Review, Vol. 81, No. 2, pp. 287-291. BORJAS, G.J. (1994), The economics of immigration, Journal of Economic Literature, No. 32, pp. 1667-1717. BORJAS, G.J. (1995), The economic benets from immigration, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 3-22. BORJAS, G.J. and TIENDA, M. (1987), The economic consequences of immigration, Science, No. 235, pp. 645-651. BORJAS, G.J. and TREJO, S.J. (1991), Immigrant participation in the welfare system, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 195-211. BORJAS, G.J., FREEMAN, R. and KATZ, L. (1996), Searching for the effect of immigration on the labor market, NBER Working Paper 5454. BUREAU OF THE CENSUS (1976), Survey of Income and Education. BUTCHER, K.F. and CARD, D. (1991), Immigration and wages: evidence from the 1980s, American Economy Review, Vol. 81, No. 2, pp. 892-926. CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES (1994), The Costs of Immigration: Assessing a Conicted Issue, Backgrounder, No. 2-94, September. CENTRE FOR INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS (1988), The relationship between immigration and economic performance in Immigration: a Commitment to Australia, Report to the Committee to advise on Australias immigration policies, Vol. 2, Australian Government Publishing Ofce, Canberra. CENTRE FOR INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS (1992), Immigration and the Commonwealth Budget, Australian Government Publishing Ofce, Canberra. CLARK, R.L. and PASSEL, J.S. (1993), How Much do Immigrants Pay in Taxes? Evidence From Los Angeles County, Washington DC, The Urban Institute, PRIP-UI-26, August. CLARK, R.L., et al. (1994), Fiscal Impacts of Undocumented Aliens: Selected Estimates in Seven States, Washington DC, The Urban Institute, September. COLLINS, N. (1991), Do immigrants place a tax burden on New Jersey residents?, Unpublished senior thesis, Department of Economics, Princeton University. COMMUNITY RESEARCH ASSOCIATES (1980), Undocumented Immigrants: Their Impact on the County of San Diego, CRA, San Diego, California. 197

CORDEIRO, A. and VERHAEREN, R. (1976), Les travailleurs immigr es et la S ecurit e sociale, Presses universitaires de Grenoble. CURRIE, J. (1995), Do children of immigrants make differential use of public health insurance?, NBER Working Paper 5388. FRIEDBERG, R.M. and HUNT, J. (1995), The impact of immigrants on host country wages, employment and growth, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 23-44. GREENWOOD, M.J. (1994), Potential channels of immigrant inuence on the economy of the receiving country, Papers in Regional Science, Vol. 73, No. 3, pp. 211-240. HEER, D.M. (1990), Undocumented Mexicans in the United States, Cambridge, England, Cambridge University Press. HUDDLE, D. (1993), The Costs of Immigration, Washington, DC, Carrying Capacity Network. JENSEN, L. (1989), The New Immigration: Implications for Poverty and Public Assistance Utilization, Greenwood Press, New York. KING, V.E. (1994), An investigation of the scal impacts of immigrants in New Jersey, in Espenshade, T.J. (ed.), A Stones Throw from Ellis Island: Economic Implications of Immigration to New Jersey, University Press of America. KOTLIKOFF, L.J. (1992), Generational Accounting: Knowing Who Pays And When For What We Spend, The Free Press, MacMillan. LALONDE, R.J. and TOPEL, R.H. (1991), Immigrants in the American labor market: quality, assimilation and distributionnal effects, American Economic Review, Vol. 81, No. 2, pp. 297-302. LEE, R.D. (1980), Age structure, intergenerational transfers and economic growth: an overview, Revue e conomique, No. 6, pp. 1129-1156. LEIBFRITZ, W., ROSEVEARE, D., FORE, D. and WURZEL, E. (1995), Ageing populations, pension systems and government budgets: do they affect saving?, Economic Department Working Paper No. 156, OECD. LOS ANGELES COUNTY (1982), Costs of Undocumented Aliens, Chief Administrative Ofce, Los Angeles, California. LOS ANGELES COUNTY (1991), Updated Revenues and Costs Attributable to Undocumented Aliens, Chief Administrative Ofce, Los Angeles, California. LOS ANGELES COUNTY INTERNAL SERVICES DIVISION (ISD) (1992), Impact of Undocumented Persons and Other Immigrants on Costs, Revenues and Services in Los Angeles County, Los Angeles County, 6 November. McCARTHY, K.F. and VALDEZ, R.B. (1986), Current and Future Effects of Mexican Immigration in California, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California. MULLER, T. and ESPENSHADE, T.J. (1985), The Fourth Wave: Californias Newest Immigrants, Urban Institute Press, Washington DC. NORTH, D. and HOUSTOUN, M. (1976), The Characteristics and Role of Illegal Aliens in the US Labor Market: An Exploratory Study, Linton and Company, Washington DC. OECD (1991), Migration: The Demographic Aspects, Paris. OFFICE FOR REFUGEES AND IMMIGRANTS (1990), Through the Golden Door: Impacts of Non-Citizen Residents on the Commonwealth, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 16 May. PARKER, R.A. and REA, L.M. (1993), Illegal Immigration in San Diego County: An Analysis of Costs and Revenues, Report to the California State Senate Special Committee on Border Issues, California Legislature, September. PASSEL, J.S. (1994), Immigrants and Taxes: A Reappraisal of Huddles The Costs of Immigrants, Washington DC, The Urban Institute, PRIP-UI-29, January. PIPES, S. and WALKER, M. (1982), Tax Facts 3, Vancouver, the Fraser Institute. RIMMER, S.J. (1991), The cost of multiculturalism, Belconnen, ACT. ROMERO, P.J., CHANG, A.J. and PARKER, T. (1994), Shifting the Costs of a Failed Federal Policy: The Net Fiscal Impact of Illegal Immigrants in California, Sacramento, Governors Ofce of Planning and Research, State of California, September. ROTHMAN, E. and ESPENSHADE, T.J. (1992), Fiscal impacts of immigration to the United States, Population Index, Vol. 58, No. 3, pp. 381-415. SAMUELSON, P.A. (1975), The optimum growth rate of a population, International Economic Review, No. 16, pp. 531-538. SIMMONS, A.B. and BUTTRICK, J. (1987), The impact of immigration on government expenditures: conceptual and methodological considerations, prepared for the Research Division Immigration Group, Employment and Immigration, Canada, August. SIMON, J. (1981), What immigrants take from and give to the public coffers. US Immigration Policy and the National Interest: Appendix D to Staff Report of the Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy. SIMON, J. (1984), Immigrants, taxes, and welfare in the United States, Population and Development Review, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 55-70. 198

SIMON, J. (1989), The Economic Consequences of Immigration, Basil Blackwell. SIMON, J. (1996), Public Expenditures on Immigrants to the United States, Past and Present, Population and Development Review, Vol. 22(1), pp. 99-109. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS (1984), Southern California: A Region in Transition, Volume Two: Impacts and Future Immigration. Los Angeles, California, SCAG. SPARKES, L. and GODDARD, R. (1988), Population and Immigration: trends and implications, Unpublished paper. STECK, Ph., RAUBER, E., ALFANDARI, E. and CHASTAND, A. (1987), Limmigr e et sa famille : les prestations familiales des immigr es, in Alfandari E. (ed.), Immigration et protection sociale, Sirey, Paris. SWAN, N. et al. (1991), Economic and Social Impact of Immigration, Economic Council of Canada. TAPINOS, G. and de RUGY, A. (1994), The macroeconomic impact of immigration, review of the literature published since the mid-1970, in OECD, Trends in International Migration, SOPEMI, Annual Report 1993, Paris. TIENDA, M. and JENSEN, L. (1986), Immigration and public assistance participation: dispelling the myth of dependency, Social Science Research, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 372-400. A (1984), Effects of alternative migration strategies on government expenditure, Information Paper 12, TULPULE, Committee for the Economic Development of Australia, Melbourne. VERNEZ, G. and McCARTHY, K.F. (1995), The Fiscal Costs of Immigration: Analytical and Policy Issues, Center for Research on Immigration Policy, Rand, Santa Monica. VERNEZ, G. and McCARTHY, K.F. (1996), The Costs of Immigration to Taxpayers: Analytical and Policy Issues, Center for Research on Immigration Policy, Rand, Santa Monica. WEINTRAUB, S. and CARDENAS, G. (1984), The use of public services by undocumented aliens in Texas: a study of state costs and revenues, Policy Research Report, No. 60, Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs, Austin, Texas. WHITEFORD, P. (1991), Immigrants and the social security system, University of New South Wales, Austrialian Bureau of Immigration Research. YOUNG, C.M. (1988), Towards a population policy: myths and misconceptions concerning the demographic effects of immigration, Australian Quarterly, Winter, pp. 220-230.

199

STATISTICAL ANNEX

Data on the ows and stocks of migrants and related issues, such as their performance in the labour market, are derived from a wide variety of sources and the nature of these sources varies across countries. This makes the application of standardised denitions difcult and hence particular attention needs to be paid to the sources and methods used to derive migration statistics, especially in the context of international comparisons of data. Most of the data presented in this report are taken from the individual contributions of correspondents appointed by the OECD Secretariat with the approval of national governments. In this regard it should be noted that: As discussed in the Foreword to this report, the Continuous Reporting System on Migration (SOPEMI) covers almost all of the Member countries of the OECD. The coverage of countries in the data and the ability to construct time-series is to a certain extent affected by the dates at which countries became members of the SOPEMI network. Recent participants to SOPEMI do not necessarily provide historical data in their reports and, in addition, further clarication is sometimes required before data can be published. SOPEMI has no authority to impose changes in data collection procedures. It has an observatory role which, by its very nature, has to use existing statistics. However, it does play an active role in suggesting what it considers to be essential improvements in data collection and makes every effort to present consistent and well-documented statistics. Discussion of the main sources and methods used for migration statistics is presented below in Section A, including an Appendix describing the available data sources for Central and Eastern European countries covered by SOPEMI. This is followed in Sections B and C by statistical tables.

A.
1.

SOURCES AND METHODS USED IN STATISTICS ON MIGRATION

Basic concepts

As is stated in a special section on migration statistics in the 1989 United Nations Demographic Yearbook1 although international migration may well in many cases entail legal procedures, it remains the most difcult of demographic phenomena to dene and measure correctly (page 95). The United Nations has endeavoured for several years to encourage the standardisation of data collection procedures and to dene what data ought to result (the last recommendation on this point dates from 1976 and a revision is in process), but one has to agree with the UN that there is little or no evidence that the quality and comparability of the ow statistics have improved signicantly since the 1970s (page 28). How do the kind of data assembled in this annex compare with the norms recommended by the United Nations? In principle, the UNs aim is to count all arrivals and departures and hence to account for all categories of persons crossing international borders, regardless of their place of residence (page 29). Taking this very general denition, the criterion of residence allows an initial distinction between migrants and nonmigrants, i.e. tourists, excursionists, visitors and special categories (seasonal workers, students, refugees, diplomatic and consular representatives, etc.). The SOPEMI statistics, which also cover refugees and seasonal workers, therefore include some of those classied by the United Nations as non-migrants. Migrants consist of immigrants and emigrants. According to the United Nations recommendations, immigrants include four categories: a) long-term immigrants, b) short-term immigrants, c) residents returning after a period working abroad (i.e. short-term emigrants returning) and d) nomads. Emigrants also comprise four
201

categories: a) long-term emigrants, b) short-term emigrants, c) non-residents departing after working in the country for less than one year (i.e. short-term immigrants departing) and d) nomads. The United Nations denes long-term migrants as follows (these denitions apply equally to all population categories, whether nationals or not, foreign-born or not): long-term emigrants are residents or persons who have resided continuously in the country for more than one year, who are departing to take up residence abroad for more than one year (page 92); long-term immigrants are non-residents or persons who have not continuously lived in the country for more than one year arriving for a length of stay of more than one year (page 95). In the case of the statistical annex, the tables present data covering different concepts. On the one hand, for nationality-based countries, they relate exclusively to foreigners and, for countries which focus on place of birth rather than on nationality or citizenship, they refer to the foreign-born population. On the other hand, the intended duration of stay is rarely recorded by countries and may not correspond to the duration of the residence permit granted or to the actual period of stay in the country. The concept of long-term migrant remains relevant, however, even if the denition may sometimes be unclear or highly empirical. This is why the SOPEMI statistics frequently show marked differences in relation to those of the Demographic Yearbook of the United Nations. 2. Available sources

In the OECD immigration countries, the statistical procedures for recording migratory phenomena stem largely from the role that each country assigned to immigration when the system of measuring and monitoring the latter was set up. The result is that the available statistics are mostly institutional and based on administrative sources. From the practical standpoint of data collection, the most signicant distinction is undoubtedly that between countries which keep population registers and those which do not. Population registers The OECD countries taking part in SOPEMI which do not keep population registers include four nonEuropean countries (Australia, Canada, Mexico, the United States) and six European countries: France, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, the United Kingdom and Turkey. The other European SOPEMI countries maintain such registers. In the case of Japan, the register covers only foreigners. The register system in principle makes it possible to monitor the whole population, foreign or other, at local administrative level, including both counts of residents and of arrivals and departures. These registers are being increasingly computerised; however, the extent to which their management is centralised varies from one country to another2. The criteria for identifying immigrants (arrivals) may include the intention to take up residence (generally more than three months), the length of stay or absence, housing occupancy or possession of a residence permit. For emigrants (departures), the intention alone denes an outow and the period of intended absence is not usually specied. This very brief description of population registers prompts the following comments: In most cases, departures are less well recorded than arrivals, which is why some countries use host country estimates to calculate their emigrants. However, the Nordic countries, which use a common registration form, trace departures from one country and arrivals in another more easily. The number of entry permits granted to foreigners does not necessarily correspond to the number of arrivals recorded in the registers, either because some foreigners fail to register or because some do not actually stay in the country long enough to be registered. Lastly, the duration criterion adopted by the European countries to dene migration is generally less than the one year recommended by the United Nations. Despite these reservations, it has to be concluded that countries which keep population registers generally have better migration statistics than those that do not, at least as regards the continuous recording of the foreign or immigrant population and migratory ows. The question of the international comparability of migration ows based on the registers, however, is a different matter which will be considered below. Other sources The sources of information concerning countries which do not use population registers are very varied and it is not possible to list them all. The most important is no doubt the census, though it has the disadvantage of being infrequent (generally every ten years) and only measuring stocks, not ows. Apart from censuses, a wide variety
202

of registers or records are used to estimate stocks and ows. These include residence permits, work permits and the information obtained at border crossings or in ports. With respect to ows, most countries without registers are able to produce counts of arrivals, generally obtained from statistics of residence permits, as well as an estimate of outows of uncertain quality. These are then combined to produce annual estimates of net migration which enter into intercensal population estimates. Special categories Whatever system is adopted, a number of categories of migrants raise problems, in particular refugees and illegal immigrants. The counting of refugees and asylum seekers (see Table A.3) differs according to the country and the method of registration. In some countries, persons in these categories are partially included in total annual arrivals by nationality. The statistics in non-European countries but also some European countries allow a distinction to be made between arrivals under the heading of immigration and arrivals under humanitarian arrangements. In a number of countries, asylum seekers are only counted when their application has been approved, in which case they appear in the statistics not according to the date of arrival but rather according to that of approval. Also, some countries only consider the actual applicant to be a refugee, his/her family being admitted under other provisions (for instance, France), while others consider the whole family to be refugees (for instance, Switzerland). The number of illegal immigrants, is by denition, not known and most estimates must be viewed with some circumspection, even though they may be useful (see the 1989 SOPEMI report). However, their number is sufciently large for several OECD countries to have launched regularisation programmes in the last few years. These programmes have given rise to considerable statistical problems, since the migration of illegal immigrants is then recorded in the statistics only after a lapse of time. Consequently, any regularisation during a given year rst has a direct impact on foreign or immigrant population ows for that year, but in the short or medium term it also has a deferred impact on the level of arrivals, notably on account of induced ows of persons entering through family reunication provisions. While naturalisations do not directly affect the consistency of the statistical series, as is the case for the groups considered above, they must nevertheless be taken into account when comparing countries with each other. Thus, in OECD Europe, the procedures whereby foreigners acquire the nationality of the host country vary in complexity from one country to another. In France or Belgium, for example, where foreigners can fairly readily acquire the nationality of the country, the endogenous changes in the immigrant population (especially births) can eventually contribute to a signicant rise in the native population. In Germany or Switzerland, on the other hand, where naturalisation is more difcult, the same phenomena will tend to manifest themselves almost exclusively as a rise in the foreign population. Lastly, certain countries have changed the laws pertaining to nationality during the eighties. These changes usually tend to reduce the foreign population by legal means, and so once again can disrupt the consistency of the series. 3. The comparability of measures of migration ows

It was noted earlier that measures of migration inows for OECD countries come from essentially two different sources, namely population registers, which are the usual source for most European countries, and residence permits, which are used to measure migration inows in the traditional settlement countries of Australia, Canada and the United States, but also in countries such as France, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. How comparable are the measures of inows obtained from these various sources? Before addressing this question, it may be useful to attempt a general characterisation of migration systems current in OECD countries. This characterisation will be necessarily somewhat of a simplication, but will be helpful in illuminating the differences in the national statistics. Systems based on permanent residence The central feature of the rst type of migration system considered here is the possibility of obtaining the right of permanent residence upon entry into the host country. This migration system is typical of settlement countries which receive immigrants with precisely the aim that the selected immigrants will establish themselves denitively in the host country. In these countries, however, there also exists a second regime of entry into the country, operating in parallel with the permanent regime, and allowing for the possibility of temporary migration, essentially but not exclusively for employment-related reasons. This temporary regime covers not only seasonal employment and short-term project-related work, but can also include fairly extended stays in the host country,
203

for example, by intra-company transferees. There is also often the possibility for persons in the temporary regime to enter the permanent regime, provided they ll the entry requirements for the latter. In addition, there exist institutionally established means of moving from the temporary to the permanent regime for certain special groups, for example, asylum seekers who are granted refugee or some other comparable status as well as persons beneting from a regularisation programme. Systems based on temporary permits In the second migration system, characteristic of most of the other OECD countries, the initial entry into the country is almost always on the basis of a residence permit of limited duration. This permit may be more or less automatically renewed upon expiry, but it is nonetheless from the legal standpoint a temporary permit. The right of permanent residence is rarely granted upon entry except perhaps for certain special groups, such as quota refugees, certain ethnic groups (e.g. ethnic Germans in the case of Germany), family members of persons permanently resident in the host country, and more generally for certain nationality groups under a regime of free circulation of persons, such as currently exists in the European Union for member country nationals. After a fairly extensive stay in the host country (generally longer than ve years), foreign immigrants under this migration system can generally apply for and receive the right of permanent residence. There exists a secondary regime in this migration system as well, characterised also by permits of limited duration (for seasonal workers, students, contract workers, etc.), where the stay in the host country is generally tied to a specic activity of predetermined duration. Statistics of inows residence permits and population registers The connection between each of these migration systems and the associated migration statistics is neither simple nor straightforward. In countries where the permanent migration regime predominates, statistics on the immigration of foreigners include as immigrants only persons who enter the permanent regime, either directly upon entry to the country or indirectly via a transfer from the temporary regime on the part of persons already in the country. In such countries, there is a close connection between the judicial and legal framework underlying the migration system and the statistics on migration, because the latter are based on the ofcial administrative means for regulating the ows, namely residence permits. However, these countries do not consider as immigrants certain persons, such as intra-company transferees, that are counted as such in countries where the entry permit is generally a temporary one. In addition, there are generally no or uncertain statistics on movements of persons whose movements are unregulated (that is, nationals or persons with the right of permanent residence and all persons leaving the country). On the other hand, for historical reasons countries where limited-duration permits are the normal mode of entry also generally happen to be those which maintain population registers, and it is the latter rather than the permit data which are the usual source of migration statistics in these countries. The reason is undoubtedly that population registers are the only source that can provide information on all ows including unregulated inows and outows. Nonetheless, there do exist countries operating largely under a temporary permit regime where there are no population registers (e.g. France) and where statistics on the migration of foreigners are taken directly from permit statistics. For countries in this group, a person is considered an immigrant if the duration of the permit granted upon entry exceeds a specied period, generally one year. Moreover, as is the case in permanent regime countries, asylum seekers are not considered immigrants until such time as a decision is made on their claim, at which point only those who are accorded refugee status in some form are considered immigrants. For countries with population registers, migration statistics for foreigners are not derived directly from the permit data but from the registers. Although population registers are designed to track population counts and movements over time, their primary aim, as is the case for residence permits, is administrative and legal rather than statistical. Indeed, the registers are generally administered by an independent board, and although national statistical institutes do have a consultative role with respect to dening the conditions of entry and exit from the registers, the statistical function is only one among several elements that enter into the boards decisions. In practice, this means that the connection between the legal framework for entry of foreigners into the country and the statistics of entries is not quite so close as is the case for countries whose statistics are based on residence permits. On the other hand, the registers have the advantage of being able to track unregulated inows (of nationals and permanent residents) as well as to measure outows. In countries with population registers, immigration counts are usually based on entries into the (central) population register. Although the holding of a residence permit is generally a necessary condition for entry, additional conditions are usually applied, particularly with respect to the intended period of stay in the country. For example, in Belgium, Spain, Italy and Luxembourg a person enters the register if he or she has a residence
204

permit and intends to stay in the country for at least three months. In the Netherlands and Norway, it is six months and in Finland and Sweden one year. In Denmark, the intended period of stay for entry into the register is three months, but a person is classied as an immigrant only if he or she has actually lived in the country for over a year. In Germany, any person coming from another country and occupying a dwelling which he or she owns, rents or sublets is in principle supposed to register, with no minimum intended duration criterion applied. In theory then, migration inows could even include vacationers renting a private dwelling, although in practice such persons probably do not commonly register. In addition the treatment of asylum seekers varies considerably from country to country, with some countries registering them if they live in private dwellings (but not reception centres) and others only if a positive decision has been taken on their claim. Generally it is not possible to harmonise the statistics across countries because asylum seekers are not specically identied on the registers. Sources of non-comparability The variations in registration requirements from country to country can have substantial effects on the statistics of inows, although the exact magnitude of these effects is not easy to ascertain. The variation in registration practices for asylum seekers can certainly be a major source of non-comparability, especially when the volume of asylum seekers is large, as has been the case in recent years. On the other hand, the different intended stay criteria may or may not have a signicant impact, depending on the correspondence between the intended stay and the actual stay and the importance of short-term ows. On the basis of the intended stay criterion alone, one would expect countries with lower duration limits for entry into the registers to record relatively higher inows of foreigners than countries where the intended duration criterion is higher. In addition, if one compares population register statistics with permit statistics, one might expect, all things being equal, register-based inows to be lower than permit-based data, because some persons granted residence permits may fail to register and others may not remain in the country long enough to register. Generally then, one might reasonably conclude that the statistics of foreign inows obtained from current national sources cannot be considered especially comparable across countries. There are in particular three important reasons for the lack of comparability in the data: in general, statistics based on residence permits cannot be compared to inow data from population registers because the issuing of a permit does not necessarily result in an entry into the registers; population register data from different countries cannot be easily compared because the rules which govern entry into the registers vary signicantly from country to country; under regimes of free circulation of persons, such as currently exists in the European Union for citizens of the member countries, it is not clear that permit-based statistics are able to capture movements of foreigners not subject to regulation, unless some form of courtesy permit is issued to such persons. Prospects for the future Currently, the possibility of harmonising the rules across countries for entry into the registers and of tying entry into the registers more closely to the granting of residence permits would not appear to be especially favourable. In practice, this means that population register data, which would seem to be a good source of ow statistics nationally, in particular because they cover both regulated and unregulated ows, may be subject to some limitations for international use. On the other hand, permit data, disaggregated by type and permit duration, exist in principle in all countries and constitute a source with an interesting potential for achieving comparability, essentially because they are by denition exhaustive with respect to the covered population (legal entries of foreigners associated with the granting of a residence permit). However, in general, permit data only cover regulated ows and thus are incomplete. To obtain data on unregulated ows, a variety of other sources (including population registers) would need to be used, the accuracy and quality of which would vary from country to country and the harmonisation of which would be difcult and indeed, perhaps impossible. 4. Nationality and place of birth

When Australia, Canada and the United States joined the SOPEMI network, it brought an end to the strictly European framework in use until then and opened the door to discussion of problems in settlement countries. Thus, statistical concepts little used in the European countries have had to be taken into account. The latter countries make a clear distinction between nationals and foreigners and nationality remains a basic dening criterion. The situation differs completely in non-European host countries (except Japan), where the criterion most used is the place of birth, which is closer to the concept of the immigrant stock as dened by the United Nations. But one can be a foreigner without being a migrant and a migrant without being a foreigner. This simple
205

observation implies that comparisons of stock data between the statistics available for nationality-based countries and those relating to the traditional countries of settlement are problematical, hence the need for separate tables for each group of countries. The United Nations Demographic Yearbook gives the following denition of native population and foreign-born population: ... native population is dened as persons born within the country or area; foreignborn population is dened as persons born outside the country or area. The country or area of birth is based on the national boundaries existing at the time of the census (page 103). The foreign-born population therefore includes people born outside the metropolitan territory in the strict sense, even though they may not necessarily have been born in what is legally a foreign country. The example of France provides an opportunity to illustrate the consequences of these denitions. According to the Demographic Yearbook3, the 1982 census counted 3 680 000 foreigners and a foreign-born population of 6 001 000. A total of 795 000 of the 3 680 000 foreigners were Algerians and 1 439 000 of the 6 001 000 foreign-born population were born in Algeria. The bulk of the difference (over 600 000) in fact consists of people who are French by birth (the pieds-noirs), with an uncertain but probably small number of people whose origin is neither Algerian nor French. Similarly, people born in Martinique, Guadeloupe or R eunion are mostly French by birth (and, moreover, born on French territory), but they are all counted as being foreignborn. Similar comments may be made about some other countries. A comparison of the two series therefore provides valuable but insufcient data since the two concepts cannot be cross-classied as would be the case if it were possible, for example, to divide the foreign-born population between nationals and foreigners. Many censuses do not provide for this classication and the Demographic Yearbook does not include any tables for this cross-classication. However, even assuming that it were possible to do so, the relevant concepts for analysing migration would, for essentially historical reasons and in the absence of any current data according to other concepts, remain those of foreigner in tables for European countries and Japan and foreign-born in those relating to the traditional settlement countries. 5. Statistics on workers

The collection of ow and stock data on the foreign labour force comes up against many obstacles which have to do with the special position of immigrants in host country societies. The legislation on immigration in different countries, and especially the provisions on access by immigrants to the labour market, greatly affect the recording and measurement of migratory phenomena and reduce the comparability of the raw data at international level. The distinction between the foreign-born population and the foreign population, which separates the nonEuropean settlement countries from the other OECD immigration countries, applies also to analyses of the labour force. In settlement countries, immigrants have always accounted for a signicant proportion of the total population. Since migration is therefore seen as a major factor of population growth, the settlement countries do not always make a distinction between immigrant workers and the members of their families in their inow statistics. However, the censuses can be used to study the structure of immigrant workers and their position in the labour market, but between censuses the ofcial data published on arrivals of new migrants cannot be used to measure the exact inow attributable to immigrant workers since most of them are counted together with their families. In some OECD European countries where migration has contributed to population growth while also acting as a source of labour, there are fairly detailed statistics on the migration of members of families. These are separate from those concerning inows of workers. This is the case notably in France and Switzerland. On the other hand, Germany, which has tended more to regard migration as a temporary source of labour, keeps very detailed gures on foreign workers but apparently has little information on members of their families. Comparative analysis of statistics based on administrative documents issued to immigrants comes up against many difculties of interpretation. For example, some countries issue a single document for both residence and work purposes, while others issue separate residence and work permits. When issuing new work permits, some countries make no distinction between rst-time migrants as such and immigrants or foreigners already present in the country and entering the labour market for the rst time. The failure to make this distinction can be confusing. Most countries obtain detailed gures on foreign workers from the various censuses and, in the case of the EU countries, from the annual estimate of the foreign labour force based on the results of the Labour Force Survey (LFS) carried out under the aegis of Eurostat or, for other countries such as Austria or Switzerland, the administrative statistics based on work permits held by foreign workers. However, for technical and methodological reasons related to the nature of the survey, the LFS covers only private households, which is a disadvantage
206

when counting foreign workers, at least in certain countries. A yearly labour force survey which distinguishes between people born in the country and those born abroad also exists in Australia. The distinction has been also incorporated annually since January 1994 in the United States Current Population Survey. In all OECD immigration countries it is difcult to measure the real impact on the labour market of foreign or immigrant workers in temporary employment, of seasonal or cross-border workers (who may or may not be included in the total number of workers, depending on the country), and of illegal immigrants or foreigners in undeclared jobs. It should be noted, however, that some gaps in the statistics are not peculiar to foreigners but also exist for nationals. For example, information on the self-employed is generally less available or less detailed than those on wage-earners. 6. Statistics on migration in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe

There is no doubt that political changes have had an impact on immigration and emigration in the different countries of Central and Eastern Europe. However, the current state of statistics does not allow for a precise assessment of the new situation. Former data collection methods have been either abandoned or superseded and new methods are being developed (see summary table of main sources of data on migrants). Consequently, the available data for the period before 1989 cannot serve as a benchmark for comparison with available statistical information for the period since then. Some concepts in use in Central and Eastern European countries The terms immigrant and emigrant often apply equally to both ows and stocks of migrants. On the one hand, the terms refer to ows of persons entering and leaving the country, whether foreigners or nationals. Though criteria for dening these migrants may vary, they generally involve minimum periods of residence inside or outside the country. It should also be noted that statistics on the returns of nationals are often incomplete and that foreigners leaving the host country are not generally counted. On the other hand, the same terms may be applied either to the stock of foreigners living in the country or to the stock of expatriate nationals. An immigrant is a foreigner entering a country with permission to reside there. Where the host country and the immigrants country of origin are bound by bilateral agreements mutually abolishing the entry visa requirement, entry into the country is permitted on simple presentation of a valid passport. Where such agreements do not exist, immigrants require an entry visa. Whether or not entry is governed by bilateral agreements or conditional on a visa, the length of stay is generally limited to a period of between 30 and 90 days. A residence permit is generally required for stays of more than 3 months. Residence permits are issued on a permanent or temporary basis and may be renewed. Permanent permits are most often granted following marriage to a citizen of the host country or the repatriation of members of an ethnic group originating from the country concerned. An emigrant is generally dened as a national leaving his country, either denitively, or for a period longer than a set minimum. Most countries have abolished exit visa requirements, a measure which previously made it possible to identify emigrants. However, all emigrants obviously must have a valid passport. In 1989, Hungary and Romania introduced a new type of passport, valid for ve years, hoping in this way to obtain information on recent emigrants when passports are renewed in 1994. It should be noted that these denitions cover nationals only. As a result of the abolition of exit visas, the category of illegal emigrants (i.e., nationals leaving their country without authorisation or extending their stay outside the country beyond the limit indicated on the visa), for which statistics existed until 1990, has disappeared. Consequently, the only category of illegal migrants that now exists in these countries, as in Western countries, is that of foreigners in an irregular situation. Census data In all countries of Central and Eastern Europe with the exception of Poland, censuses provide quantitative information on the resident population by nationality or ethnic group. In fact, the distinction between nationality and ethnic group is unclear, and all the evidence suggests that there is a mix-up between the two concepts. In particular it would appear that, in comparison with international standards, statistics on nationality or are both awed and inated. It is generally respondents themselves who choose their nationality or ethnic group, sometimes from a list. In Hungary, for example, Gypsies may describe themselves as Gypsies or Hungarians. In Romania, respondents are asked if they are Romanian and, if not, to state their nationality or ethnic group. The statistical exploitation of this type of question is limited by the narrowness of the proposed breakdown. Further, only foreigners holding a permanent residence permit are taken into account. Ultimately, it is
207

not possible to give a reliable description of the demographic and socio-economic structures of immigrant populations on the basis of census data from Central and Eastern European countries. Censuses offer the possibility, in theory, of measuring international immigration by allowing comparison of permanent residents current address with their address reported in the previous census but, with the exception of Hungary (in the 1990 census), the other central and eastern European countries ask for the length of time at the current address and the previous address. In these countries, census data thus considerably underestimate immigration. These questions do not make it possible to measure international immigration. However, in several countries the census attempts to count emigrating nationals insofar as members of their family remain in the country to notify the fact that they have emigrated. Emigrants are identied from members of households declared as temporarily absent, for whom an address is requested. In Poland, respondents are asked whether the persons in question have been absent from the household for more than two months. In all events, gures obtained in this way considerably underestimate the emigrant population and make no distinction as to length of time, since longstanding emigrants may be included with recent emigrants. Overall, censuses carried out in Central and Eastern European countries in the 1990s are unlikely to provide much reliable data concerning the immigrant and emigrant population and international migratory movements. Population registers Population registers are an administrative tool enabling the legal population of each basic administrative unit to be monitored on an ongoing basis. Held locally, the population register is centralised and computerised under the aegis of the Interior Ministry in Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic. Bulgaria and Romania have a statistical form, lled out with each change of address, which is entered into a computer and processed in order to produce the various statistical tables. The centralisation of the registers is under consideration. The registers only record foreigners permanently residing in the country. They are updated by means of compulsory declarations of change of address which must be made within a statutory period. In practice, few declarations are made. The declaration requirement also applies to migrations from or to other countries. As in western European countries, the system suffers from a certain level of under-counting relating to the advantages of not declaring a change of address. In the case of the international emigration of nationals, under-counting is common because emigrants have every reason to remain on the register of their commune of origin in order to facilitate a possible return. Further, any change of address within the country has to be declared twice, in the administration of origin and that of the destination. The reliability of population registers has improved considerably since they have been centralised and computerised, since automatic checks can be made and double-counting eliminated. However, although it is in principle compulsory to declare a change of address, records are far from being exhaustive where multiple addresses exist, as is also the case in Scandinavia, Belgium and the Netherlands. Residence permits The system for residence permits applies exclusively to foreign residents, whether on temporary or permanent permits. It thus makes it possible, to a certain extent, to remedy the deciencies of population registers. In each country, the Interior Ministry has a database containing all such information. However, the information is generally held by the police and is less readily available to the statistical service. Furthermore, the permit les are not updated systematically. Consequently, these databases are an unreliable means for counting numbers of foreigners in the population by nationality. In general, three types of residence permits are issued in Central and Eastern European countries: temporary or short-term permits, long-term permits and permanent permits. Temporary residence permits are granted for a maximum of one year. Long-term permits (more than one year) are renewable annually and cover the period of activity justifying residence in the country (work or study). Until 1990, permanent permits were only granted for family reasons (marriage, for example). New laws being prepared will extend the possibilities for obtaining a permanent permit. In both the Czech and Slovak Republics, temporary permits are granted for a maximum of six months. Long-term permits are valid for one year and may be renewed. They entitle the holder to carry on an activity and are linked to that activity. Permanent permits are issued in the case of family reunication, on humanitarian grounds, or in the interest of the host countrys foreign policy. Europeans, with the exception of Turks and Cypriots, no longer need an entry visa. The residence permit le is centralised and partially computerised.
208

Summary table of main sources of data on migrants

Bulgaria Czech Republic Hungary Poland Romania Slovak Republic

1. Census Date of the last census

Coverage

Data items related to migration

January 1990 December 1988 January 1992 (see Czech Republic) (inter-census survey (inter-census survey in 1996) in 1995) Nationals, permanent and Nationals, permanent and Nationals, permanent and Nationals, permanent and Nationals, permanent and temporary foreign temporary foreign temporary foreign temporary foreign temporary foreign residents residents residents residents residents Ethnic composition Ethnic composition Ethnic composition Ethnic composition Place of birth Place of birth Place of birth Previous address Previous address Previous address Previous address Length of stay at present Length of stay Length of stay Length of stay address at present address at present address at present address Identication Identication Identication Identication Identication of emigrants of emigrants of emigrants of emigrants of emigrants ESGRAON EVIDENCE OBYVATELSTVA Czech citizens 1 Decentralised since 1992 at local level and partially computerised ALLAMI NEPESSEG NYALVANTARTO (A.N.N.) Nationals and permanent foreign residents Centralised and computerised POWSZECHY SYSTEM EWIDENCJI LUDNOSCI (PESEL) Nationals and permanent foreign residents Centralised and computerised EVIDENTA POPULATIEI Nationals and permanent foreign residents Centralisation and computerisation in process EVIDENCIA OBYVATELSTVA Nationals and permanent foreign residents Decentralised, partially computerised

December 1992

March 1991

2. Population register Name

Coverage Characteristics

Nationals and permanent foreign residents Centralised and computerised

209

3. Residence permits Kind of permit Short-term Long-term

Less than 6 months 6 months to 5 years 1 year (renewable)

Less than 1 year (renewable) 1 year (renewable)

Less than 1 year 1 year or more depending on the purpose of the visit Unlimited

Less than 6 months No law denes the length of stay of foreigners Unlimited 1 year (renewable)

Permanent

Unlimited

Unlimited

Unlimited

Unlimited

Summary table of main sources of data on migrants (cont.)

Bulgaria Czech Republic Hungary Poland Romania Slovak Republic

Existence of a register of foreigners Name

SKRECH

a) TUC

a) KEOK

New register including temporary residents in process

Central register of foreigners

b) DUC Coverage Holders of a residence permit a) Permanent residents b) Long-term residents Centralised and partially computerised Linked to the system of residence permits

b) Short-term residents register a) Permanent and long-term residents b) Short-term residents Both registers are centralised; only KEOK register is computerised Holders of a residence permit Long-term and permanent residents Centralised and computerised Linked to the system of residence permits

Characteristics

4. Work permits2 Kind of permit Short-term

Long-term Characteristics

Less than 1 year Linked to the residence permit Availability of domestic workers as grounds for refusal Activity restricted to specic sector and geographical area Monthly estimation of ows 1 year Availability of domestic workers as grounds for refusal

3 months 12 or 24 months (renewable)

6 months (renewable)

3 months (seasonal workers) 1 year (renewable) Availability of domestic workers as grounds for refusal Linked to the residence permit

210
1. 2.

Combined residence and work permit 5. Surveys At borders Other

Counts of ows and sample survey Quarterly labour force survey

Counts of ows and sample survey

Counts of ows and sample survey Quarterly labour force survey

Counts of ows

Monthly estimation of ows Quarterly labour force survey

It is planned to include permanent foreign residents in this register in the future. Permanent residents, persons who obtained refugee status and some skilled workers are generally exempt from a work permit.

In Bulgaria, the Interior Ministry issues temporary residence permits for up to six months. Other residence permits are issued for periods of six months to ve years. Austrians, Scandinavians and citizens of former COMECON countries do not need entry visas. Under a new law, it should be possible to obtain a permanent permit after three years residence. In Hungary, the residence permit le seems to be operational, allowing annual statistics concerning the foreign population to be established. Exit visas have not been required since 1990 and the entry visa requirement has also been abolished under bilateral agreements with most European countries. In Poland, the Interior Ministry has centralised the register of permanently resident foreigners, which has recently been computerised. Bulgarians, Romanians and citizens of the Czech Republic, Slovak Republic and former Soviet Union are entitled to reside in the country without a residence permit. Other data All of these countries have implemented a labour force survey, some on a quarterly basis. However, not all collect the data necessary to identify the immigrant population. In Hungary, work permits issued by the Labour Ministry are compulsory for foreigners wishing to work there. Poland issues residence permits coupled with work permits in the form of either short-term permits (up to three months) or long-term permits (up to twelve months). Certain specic surveys are carried out and other statistical data are collected when borders are crossed. Such information could prove useful in measuring international mobility. However, given the permeability of the frontiers of Central and Eastern European countries, these statistics do not at present allow a reliable estimate to be made of international migratory movements in the region. 7. Conclusions

In concluding this introduction to the migration statistics contained in this Annex, several points need to be emphasised: The statistics commonly developed for national purposes are not necessarily the ones that are most appropriate for international comparisons. This is particularly the case for data sources where the denitions applied nationally have been developed independently of possible international uses and where the possibility of producing statistics according to other denitions has not been allowed for. In many OECD countries, statistics on unregulated migration ows (for example, inows of nationals or outows in general) are either not available or, if they are, are often of uncertain quality or limited in detail. The fact that unregulated ows are not subject to legal constraints generally means that there is less administrative incentive to record them. Indeed, in some countries they are not recorded at all. A full accounting of migration ows, both regulated and unregulated, on a comparable basis for OECD countries does not seem possible at the current time. Although countries with population registers could produce statistics on both these kinds of ows, their comparability may be seriously affected by variations in registration criteria from country to country as well as by differences in quality and coverage. Given that the aim is to harmonise migration statistics for all OECD countries and given the uneven nature of statistics on unregulated ows, a stepwise strategy would seem to be called for, in which the emphasis initially would be on regulated ows, where the main focus of policy interest lies. Permit data covering such ows exist in all countries and the possibility of harmonising them appears favourable. Although this introduction has focused largely on migration ows, statistics of stocks are obviously also of particular interest. There exist a number of problems here as well that have not been covered in this section. Among them are the appropriateness of the concept of nationality in analyses of the immigrant population and the relationship between international statistics of migration ows and those of the total population. A discussion of these, however, is beyond the limited scope of this introduction.

211

B.
1.

INTRODUCTION TO THE STATISTICAL ANNEX TABLES

Presentation of the tables

The following tables show various migration statistics including stocks of migrants and workers and arrivals and departures for every year for which data is available since 1985. This statistical information, based on national denitions and data collection practices, comes from the SOPEMI correspondents reports. These denitions and practices sometimes vary considerably from one country to another. Therefore, the fact that several tables are presented in a relatively standard form should not lead users to think that the data have been fully standardised and are thus comparable at an international level (see below). The series A tables, numbered 1 to 7, contain synoptic tables prepared with the information available on the theme presented. The countries presented are those using the criteria of nationality (except Table A3, which shows asylum seekers for all countries which collect data on asylum seekers). For countries using the criteria of nationality, the tables from series B1, B2 and B3 show stock of foreigners by nationality (B1), foreign workers by nationality (B2) and the numbers of naturalisations according to the country of the former nationality (B3). The subsequent series show, for countries using the place of birth criteria, the immigrant population by country of birth (C1), the arrivals of permanent immigrants by category (C2) and by place of birth (C3), the arrivals of temporary immigrants by place of birth (C4) and naturalisations (C5). The tables in this statistical annex do not cover all the countries taking part in SOPEMI. In particular, data concerning Mexico and countries from Eastern and Central Europe, both OECD Members (the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland) and non OECD Members (Bulgaria, Romania and the Slovak Republic) are not included in this annex. 2. Data sources used in the tables

The available data sources used in this annex are shown in the following table by country under six main categories: foreign or immigrant population; migration ows; stocks and ows of foreign immigrants or workers; asylum seekers and naturalisations. Besides the data sources (work permits, residence permits, population register, census, labour force surveys, etc.), reference had been made to institutions and administrations collecting and/or publishing statistics. 3. Explanatory notes for the Statistical Annex

a) Up to 1994 (inclusive), European Union refers to the following 12 countries: Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom, members of the European Union at 31 December 1994. As of 1995, European Union also includes the following three countries: Austria, Finland and Sweden. b) The series A tables are presented in alphabetical order by the name of the country in English. In the other tables, the nationalities or countries are ranked by decreasing order of the stocks for the last year available. c) In the tables by nationality, Other countries is a residual calculated as the difference between the total foreign population and the sum for the nationalities indicated in the table. For some nationalities, data are not available for all years and this is reected in the residual entry of Other countries. This must be borne in mind when interpreting changes in this category. d) The rounding of entries may cause totals to differ slightly from the sum of the component entries. e) The symbols used in the tables are the following: . . Data not available; Nil, or negligible.

212

Sources and suppliers of data for Statistical Annex tables

Foreign/immigrant population Foreign/immigrant labour force Migration ows Inows of foreign/immigrant workers Asylum seekers Naturalisations

Australia

Census Australian Bureau of Statistics

Labour force survey Australian Bureau of Statistics

Residence permits Department of Immigration and Population Research

Residence permits Department of Immigration and Population Research Work permits Bundesministerium f ur Arbeit und Soziales

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Osterreichisches Statistiches Zentralamt Institut national de statistique and Ofce des e trangers, Commissaire g en eral aux r efugi es et aux apatrides United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Danmarks Statistik Ministry of the Interior

Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs Osterreichisches Statistiches Zentralamt Institut national de statistique and minist` ere de la Justice

Austria

Population register Osterreichisches Statistiches Zentralamt Population register Institut national de statistique

Work permits Bundesministerium f ur Arbeit und Soziales Work permits Minist` ere de lEmploi et du Travail Population register Institut national de statistique

Belgium

Work permits Minist` ere de lEmploi et du Travail

Canada

Census Statistics Canada

Census Statistics Canada

Residence permits Statistics Canada

Residence permits Statistics Canada

Statistics Canada

213

Denmark

Population register Danmarks Statistik Population register Central Statistical Ofce, Population Register Centre Census Institut national de la statistique et des e tudes e conomiques Population register Statistiches Bundesamt, Ausl anderzentralregister Labour force survey Central statistical Ofce

Population register Danmarks Statistik

Population register Danmarks Statistik Population register Central Statistical Ofce

Residence permits Danmarks Statistik

Danmarks Statistik Central Statistical Ofce Minist` ere des Affaires sociales, de la Sant e et de la Ville Statistiches Bundesamt

Finland

France

Labour force survey Institut national de la statistique et des e tudes e conomiques Work permits Bundesanstalt f ur Arbeit Labour force survey Central statistical Ofce

Residence permits Ofce des migrations internationales Population register Statistiches Bundesamt, Ausl anderzentralregister

Work permits Ofce des migrations internationales Work permits Bundesanstalt f ur Arbeit

Ofce fran c ais de protection des r efugi es et des apatrides Bundesministerium des Innern

Germany

Ireland

Sources and suppliers of data for Statistical Annex tables (cont.)

Foreign/immigrant population Foreign/immigrant labour force Migration ows Inows of foreign/immigrant workers Asylum seekers Naturalisations

Italy

Residence permits Ministry of the Interior

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Residence permits Ministry of Justice Work permits Inspection g en erale de la S ecurit e sociale Central Bureau of Statistics Population register Statistics Norway Residence permits Ministry of the Interior Work permits Ministerio de Trabajo y Seguridad Social Labour force survey Statistics Sweden Register of foreigners Ofce f e d eral des e trangers Labour force survey Employment Department Census US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Population register Statistics Sweden Register of foreigners Ofce f e d eral des e trangers Residence permits Home Ofce Residence permits US Department of Justice Register of foreigners Ofce f e d eral des e trangers Work permits Department of Employment Residence permits US Department of Justice Population register Service central de la statistique et des e tudes e conomiques Population register Central Bureau of Statistics Population register Statistics Norway Work permits Inspection g en erale de la S ecurit e sociale Ministry of Justice Directorate of Immigration Ministry of the Interior Ofcine de Asilo y Refugio Swedish Immigration Board Ofce f e d eral des r efugi es Home Ofce US Department of Justice Ministry of Justice Ministry of Justice, Civil Affairs Bureau Service central de la statistique et des e tudes e conomiques Central Bureau of Statistics Statistics Norway

Japan

Register of foreigners Ministry of Justice, Immigration Bureau Population register Service central de la statistique et des e tudes e conomiques Population register Central Bureau of Statistics Population register Statistics Norway Residence permits Ministry of the Interior Residence permits Ministerio del Interior, Direccion General de la Policia Population register Statistics Sweden Register of foreigners Ofce f e d eral des e trangers Labour force survey Home Ofce Census US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census

Luxembourg

Netherlands

Norway

214

Portugal Spain

Sweden

Statistics Sweden Ofce f e d eral des e trangers Home Ofce US Department of Justice

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States

Notes
1. Demographic Yearbook/Annuaire d emographique,1989, United Nations/Nations Unies, New York, 1991. This edition of the Yearbook is important since, for the rst time since 1977, it takes international migration as its special annual topic. All the page references to a UN publication given in the text refer to this edition. 2. A description of the available sources for the EC countries will be found in: Michel Poulain, Marc Debuisson, Thierry Eggerickx, Projet dharmonisation des statistiques de migration internationale au sein de la Communaut e europ eenne, Universit e Catholique de Louvain, Institut de d emographie, Louvain-La-Neuve, Belgium (undated). A further survey covering all the EFTA countries is in Eurostat (Migration statistics for EFTA countries. Report by M. Poulain, Doc E3/SD/12/92). 3. The gures that follow are taken from Tables 31 and 34 of the United Nations Demographic Yearbook.

215

C.

TABLES OF THE STATISTICAL ANNEX

Table A.1.
1985 1986

Stocks of foreign population in selected OECD countries

Thousands
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Austria1 % total population Belgium2 % total population Denmark % total population Finland % total population France3 % total population Germany4 % total population Ireland5 % total population Italy6 % total population Japan7 % total population Luxembourg8 % total population Netherlands9 % total population Norway10 % total population Portugal11 % total population Spain12 % total population Sweden % total population Switzerland13 % total population United Kingdom5 % total population

304.4 4.0 846.5 8.6 117.0 2.3 17.0 0.3 .. .. 4 378.9 7.2 79.0 2.3 423.0 0.7 850.6 0.7 97.9 26.7 552.5 3.8 101.5 2.4 .. .. 242.0 0.6 388.6 4.6 939.7 14.5 1 731 3.1

314.9 4.1 853.2 8.6 128.3 2.5 17.3 0.4 .. .. 4 512.7 7.4 77.0 2.2 450.2 0.8 867.2 0.7 97.3 26.3 568.0 3.9 109.3 2.6 .. .. 293.2 0.8 390.8 4.7 956.0 14.7 1 820 3.2

326.2 4.3 862.5 8.7 136.2 2.7 17.7 0.4 .. .. 4 240.5 6.9 77.0 2.2 572.1 1.0 884.0 0.7 102.8 26.8 591.8 4.0 123.7 2.9 .. .. 334.9 0.9 401.0 4.8 978.7 14.9 1 839 3.2

344.0 4.5 868.8 8.8 142.0 2.8 18.7 0.4 .. .. 4 489.1 7.3 82.0 2.4 645.4 1.1 941.0 0.8 105.8 27.4 623.7 4.2 135.9 3.2 94.7 1.0 360.0 0.9 421.0 5.0 1 006.5 15.2 1 821 3.2

387.2 5.1 880.8 8.9 150.6 2.9 21.2 0.4 .. .. 4 845.9 7.7 78.0 2.3 490.4 0.9 984.5 0.8 106.9 27.9 641.9 4.3 140.3 3.3 101.0 1.0 249.6 0.6 456.0 5.3 1 040.3 15.6 1 812 3.2

456.1 5.9 904.5 9.1 160.6 3.1 26.3 0.5 3 596.6 6.3 5 342.5 8.4 80.0 2.3 781.1 1.4 1 075.3 0.9 113.1 29.4 692.4 4.6 143.3 3.4 107.8 1.1 278.7 0.7 483.7 5.6 1 100.3 16.3 1 723 3.2

532.7 6.8 922.5 9.2 169.5 3.3 37.6 0.8 .. .. 5 882.3 7.3 87.7 2.5 863.0 1.5 1 218.9 1.0 117.8 30.2 732.9 4.8 147.8 3.5 114.0 1.2 360.7 0.9 493.8 5.7 1 163.2 17.1 1 750 3.1

623.0 7.9 909.3 9.0 180.1 3.5 46.3 0.9 .. .. 6 495.8 8.0 94.9 2.7 925.2 1.6 1 281.6 1.0 122.7 31.0 757.4 5.0 154.0 3.6 123.6 1.3 393.1 1.0 499.1 5.7 1 213.5 17.6 1 985 3.5

689.6 8.6 920.6 9.1 189.0 3.6 55.6 1.1 .. .. 6 878.1 8.5 89.9 2.7 987.4 1.7 1 320.7 1.1 127.6 31.8 779.8 5.1 162.3 3.8 131.6 1.3 430.4 1.1 507.5 5.8 1 260.3 18.1 2 001 3.5

713.5 8.9 922.3 9.1 196.7 3.8 62.0 1.2 .. .. 6 990.5 8.6 91.1 2.7 922.7 1.6 1 354.0 1.1 132.5 32.6 757.1 5.0 164.0 3.8 157.1 1.6 461.4 1.2 537.4 6.1 1 300.1 18.6 1 946 3.4

723.5 9.0 909.8 9.0 222.7 4.2 68.6 1.3 .. .. 7 173.9 8.8 96.1 2.7 991.4 1.7 1 362.4 1.1 138.1 33.4 728.4 5.0 160.8 3.7 168.3 1.7 499.8 1.2 531.8 5.2 1 330.6 18.9 2 060 3.4

218

Note: Data are from population registers or from registers of foreigners except for France (Census), Portugal (residence permits), Ireland and the United Kingdom (labour force survey) and refer to the population on the 31st of December of the years indicated unless otherwise stated. Stocks of foreign population by nationality are given in Tables B1. 1. Annual average. Prior to 1992, the gures have been revised on the basis of the 1991 census. 2. In 1985 and in 1992, following changes in nationality laws which granted Belgian nationality to a signicant number of foreigners, the stock of foreign population dropped sharply. The decrease in 1995 can be explained both by the continuation of the effects of the change in nationality laws and the removal from the register of almost 11 000 asylum seekers awaiting a decision. 3. Data are from the population census of 1990. The gure for the 1982 census is 3 714.2. 4. Data from 1987 to 1989 have been adjusted, taking into account results of the population census of 1987. Population counts cover western Germany only up to 1990 and Germany as a whole from 1991 on. 5. Estimated from the annual labour force survey. Fluctuations from year to year may be due to sampling error. 6. Children under 18 who are registered on their parents permit are not counted. Data are adjusted to take account of the regularisations which occurred in 1987-1988 and 1990. The decrease observed for 1989 and 1994 is a result of a clean-up of the register of foreigners: duplicate entries and entries of persons who had returned to their country of origin were removed. In 1995 data do not include permits delivered following the 1995-1996 regularisation programme. 7. Data are based on registered foreign nationals which include foreigners staying in Japan for more than 90 days. 8. Figures have been revised from 1987 on to take into account the effects of the change in the legislation on naturalisation which took place at the end of 1986. 9. Figures include administrative corrections. The decrease observed from 1994 to 1995 is the result of a clean-up of the population registers. The data for 1995 are provisional. 10. From 1987 on, asylum seekers whose requests are being processed are included. Note that prior to 1987 the number of asylum seekers was quite small. 11. Figures include all foreigners who hold a valid residence permit. In 1994 data include 39 200 permits delivered following the 1992-1993 regularisation programme. 12. Number of foreigners with a residence permit. Permits of short duration (less than 6 months) as well as students are excluded. The decrease in 1989 is the result of a clean-up of the register of foreigners. Data for 1991 include 108 372 permits delivered following a regularisation programme. 13. Number of foreigners with an annual residence permit or with a settlement permit (permanent permit). Seasonal and frontier workers are excluded.

Table A.2.
1985 1986

Inows of foreign population into selected OECD countries

Thousands
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Belgium Denmark2 Finland3 France4 Germany5 Japan6 Luxembourg Netherlands7 Norway8 Sweden9 Switzerland10 United Kingdom11

37.5 15.6 .. 43.4 398.2 156.5 6.6 46.2 15.0 27.9 59.4 55.4

39.3 17.6 .. 38.3 478.3 157.5 7.4 52.8 16.8 34.0 66.8 47.8

40.1 15.2 .. 39.0 473.3 180.3 7.2 60.9 23.8 37.1 71.5 46.0

38.2 13.8 .. 44.0 648.6 234.8 8.2 58.3 23.2 44.5 76.1 49.3

43.5 15.1 4.2 53.2 770.8 237.4 8.4 65.4 18.5 58.9 80.4 49.7

50.5 15.1 6.5 102.4 842.4 223.8 9.3 81.3 15.7 53.2 101.4 52.4

54.1 17.5 12.4 109.9 920.5 258.4 10.0 84.3 16.1 43.9 109.8 53.9

55.1 16.9 10.4 116.6 1 207.6 267.0 9.8 83.0 17.2 39.5 112.1 52.6

53.0 15.4 10.9 99.2 986.9 234.5 9.2 87.6 22.3 54.8 104.0 55.5

56.0 15.6 7.6 69.3 774.0 237.5 9.2 68.4 17.9 74.7 91.7 55.1

53.1 .. 7.3 56.7 788.3 209.9 9.6 67.0 16.5 36.1 87.9 55.5

Note: Data are from population registers, except for France (residence permits), Japan (register of foreigners) and the United Kingdom (annual labour force survey). The criteria governing who gets registered differ from country to country and the data are therefore not fully comparable. Counts for the Netherlands, Norway and especially Germany include substantial numbers of asylum seekers. 1. Small numbers of asylum seekers are included. In 1995, asylum seekers awaiting a decision are registered on a temporary register. 2. Entries of foreigners staying in Denmark more than one year. Asylum seekers and refugees with a provisional residence status are not included. 3. Entries of foreigners intending to stay in Finland for longer than one year. 4. Up to 1989, inows include permanent workers, holders of provisional work permits and persons admitted under family reunication. From 1990 on, spouses of French nationals, parents of French children, refugees, the self-employed and others eligible for a residence permit are also included. Provisional work permits, on the other hand, are not included. If unregistered ows (inows of family members of EU citizens for example) are included, estimates for total inows are 135 400, 116 200, 82 800 and 68 300 from 1992 to 1995. 5. Entries of foreigners staying in Germany more than 3 months. The data cover western Germany only up to 1990, Germany as a whole from 1991 on. 6. New entries excluding entries of temporary visitors, which include registered immigrants who declare their intention to stay in Japan for more than 90 days. 7. The population register data include some asylum seekers, in particular persons who receive provisional stay permits, who are recognised as refugees, or who are admitted on humanitarian grounds; asylum-seekers in reception centres are excluded. 8. Entries of foreigners intending to stay in Norway for longer than six months. 9. Data are from population registers and refer to persons who declare their intention to stay in Sweden for longer than one year. Figures do not include asylum seekers who are waiting for decision neither temporary workers. 10. Entries of foreigners with an annual residence permit or with a settlement permit (permanent permit) who return to Switzerland after a temporary stay abroad. Seasonal and frontier workers (including seasonal workers who obtain an annual permit) are excluded. 11. The inows in the table correspond to permanent settlers within the meaning of the 1971 Immigration Act and subsequent amendments. Citizens of the Republic of Ireland are not included.

219

Table A.3. Inows of asylum seekers into selected OECD countries

Thousands
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Australia Austria2 Belgium Canada Denmark Finland France1 Germany Greece Italy1 Netherlands Norway Portugal Spain1 Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom3 United States4
1. 2. 3. 4.

.. 6.7 5.3 8.4 8.7 28.8 73.8 1.4 5.4 5.6 0.8 0.1 2.3 14.5 9.7 6.2 16.6

.. 8.6 7.7 23.0 9.3 26.2 99.7 4.3 6.5 5.9 2.7 0.1 2.8 14.6 8.5 5.7 18.9

.. 11.4 6.0 35.0 2.7 27.6 57.4 6.3 11.0 13.5 8.6 0.2 3.7 18.1 10.9 5.9 26.1

.. 15.8 4.5 45.0 4.7 0.1 34.3 103.1 9.3 1.4 7.5 6.6 0.3 4.5 19.6 16.7 5.7 60.7

0.5 21.9 8.2 19.9 4.6 0.2 61.4 121.3 6.5 2.3 13.9 4.4 0.1 4.1 30.0 24.4 16.8 101.7

3.8 22.8 13.0 36.7 5.3 2.7 54.8 193.1 4.1 4.7 21.2 4.0 0.1 8.6 29.4 35.8 38.2 73.6

17.0 27.3 15.4 32.3 4.6 2.1 47.4 256.1 2.7 31.7 21.6 4.6 0.2 8.1 27.4 41.6 73.4 56.3

4.1 16.2 17.6 37.7 13.9 3.6 28.9 438.2 2.0 2.6 20.3 5.2 0.6 11.7 84.0 18.0 32.3 104.0

4.6 4.7 26.5 21.1 14.3 2.0 27.6 322.6 0.8 1.3 35.4 12.9 2.1 12.6 37.6 24.7 28.0 144.2

4.2 5.1 14.7 21.7 6.7 0.8 26.0 127.2 1.3 1.8 52.6 3.4 0.8 12.0 18.6 16.1 42.2 146.5

5.1 5.9 11.7 25.6 5.1 0.8 20.4 127.9 1.4 1.7 29.3 1.5 0.5 5.7 9.0 17.0 55.0 149.1

Data refer to principal applicants and do not include dependants. Figures do not include de facto refugees from Bosnia Herzegovina. Data have been adjusted to include dependants. Data refer to scal year (October to September of the given year) and do not include dependants.

Table A.4. Outows of foreign population from selected OECD countries

Thousands
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Belgium Denmark1 Finland2 Germany3 Japan Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Sweden Switzerland4

33.0 4.3 .. 366.7 133.2 5.8 24.2 7.5 14.0 54.3

31.8 4.3 .. 347.8 131.2 5.5 23.6 8.4 15.4 52.8

34.2 4.9 .. 334.2 151.3 5.0 20.9 8.6 11.6 53.8

32.3 5.3 .. 359.1 183.7 5.3 21.4 9.3 11.8 55.8

27.5 4.8 1.0 438.3 204.8 5.5 21.5 10.6 13.1 57.5

27.0 4.6 0.9 466.0 166.1 5.5 20.6 9.8 16.2 59.6

35.3 5.2 1.1 497.5 181.3 5.9 21.3 8.4 15.0 66.4

28.1 4.8 1.5 614.7 204.8 5.6 22.7 8.1 13.2 80.4

31.2 4.9 1.5 710.2 200.5 5.0 22.2 10.5 14.8 71.2

34.1 5.0 1.5 621.5 204.2 5.3 22.7 9.6 15.7 64.2

33.1 .. 1.5 561.1 195.2 4.9 21.7 9.0 15.4 68.0

Note: Data are from population registers, except for Japan where the data are from registers of foreigners. 1. Correspond to departures of foreigners for more than one year. Departures of asylum seekers and of refugees with a provisional residence status are not included. 2. Departures of foreigners who intend to settle abroad. 3. Counts include registered departures of asylum seekers. Data refer to western Germany up to 1990, to Germany as a whole from 1991 on. 4. Correspond to departures of foreigners with an annual residence permit or a settlement permit (permanent permit).

220

Table A.5. Stocks of foreign labour in selected OECD countries

Thousands
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Austria Belgium2 Denmark3 France4 Germany5 Ireland6 Luxembourg7 Netherlands8 Norway9 Portugal10 Spain11 Sweden12 Switzerland13 United Kingdom14

148.3 179.7 56.5 1 649.2 1 823.4 34.0 55.0 166 .. .. .. 216 549.3 808

155.0 179.2 60.1 1 555.7 1 833.7 33.0 58.7 169 .. .. .. 215 566.9 815

157.7 176.6 62.7 1 524.9 1 865.5 33.0 63.7 176 .. .. .. 215 587.7 815

160.9 179.4 65.1 1 557.0 1 910.6 35.0 69.4 176 49.5 45.5 58.2 220 607.8 871

178.0 196.4 66.9 1 593.8 1 940.6 33.0 76.2 192 47.7 48.7 69.1 237 631.8 914

229.5 .. 68.8 1 549.5 2 025.1 34.0 84.7 197 46.3 51.8 85.4 246 669.8 882

277.2 .. 71.2 1 506.0 2 179.1 39.3 92.6 214 46.3 54.9 171.0 241 702.5 828

295.9 .. 74.0 1 517.8 2 360.1 40.4 98.2 229 46.6 59.2 139.4 233 716.7 902

304.6 .. 77.7 1 541.5 2 575.9 37.3 101.0 219 47.9 63.1 117.4 221 725.8 862

316.5 .. 80.3 1 593.9 2 559.6 34.5 106.3 216 50.3 77.6 121.8 213 740.3 847

325.2 .. .. 1 573.3 2 569.2 42.1 111.8 221 51.9 84.3 138.7 220 728.7 899

Note: Data include the unemployed, except in Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom. Cross-border workers and seasonal workers are excluded unless otherwise stated. Stocks of foreign labour by nationality are given in Tables B2. 1. Annual average. The unemployed are included and the self-employed are excluded. Until 1993, data on employment are from valid work permits. Figures may be over-estimated as a result of persons holding more than one permit. Data for 1990 and 1991 have been adjusted to correct for a temporary over-issue of work permits relative to the number of jobs held by foreigners, between August 1990 and June 1991. From 1994 on, data on employment are from Social Security records and include EEA nationals. 2. Data exclude the unemployed and the self-employed. 3. Data are from population registers and give the count as of the end of the given year (end of November until 1991, end of December from 1992). 4. Data are derived from the labour force survey and refer to the month of March. 5. Data are for 30th September of each year and include cross-border workers but not the self-employed. Covers only western Germany for all years. 6. Estimates are from the labour force survey. 7. Data are for 1st October of each year and cover foreigners in employment, including apprentices, trainees and cross-border workers. The unemployed are not included. 8. Estimates are for 31st March and include cross-border workers, but exclude the self-employed, family workers and the unemployed. From 1990 onwards, foreigners legally residing in the Netherlands but working abroad are excluded. 9. Data are for the 2nd quarter. The unemployed and the self-employed are not included. 10. Workers who hold a valid residence permit (including the unemployed). Data for 1994 include workers who beneted from the 1992-1993 regularisation procedures. 11. Data are for 31st December of each year and are counts of valid work permits. From 1992 onwards, workers from the European Union are not included. From 1991 to 1993, the data include work permits delivered following the 1991 regularisation programme. The data for 1995 are provisional. 12. Annual average from the labour force survey. 13. Data are for 31 December of each year and are counts of the number of foreigners with an annual residence permit or a settlement permit (permanent permit), who engage in gainful activity. 14. Estimates are from the labour force survey. The unemployed are not included.

Table A.6. Seasonal and cross-border workers in selected OECD countries

Thousands
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Austria1 Seasonal workers France2 Seasonal workers Germany3 Seasonal workers Cross-border workers Luxembourg4 Cross-border workers Norway5 Seasonal workers Switzerland6 Seasonal workers Cross-border workers
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

.. 86.2 .. .. 16.1 .. 102.8 111.6

.. 81.7 .. .. 18.2 .. 109.8 119.8

.. 76.6 .. .. 20.9 .. 114.6 130.1

.. 70.5 .. .. 24.3 .. 120.6 144.8

24.3 61.9 .. 2.3 28.6 .. 120.1 163.4

26.3 58.2 .. 2.9 33.7 4.3 121.7 180.6

17.6 54.2 .. 15.7 38.9 4.3 115.9 182.6

20.4 13.6 212.0 14.6 43.3 4.7 93.1 169.9

15.8 11.3 181.0 10.3 47.3 4.3 71.8 159.7

.. 10.3 155.2 6.9 51.3 7.0 61.1 153.7

.. 9.4 192.8 6.5 55.8 5.3 53.7 151.0

Initial work permits issued for less than 6 months. Number of contracts with the Ofce des migrations internationales (OMI). From 1992 on, European Union nationals are not included. From 1991 on, data include the eastern part of Germany. Annual average. The data for 1995 are provisional. Not renewable work permits granted. Issued for 3 months mostly to Polish nationals. Data are for 31st August each year, when seasonal work is at its peak.

221

Table A.7.
1985

Inows of foreign workers into selected OECD countries

Thousands
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Austria Belgium2 Denmark3 France4 Permanents APT Germany5 Luxembourg6 Switzerland7 United Kingdom8 Long-term Short-term Trainees Total
1.

34.0 1.9 .. 9.7 1.2 33.4 6.9 25.4 7.1 6.6 2.9 16.6

18.0 2.2 .. 9.9 1.4 37.2 8.4 29.4 7.9 8.0 2.8 18.7

15.3 2.4 .. 10.7 1.5 48.1 10.5 33.6 8.1 9.4 2.9 20.4

17.4 2.8 3.1 12.7 1.9 60.4 12.6 34.7 10.4 11.8 3.8 26.0

37.2 3.7 2.7 15.6 3.1 84.8 14.7 37.1 13.3 12.2 4.2 29.7

103.4 .. 2.8 22.4 3.8 138.6 16.9 46.7 16.1 13.8 4.8 34.6

62.6 5.1 2.4 25.6 4.1 241.9 16.9 46.3 12.9 12.6 3.5 29.0

57.9 4.4 2.4 42.3 3.9 408.9 15.9 39.7 12.7 14.0 3.4 30.1

37.7 4.3 2.1 24.4 4.0 325.6 15.5 31.5 12.5 13.3 3.5 29.3

27.1 4.1 2.1 18.3 4.1 221.2 16.2 28.6 13.4 12.9 3.8 30.1

15.4 2.7 2.2 13.1 4.5 270.8 16.5 27.1 15.5 15.6 4.4 35.5

2. 3. 4.

5.

6. 7.

8.

Data for all years cover initial work permits for both direct inows from abroad and for rst participation in the Austrian labour market of foreigners already present in the country. Seasonal workers are included. Data in 1985 also include permits issued for job changes following a period of unemployment of more than 4 weeks. Work permits issued to rst-time immigrants in wage and salary employment. Citizens of European Union (EU) Member states are not included, except for those of Greece until 1987, and of Spain and Portugal until 1992. Residence permits issued for employment. Nordic and EU citizens are not included. Permanents are foreign workers subject to control by the Ofce des migrations internationales (OMI). Certain citizens of EU Member states employed for short durations may not be included. Resident family members of workers who enter the labour market for the rst time are not included. Provisional work permits (APT) cannot exceed six months, are renewable and apply to trainees, students and other holders of non-permanent jobs. New work permits issued. Data include essentially newly entered foreign workers, contract workers and seasonal workers. Citizens of EU Member states are not included, except those of Greece until 1987, and of Spain and Portugal until 1992. Data refer to western Germany up to 1990, to Germany as a whole from 1991 on. Data cover both arrivals of foreign workers and residents admitted for the rst time to the labour market. Data cover foreigners who enter Switzerland to work and who obtain an annual residence permit, whether the permit is renewable or not (e.g. trainees). The data also include holders of a settlement permit returning to Switzerland after a short stay abroad. Issues of an annual permit to persons holding a seasonal one are not included. Most long-term permits are delivered to highly qualied workers. Short duration permits are for students doing temporary or part-time jobs, or taking training with a rm. Citizens of EU Member states are excluded. First permissions (issued to foreigners already residents and now entering the labour market) are included.

222

Table B1.

BELGIUM, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995 1993 1994 1995

Italy Morocco France Turkey Netherlands Spain Germany United Kingdom Portugal Greece Zaire United States Algeria Former Yugoslavia Tunisia Poland Luxembourg Japan China Ireland Denmark Sweden Canada Other countries Total Of which: EU Total women

252.9 123.6 92.3 74.2 59.6 51.2 24.3 20.8 9.5 19.3 8.9 11.0 10.0 4.7 5.9 .. 5.1 .. .. 1.2 1.9 .. 1.3 68.8 846.5 538.1 386.5

251.8 126.0 92.7 76.1 60.2 50.7 24.4 20.9 9.9 19.2 9.0 11.0 10.1 4.6 5.9 .. 5.0 .. .. 1.3 2.0 .. 1.3 71.1 853.2 538.1 391.1

241.1 132.6 90.9 77.5 59.3 52.8 26.0 21.8 12.2 20.4 10.7 12.6 10.5 5.5 6.2 .. 4.7 .. .. 1.6 2.1 .. 1.6 72.4 862.5 532.9 395.6

241.0 135.5 91.4 79.5 60.5 52.6 26.4 21.8 13.5 20.6 10.9 11.6 10.6 5.4 6.2 .. 4.8 .. .. 1.8 2.3 .. 1.5 70.9 868.8 536.7 399.8

240.5 138.4 92.2 81.8 62.4 52.4 26.7 21.9 15.1 20.7 11.2 11.5 10.6 5.5 6.2 .. 4.7 .. .. 2.0 2.4 .. 1.6 73.0 880.8 541.0 405.8

241.2 141.7 94.3 84.9 65.3 52.2 27.8 23.3 16.5 20.9 12.0 11.7 10.7 5.9 6.4 4.9 4.7 3.1 2.4 2.4 2.6 2.7 1.6 65.2 904.5 551.2 417.5

240.0 145.6 94.9 88.4 67.7 51.1 28.5 24.2 17.8 20.6 12.8 11.7 11.0 6.5 6.4 4.8 4.7 3.1 2.6 2.5 2.6 3.0 1.7 70.4 922.5 554.6 425.9

217.5 145.0 95.2 88.3 69.7 49.5 29.3 24.9 20.5 20.0 14.6 11.8 10.4 7.5 6.2 4.8 4.6 3.1 2.9 2.8 2.8 3.1 1.7 73.2 909.3 536.7 418.9

216.0 145.4 97.1 88.3 72.6 49.4 30.2 25.4 21.9 20.3 15.9 11.7 10.2 7.4 6.0 4.9 4.6 3.3 3.2 3.0 2.9 3.0 1.7 75.6 920.0 543.5 424.6

213.5 144.0 98.7 86.0 75.0 48.9 31.0 25.9 23.0 20.1 16.5 11.7 10.0 7.7 5.7 5.2 4.6 3.6 3.3 3.2 3.1 2.9 1.8 76.7 922.3 547.1 429.7

210.7 140.3 100.1 81.7 77.2 48.3 31.8 26.0 23.9 19.9 12.2 12.0 9.5 8.1 5.3 5.4 4.6 3.7 3.4 3.2 3.2 3.1 1.9 74.5 909.8 554.5 428.0

95.5 67.1 49.3 42.2 31.4 23.4 14.4 11.7 9.3 10.6 7.5 5.9 4.4 3.3 2.2 3.0 1.9 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.4 0.8 33.1 424.6 250.8

94.6 66.6 50.3 41.5 32.7 23.3 15.0 11.9 11.2 9.3 7.9 6.0 4.4 3.5 2.1 3.2 1.9 1.7 1.6 1.8 1.7 1.4 0.9 35.1 429.7 253.7

93.7 65.2 51.2 39.9 33.9 23.1 15.4 11.9 11.7 9.2 5.9 6.1 4.2 3.9 2.0 3.5 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.0 36.1 428.0 258.5

223

Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. In 1985 and in 1992, following changes in nationality laws which granted Belgian nationality to a signicant number of foreigners, the stock of foreign population dropped sharply. The decrease in 1995 can be explained both by the continuation of the effects of the change in nationality laws and the removal from the register of almost 11 000 asylum seekers awaiting a decision.

Table B1.

DENMARK, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995 1993 1994 1995

Turkey Former Yugoslavia United Kingdom Norway Germany Sweden Iran Iraq Somalia Pakistan Sri Lanka Poland United States Vietnam Iceland Lebanon Morocco Netherlands Thailand France Italy Finland Philippines Switzerland Other countries Total Of which: EU 1 Total women

20.4 7.9 9.7 9.8 8.2 8.1 4.7 0.7 .. 6.6 0.6 2.2 4.3 3.7 3.3 0.2 2.3 1.6 0.6 1.7 1.8 1.8 0.8 1.1 15.8 117.0 35.6 54.0

22.3 8.3 10.0 9.9 8.3 8.3 5.7 1.0 0.1 6.6 2.9 2.7 4.4 3.7 3.4 1.0 2.5 1.7 0.7 1.7 2.0 1.9 0.8 1.1 18.2 128.3 36.7 58.1

24.4 8.8 10.1 9.9 8.3 8.3 6.7 1.3 0.1 6.5 4.0 3.3 4.3 3.5 3.2 1.7 2.5 1.8 0.8 1.9 2.0 1.8 0.9 1.1 20.1 136.2 37.0 62.0

26.1 9.1 10.0 9.9 8.1 8.2 7.7 1.7 0.2 6.5 4.3 3.9 4.2 3.4 3.0 2.1 2.5 1.8 0.9 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.0 1.1 21.7 142.0 36.6 65.2

27.9 9.5 10.0 10.2 8.1 8.0 8.4 2.3 0.4 6.3 4.8 4.3 4.1 3.5 3.0 2.6 2.7 1.9 1.2 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.2 1.1 24.4 150.6 36.6 69.8

29.7 10.0 10.2 10.2 8.4 8.2 9.0 2.8 0.6 6.2 5.1 4.7 4.5 3.7 3.0 3.2 3.0 2.0 1.4 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.3 1.1 27.4 160.6 37.7 75.2

32.0 10.7 10.5 10.3 8.6 8.3 8.8 3.2 1.2 6.1 5.3 4.9 4.4 3.8 3.0 3.7 3.2 2.1 1.6 2.1 1.9 1.9 1.4 1.1 30.4 169.5 38.6 80.6

33.7 11.3 10.9 10.4 8.9 8.4 8.2 4.4 2.1 6.3 5.7 5.0 4.6 4.5 3.0 4.2 3.2 2.3 1.9 2.2 2.0 1.9 1.5 .. 33.5 180.1 39.9 86.4

34.7 11.6 11.4 10.5 9.5 8.6 7.9 5.3 3.6 6.4 5.8 5.1 4.8 4.8 3.1 4.4 3.2 2.5 2.2 2.2 2.1 1.9 1.7 .. 35.7 189.0 41.8 91.6

35.0 11.3 11.9 10.8 10.1 8.8 7.7 6.0 5.1 6.4 5.8 5.2 4.8 5.0 3.7 4.4 3.2 2.9 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.1 1.8 1.1 37.7 196.7 42.0 96.0

35.7 28.1 12.1 11.1 10.6 9.1 7.4 7.1 6.9 6.6 5.7 5.3 5.1 5.0 4.8 4.4 3.3 3.2 2.7 2.6 2.3 2.1 1.8 1.1 39.7 222.7 57.2 109.2

16.8 5.6 4.3 6.0 4.4 5.0 3.1 2.0 .. 3.3 2.6 3.4 2.2 2.3 1.5 2.2 1.4 1.0 1.8 1.1 0.6 1.2 1.2 .. 18.3 91.6 18.9

17.0 5.5 4.4 6.1 4.6 5.0 3.2 2.5 .. 3.4 2.7 3.5 2.2 2.5 1.8 2.3 1.5 1.2 2.0 1.1 0.6 1.3 1.3 .. 20.2 96.0 22.3

17.4 13.6 4.4 6.3 4.9 5.2 3.1 2.9 .. 3.5 2.9 3.6 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.3 1.5 1.3 2.3 1.2 0.6 1.3 1.4 .. 22.3 109.2 27.1

224

Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. 1. All gures include the 13 countries (excluding Denmark and Austria) of the European Union as of 31st December 1995. Figures do not include Belgium and Luxembourg in 1995.

Table B1.

FINLAND, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995 1993 1994 1995

Former USSR Estonia1, 2 Sweden Somalia Former Yugoslavia Vietnam United Kingdom United States Germany China Iraq Turkey Iran Thailand Poland Morocco Norway Italy Denmark France Hungary Netherlands Other countries Total Of which: EU Total women

1.6 .. 4.9 .. .. .. 1.1 1.3 1.6 .. .. .. .. .. 0.3 .. 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 4.4 17.0 .. ..

1.6 .. 5.1 .. .. .. 1.1 1.2 1.5 .. .. .. .. .. 0.3 .. 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.3 4.5 17.3 .. ..

1.9 .. 5.3 .. .. .. 1.1 1.2 1.4 .. .. 0.1 0.1 .. 0.3 .. 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 4.5 17.7 .. ..

2.1 .. 5.4 .. .. .. 1.1 1.2 1.4 .. .. 0.1 0.1 .. 0.3 .. 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 5.0 18.7 .. ..

2.4 .. 5.7 .. .. .. 1.2 1.4 1.4 .. .. 0.2 0.1 .. 0.4 .. 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.3 6.3 21.2 .. ..

4.2 .. 6.1 .. .. .. 1.3 1.5 1.6 .. .. 0.2 0.1 .. 0.6 .. 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 8.8 26.6 .. 11.5

9.7 0.7 6.3 1.5 0.2 0.4 1.5 1.6 1.6 0.6 0.2 0.6 0.6 .. 0.7 .. 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 8.8 37.6 .. 16.7

11.9 3.4 6.5 1.9 0.4 1.1 1.6 1.7 1.6 0.8 0.5 0.8 0.8 .. 0.7 .. 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 10.0 46.3 .. 21.0

13.3 5.9 6.5 2.9 2.4 1.4 1.7 1.8 1.6 1.1 0.8 1.0 0.9 .. 0.7 .. 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 11.0 55.6 .. 25.8

15.1 7.5 6.7 3.5 2.3 1.8 1.6 1.8 1.6 1.3 1.0 1.2 1.1 .. 0.7 .. 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 12.2 62.0 .. 29.2

15.9 8.4 7.0 4.0 2.4 2.1 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.3 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 .. .. 14.0 68.6 13.7 32.8

7.9 3.3 3.0 1.1 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.3 .. 0.4 .. 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 4.3 25.8

8.8 4.3 3.0 1.4 0.9 0.9 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.4 .. 0.4 .. 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 5.1 29.2

9.6 4.8 3.2 1.7 1.0 1.1 0.5 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.5 .. 0.4 .. 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.2 .. .. 6.3 32.8

225

Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. 1. Figures include Ingrians (ethnic Finns). 2. Included in former USSR until 1990.

Table B1. FRANCE, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women 1975 1982 1990 1975 1982 1990

Portugal Algeria Morocco Italy Spain Tunisia Turkey Former Yugoslavia Cambodia Poland Senegal Vietnam Laos Other countries Total Of which: EU

758.9 710.7 260.0 462.9 497.5 139.7 50.9 70.3 4.5 93.7 14.9 11.4 1.6 365.4 3 442.4 1 869.9

767.3 805.1 441.3 340.3 327.2 190.8 122.3 62.5 37.9 64.8 32.3 33.8 32.5 456.1 3 714.2 1 594.8

649.7 614.2 572.7 252.8 216.0 206.3 197.7 52.5 47.4 47.1 43.7 33.7 31.8 631.0 3 596.6 1 311.9

350.4 227.6 69.5 202.5 235.1 43.2 13.1 29.6 1.5 50.1 2.2 4.7 0.5 151.7 1 381.6 854.1

361.6 310.5 172.4 147.3 154.5 72.0 51.8 28.7 17.6 37.9 9.7 16.0 15.4 199.2 1 594.6 739.4

304.2 253.9 250.7 108.0 103.7 84.8 87.5 24.5 22.6 28.9 17.0 15.3 15.0 298.0 1 614.3 613.9

Note: Data are from the population censuses.

226

Table B1.

GERMANY, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women4

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995 1993 1994 1995

Turkey Former Yugoslavia1 Italy Greece Bosnia-Herzegovina2 Poland Croatia2 Austria Spain Portugal Netherlands United Kingdom Romania United States Iran France Vietnam Morocco Former USSR Hungary Lebanon Sri Lanka Bulgaria Switzerland India Former CSFR Japan Tunisia Belgium Rep. of Korea Denmark Algeria Sweden Ireland Finland Other countries Total Of which: EU3 Total women

1 401.9 591.0 531.3 280.6 .. 104.8 .. 172.5 152.8 77.0 108.4 88.1 13.7 85.7 51.3 74.8 .. 48.1 6.7 21.4 13.2 .. 4.3 29.9 .. 28.2 .. 23.2 .. .. .. 5.3 .. .. 9.9 454.8 4 378.9 1 539.0 1 867.4

1 434.3 591.2 537.1 278.5 .. 116.9 .. 174.6 150.5 78.2 109.0 90.0 15.0 88.3 73.0 76.7 .. 52.0 7.1 23.1 21.9 .. 4.5 30.5 .. 29.1 .. 23.6 .. .. .. 5.4 .. .. 10.2 492.0 4 512.7 1 549.5 1 919.6

1 453.7 551.6 499.6 256.4 .. 120.6 .. 150.0 128.8 69.3 95.7 80.7 14.8 75.6 65.6 68.9 .. 47.3 6.9 21.8 18.8 .. 4.0 25.9 .. 25.7 .. 20.6 .. .. .. 4.7 .. .. 8.8 424.8 4 240.5 1 399.2 1 898.6

1 523.7 579.1 508.7 274.8 .. 171.5 .. 155.1 126.4 71.1 96.9 83.0 17.7 79.6 73.0 71.8 .. 52.1 8.4 26.6 22.3 .. 4.6 26.7 .. 27.9 .. 21.6 .. .. .. 5.1 .. .. 9.0 452.4 4 489.1 1 440.0 2 022.1

1 612.6 610.5 519.5 293.6 .. 220.4 .. 171.1 127.0 74.9 101.2 85.7 21.1 85.7 81.3 77.6 .. 61.8 11.5 31.6 30.1 .. 5.7 29.6 .. 31.7 .. 24.3 .. .. .. 5.9 .. .. 9.7 521.8 4 845.9 1 506.2 2 179.4

1 694.6 662.7 552.4 320.2 .. 242.0 .. 183.2 135.5 85.5 111.7 96.5 60.3 92.7 92.2 85.1 .. 69.6 18.2 36.7 47.1 .. 14.7 31.2 .. 34.4 .. 26.1 .. .. .. 7.4 .. .. 10.5 632.1 5 342.5 1 632.6 2 330.7

1 779.6 775.1 560.1 336.9 .. 271.2 .. 186.9 135.2 93.0 113.3 103.2 92.1 99.7 97.9 88.9 .. 75.1 52.8 56.4 50.9 .. 32.6 33.0 .. 46.7 .. 27.2 .. .. .. 9.1 13.4 .. 11.2 740.7 5 882.3 1 698.7 2 541.4

1 854.9 915.6 557.7 345.9 .. 285.6 .. 185.3 133.8 98.9 113.6 103.5 167.3 104.4 99.1 90.9 .. 80.3 .. 61.4 53.5 .. 59.1 33.8 .. 63.7 .. 28.1 .. .. .. 13.4 14.4 .. 12.2 1 019.5 6 495.8 1 719.2 2 156.04

1 918.4 929.6 563.0 352.0 139.1 260.5 153.1 186.3 133.2 105.6 113.4 108.2 162.6 107.4 101.5 94.2 95.5 82.8 63.6 62.2 55.1 46.5 56.7 35.0 36.0 52.0 27.1 28.1 22.4 20.9 19.6 23.1 15.3 14.7 13.0 680.5 6 878.1 1 750.2 2 300.54

1 965.6 834.8 571.9 355.6 249.4 263.4 176.3 185.1 132.4 117.5 112.9 110.2 125.9 108.3 104.1 97.0 96.7 82.4 61.6 58.0 54.3 49.4 44.8 35.6 34.0 43.0 27.1 27.4 22.7 20.9 20.4 19.1 16.1 14.9 14.1 737.7 6 990.5 1 776.3 2 375.34

2 014.3 797.7 586.1 359.5 316.0 276.7 185.1 184.5 132.3 125.1 113.1 112.5 109.2 108.4 107.0 99.1 96.0 81.9 58.3 56.7 54.8 54.6 38.8 36.0 34.7 34.1 27.3 26.4 22.9 21.2 20.5 17.7 16.8 15.7 14.8 818.1 7 173.9 1 811.7 2 459.84

607.1 304.0 173.1 130.9 50.6 91.7 62.1 77.4 54.0 40.1 49.7 40.7 38.4 41.5 17.9 15.3 30.6 6.5 14.9 10.9 18.6 11.1 46.9 2.4 6.6 27.8 11.2 8.9 .. .. .. 28.9 .. .. 19.9 261.2 2 300.5 659.3

626.8 269.8 176.9 132.5 90.4 95.7 71.8 77.5 54.5 41.8 49.2 41.0 33.7 41.6 30.1 48.4 30.4 20.7 27.5 15.0 10.9 11.8 12.8 18.9 6.9 15.6 11.5 6.5 .. .. .. 2.1 .. .. 9.3 293.8 2 375.3 669.4

643.0 256.9 182.2 134.5 113.3 101.5 75.9 77.5 55.2 43.6 49.0 42.3 32.6 41.6 31.4 49.4 30.1 21.3 26.3 15.5 11.2 13.0 11.9 18.1 7.9 12.9 11.7 6.5 .. .. .. 2.1 .. .. 9.6 331.8 2 459.8 682.3

227

Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the 31st December of the given year. Data from 1987 to 1989 have been adjusted, taking into account results of the population census of 1987. Population counts cover western Germany only up to 1990 and Germany as a whole from 1991 on. 1. From 1993 on, Serbia and Montenegro. 2. Included in former Yugoslavia until 1992. 3. All gures include the 14 countries (excluding Germany) of the European Union as of 31st December 1995 (except Sweden prior to and including 1990). 4. Women aged 16 years and over.

Table B1.
1985 1986

ITALY, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 19951

Morocco United States Former Yugoslavia Philippines Tunisia Germany Albania United Kingdom France Romania Senegal Brazil Poland Egypt China Sri Lanka Switzerland Spain Somalia Greece India Ghana Argentina Ethiopia Other countries Total Of which: EU

2.6 51.1 13.9 7.6 4.4 37.2 .. 27.9 23.7 .. 0.3 4.7 .. 7.0 1.6 2.5 18.2 12.6 1.8 28.8 5.3 .. 5.3 7.2 159.3 423.0 ..

2.9 54.0 14.5 8.1 4.9 40.2 .. 29.6 25.4 .. 0.4 5.3 10.3 7.2 1.8 2.4 19.0 13.5 2.0 28.8 5.7 .. 5.6 7.5 161.0 450.2 ..

15.7 60.8 19.0 15.1 12.0 44.6 .. 32.7 28.3 .. 5.7 7.6 14.0 11.0 5.8 4.3 20.2 15.6 3.4 31.4 8.0 .. 7.0 10.5 199.3 572.1 ..

23.5 65.6 21.8 18.1 14.6 48.6 .. 35.3 30.5 .. 7.4 9.7 16.9 12.6 7.8 5.4 21.3 16.8 4.2 32.9 9.1 .. 8.3 12.2 222.7 645.4 ..

26.8 50.2 17.1 16.1 14.1 36.6 .. 23.0 21.1 .. 8.2 8.7 10.1 10.2 8.5 5.1 18.5 12.1 3.7 19.1 7.2 .. 7.0 7.9 158.9 490.4 ..

78.0 58.1 29.8 34.3 41.2 41.6 .. 26.6 24.4 7.5 25.1 14.3 17.0 19.8 18.7 11.5 20.0 14.4 9.4 21.0 11.3 11.4 12.8 11.9 221.0 781.1 148.6

89.0 59.7 33.9 40.7 46.4 39.0 26.4 27.7 25.0 13.5 27.1 17.0 19.1 22.4 20.6 13.4 18.1 14.4 11.9 17.4 12.1 12.8 14.8 12.5 227.9 863.0 144.8

95.6 62.1 44.5 44.1 50.4 39.5 28.5 28.1 25.4 16.4 27.5 18.7 21.2 23.5 22.5 16.4 18.2 15.6 14.9 16.2 13.4 14.3 14.9 13.0 240.5 925.2 146.9

97.6 64.0 72.4 46.3 44.5 39.9 30.8 29.1 27.0 19.4 26.4 21.1 21.1 24.6 22.9 19.7 18.2 17.0 19.6 16.5 14.3 14.0 14.0 14.1 253.1 987.4 153.0

92.6 56.7 89.4 40.7 41.1 37.1 31.9 26.4 25.7 20.2 24.6 19.6 18.9 21.2 19.5 18.7 17.8 16.4 16.3 14.3 13.3 12.6 10.7 10.1 226.6 922.7 141.6

94.2 60.6 52.0 43.4 40.5 39.4 34.7 27.7 27.3 24.5 24.0 22.1 22.0 21.9 21.5 20.3 18.2 17.8 17.4 14.8 14.6 12.6 10.5 .. 309.5 991.4 164.0

228

Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. Children under 18 who are registered on their parents permit are not counted. Data are adjusted to take account of the regularisations which occurred in 1987-1988 and 1990. The decrease observed for 1989 and 1994 is a result of a clean-up of the register of foreigners: duplicate entries and entries of persons who had returned to their country of origin were removed. 1. Data do not include permits delivered following the 1995-1996 regularisation programme.

Table B1.
1985 1986 1987

JAPAN, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Republic of Korea China1 Brazil Philippines United States Peru Thailand United Kingdom Vietnam Iran Canada Indonesia Australia India Malaysia Bangladesh Pakistan Germany Other countries

683.3 74.9 2.0 12.3 29.0 0.5 2.6 6.8 4.1 .. 2.4 1.7 1.8 .. 1.8 .. 1.0 3.0 23.4 850.6

678.0 84.4 2.1 18.9 30.7 0.6 3.0 7.4 4.4 .. 2.7 1.8 2.1 .. 2.2 .. 1.2 3.2 24.5 867.2

673.8 95.5 2.3 25.0 30.8 0.6 3.8 7.8 4.4 .. 2.9 2.0 2.2 .. 2.6 .. 1.4 3.2 25.7 884.0

677.1 129.3 4.2 32.2 32.8 0.9 5.3 8.5 4.8 .. 3.5 2.4 2.6 .. 3.5 .. 2.1 3.2 28.6 941.0

681.8 137.5 14.5 38.9 34.9 4.1 5.5 9.3 6.3 .. 4.2 2.8 3.1 .. 4.0 .. 1.9 3.3 32.4 984.5

687.9 150.3 56.4 49.1 38.4 10.3 6.7 10.2 6.2 .. 4.9 3.6 4.0 .. 4.7 .. 2.1 3.6 36.9 1 075.3

693.1 171.1 119.3 61.8 42.5 26.3 8.9 11.8 6.4 .. 5.9 4.6 5.4 .. 5.6 .. 3.7 3.8 48.7 1 218.9

688.1 195.3 147.8 62.2 42.5 31.1 10.1 12.0 6.9 .. 6.1 5.2 5.9 .. 5.7 .. 4.1 3.8 54.8 1 281.6

682.3 210.1 154.7 73.1 42.6 33.2 11.8 12.2 7.6 6.8 6.5 5.6 6.3 4.6 5.5 3.3 4.4 3.8 46.3 1 320.7

676.8 218.6 159.6 86.0 43.3 35.4 14.0 12.5 8.2 8.2 6.9 6.3 6.2 5.2 5.4 4.0 4.5 4.0 49.0 1 354.0

666.4 223.0 176.4 74.3 43.2 36.3 16.0 12.5 9.1 8.6 7.2 7.0 6.0 5.5 5.4 4.9 4.8 4.0 51.8 1 362.4

229

Total

Note: Data are based on registered foreign nationals which include foreigners staying in Japan for more than 90 days and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. 1. Including Chinese Taipei.

Table B1. LUXEMBOURG, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Portugal Italy France Belgium Germany Spain Other countries Total

29.0 20.7 12.6 8.5 8.9 2.2 16.0 97.9

29.0 20.7 12.6 8.5 8.9 2.3 15.3 97.3

31.4 19.8 12.6 9.2 8.8 2.3 18.7 102.8

33.7 19.7 12.7 9.5 8.8 2.4 18.9 105.8

36.2 19.6 12.8 9.8 8.9 2.5 17.2 106.9

39.1 19.5 13.0 10.1 8.8 2.5 20.1 113.1

42.1 19.5 13.1 10.3 8.9 2.5 21.4 117.8

44.2 19.5 13.3 10.6 8.9 2.6 23.6 122.7

47.1 19.7 13.8 10.9 9.2 2.7 24.3 127.6

49.4 19.7 14.3 11.3 9.5 2.7 25.4 132.5

51.5 19.8 15.0 11.8 9.7 2.8 27.5 138.1

Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. Figures have been revised from 1987 on to take into account the effects of the change in the legislation on naturalisation which took place at the end of 1986.

230

Table B1.

NETHERLANDS, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994 1992 1993 1994

Turkey Morocco Germany United Kingdom1 Former Yugoslavia Belgium Italy Spain United States Portugal Greece Tunisia Other countries Total Of which: EU2 Total women

155.6 111.3 44.8 40.7 12.2 23.6 20.3 20.7 10.4 7.9 4.0 2.8 104.4 558.7 177.7 241.1

156.4 116.4 41.0 38.5 11.7 22.8 17.8 19.0 10.5 7.5 3.8 2.6 104.5 552.5 166.4 239.8

160.6 122.7 40.4 38.0 11.6 23.0 17.0 18.2 10.4 7.5 3.8 2.6 112.2 568.0 164.6 249.2

167.3 130.1 39.4 37.1 11.7 22.9 15.9 17.6 10.4 7.8 4.0 2.6 125.0 591.8 161.9 260.5

176.5 139.2 40.3 37.4 12.1 23.1 16.0 17.4 10.8 8.0 4.3 2.7 135.9 623.7 164.9 277.2

191.5 148.0 41.8 37.5 12.8 23.3 16.7 17.4 10.5 8.0 4.5 2.4 127.5 641.9 167.8 287.8

203.5 156.9 44.3 39.0 13.5 23.6 16.9 17.2 11.4 8.3 4.9 2.6 150.3 692.4 173.9 311.1

214.8 163.7 46.9 41.8 15.1 23.9 17.2 16.9 12.1 8.7 5.2 2.6 163.9 732.9 181.9 329.6

212.5 165.1 49.3 44.1 16.8 24.0 18.8 17.3 13.0 9.4 5.6 2.6 179.0 757.4 189.0 343.7

202.6 164.6 52.1 44.7 24.7 24.2 17.5 16.8 13.4 9.6 5.8 2.4 201.6 779.8 193.9 356.9

182.1 158.7 53.4 43.0 29.6 24.1 17.5 16.8 12.8 9.2 5.6 2.1 202.3 757.1 193.1 348.3

97.3 73.7 23.6 17.7 7.3 12.3 8.7 5.6 6.4 4.2 1.9 0.8 84.3 343.7 80.6

93.6 74.0 24.8 18.0 11.7 12.5 5.7 7.4 6.6 4.3 2.0 0.8 95.8 356.9 83.1

84.5 71.8 25.7 17.3 14.0 12.6 5.7 7.5 6.3 4.1 1.9 0.7 96.2 348.3 87.0

231

Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. Figures include administrative corrections. 1. Including Hong Kong. 2. All gures include the 14 countries (excluding the Netherlands) of the European Union as of 31st December 1995.

Table B1.

NORWAY, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995 1993 1994 1995

Denmark Sweden Bosnia-Herzegovina 1 United Kingdom Pakistan United States Former Yugoslavia Vietnam Sri Lanka Germany Iran Turkey Somalia Finland Chile Netherlands Iceland India Iraq Poland Philippines France China Morocco Other countries Total Of which: EU2 Total women

15.7 10.0 .. 12.5 8.4 10.0 1.7 5.3 1.0 3.7 0.3 3.4 .. .. 1.1 2.4 .. 2.3 .. 1.6 1.0 2.2 .. 1.4 17.5 101.5 52.9 48.1

16.8 10.9 .. 12.5 9.3 10.0 1.8 5.6 1.5 3.9 0.7 3.7 .. .. 1.4 2.5 .. 2.5 .. 1.9 1.4 2.1 .. 1.5 19.3 109.3 55.5 51.8

17.6 12.0 .. 12.8 10.3 10.1 2.4 6.0 3.3 4.1 2.7 4.3 .. .. 3.0 2.5 .. 2.8 .. 2.3 1.7 2.0 .. 1.7 22.1 123.7 58.2 57.2

18.1 12.4 .. 13.2 11.1 10.1 3.0 6.5 3.9 4.3 4.3 4.9 0.7 3.6 4.9 2.6 2.3 3.1 0.5 2.6 2.0 2.0 0.9 1.9 17.0 135.9 59.8 62.2

17.5 11.7 .. 12.5 11.6 9.6 3.9 6.8 4.7 4.1 5.2 5.3 1.4 3.3 5.3 2.6 2.2 3.4 0.8 2.9 2.2 1.9 1.2 2.1 18.2 140.3 57.2 64.4

17.2 11.7 .. 11.8 11.4 9.5 4.2 6.9 5.2 4.3 5.9 5.5 1.7 3.1 5.4 2.6 2.2 3.5 0.9 2.9 2.3 1.8 1.5 2.2 19.8 143.3 55.9 66.5

17.4 12.0 .. 11.5 11.3 9.6 4.8 6.8 5.7 4.3 6.6 5.5 2.3 3.1 5.4 2.6 2.2 3.4 1.2 2.9 2.3 1.8 1.7 2.1 21.3 147.8 56.2 69.0

17.0 12.6 .. 11.6 10.8 9.6 6.8 6.9 6.2 4.5 6.9 5.6 2.9 3.1 5.2 2.7 2.2 3.3 1.8 2.9 2.2 1.9 1.9 2.0 23.4 154.0 57.7 72.5

18.0 13.5 6.3 11.4 10.4 9.3 7.3 6.8 6.5 4.5 7.0 5.4 3.4 3.2 5.0 2.7 2.3 3.0 2.3 2.8 2.2 1.9 1.9 1.9 23.2 162.3 58.9 77.8

18.1 14.4 9.5 11.2 10.3 9.2 6.7 6.4 6.0 4.7 5.9 5.0 3.8 3.5 4.6 2.8 2.6 2.9 2.4 2.6 2.2 1.9 1.9 1.7 23.4 164.0 60.5 80.2

17.9 15.4 11.2 11.1 9.7 9.0 6.4 5.9 5.1 4.8 4.7 4.4 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.0 2.9 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.6 23.3 160.8 61.6 80.3

9.2 7.2 3.2 4.7 5.1 4.9 3.1 3.3 2.5 2.4 2.6 2.5 1.3 1.8 2.3 1.4 1.2 1.4 0.8 1.9 1.7 0.9 0.9 0.7 10.9 77.8 29.1

9.3 7.7 4.8 4.6 5.1 4.8 3.0 3.2 2.5 2.5 2.3 2.4 1.6 2.0 2.1 1.4 1.3 1.4 0.9 1.8 1.6 0.9 1.0 0.6 11.4 80.2 29.9

9.1 8.3 5.7 4.5 4.9 4.7 2.8 2.9 2.4 2.6 2.0 2.2 1.7 2.1 1.7 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.0 1.7 1.5 0.9 0.9 0.6 11.8 80.3 30.4

232

Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. From 1987 on, asylum seekers whose requests are being processed are included. Note that prior to 1987, the number of asylum seekers was quite small. 1. Included in former Yugoslavia until 1992. 2. All gures include the 15 countries of the European Union as of 31 December 1995.

Table B1. PORTUGAL, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1 1995

Cape Verde Brazil Angola Guinea-Bissau United Kingdom Spain United States Germany France Venezuela Mozambique S ao Tom e and Principe Netherlands Canada China Italy India Pakistan Iran Former USSR Bulgaria Poland Other countries Total Of which: EU Total women

27.1 9.3 4.4 3.1 7.1 7.1 6.1 4.1 2.8 4.8 2.8 1.7 1.5 2.1 1.0 1.1 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.1 6.6 94.7 25.3 ..

28.0 10.5 4.8 3.4 7.8 7.3 6.4 4.5 3.0 4.9 3.0 1.9 1.7 2.1 1.1 1.1 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 7.5 101.0 27.0 ..

28.8 11.4 5.3 4.0 8.5 7.5 6.9 4.8 3.2 5.1 3.2 2.0 1.8 2.1 1.2 1.2 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 8.5 107.8 28.8 ..

29.7 12.7 5.7 4.8 8.9 7.6 7.2 5.1 3.4 5.1 3.4 2.2 1.9 2.0 1.4 1.2 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.1 9.3 114.0 30.0 ..

31.1 14.0 6.6 5.8 9.3 7.7 7.9 5.4 3.7 5.2 3.6 2.5 2.0 2.4 1.6 1.4 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 9.4 122.3 31.4 51.7

32.0 15.7 7.6 6.5 9.6 8.1 8.2 5.8 4.0 5.0 3.8 2.9 2.1 2.4 1.5 1.5 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.2 11.7 131.6 33.2 60.0

36.6 18.6 13.6 10.8 10.7 8.5 8.4 6.8 4.4 4.9 4.2 3.8 2.5 2.4 2.0 1.7 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.2 14.1 157.1 37.1 65.0

38.7 19.9 15.8 12.3 11.5 8.9 8.5 7.4 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.1 2.7 2.4 2.2 1.9 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.2 15.3 168.3 41.5 69.9

Note: Figures include all foreigners who hold a valid residence permit. 1. Data include 39 200 permits delivered following the 1992-1993 regularisation programme.

233

Table B1.
1985 1986

SPAIN, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1987 1988 1989 1 1990 1991 2 1992 1993 1994 1995

Morocco United Kingdom Germany Portugal France Italy Argentina Peru United States Dominican Republic Netherlands Philippines China Belgium Colombia Venezuela Switzerland India Sweden Chile Cuba Denmark Other countries Total Of which: EU

5.8 39.1 28.5 23.3 17.8 10.3 9.7 1.7 12.2 1.2 10.9 6.2 1.6 7.4 2.7 6.3 5.6 3.7 4.8 4.5 5.0 4.0 29.6 242.0 143.5

8.6 46.9 34.1 28.7 21.2 12.2 12.2 2.2 14.0 1.7 12.1 7.5 2.5 8.6 3.4 7.3 6.3 4.3 5.4 5.5 5.5 4.7 38.4 293.2 171.0

11.2 55.3 39.1 31.0 23.6 13.0 13.8 2.5 15.7 1.9 13.8 8.3 3.0 5.5 3.9 7.8 7.1 4.9 6.5 6.1 5.7 5.5 49.8 334.9 193.5

11.9 64.1 39.4 31.6 25.2 14.1 14.6 2.6 16.7 2.0 15.0 8.2 3.5 10.6 4.1 8.4 7.5 5.3 7.2 6.2 5.7 5.8 50.2 360.0 208.5

9.1 46.1 27.8 20.6 17.4 9.6 10.1 2.5 11.4 1.5 10.3 4.0 2.6 7.2 3.0 5.7 5.1 3.6 5.2 4.1 3.7 4.0 35.0 249.6 144.9

11.4 55.5 31.2 22.8 19.7 10.8 12.1 2.6 11.0 1.5 11.7 5.1 2.8 8.2 3.1 6.4 5.7 3.9 5.9 4.0 3.5 4.6 35.3 278.8 164.6

49.5 50.1 28.7 25.4 20.0 11.7 20.0 6.5 13.2 6.6 9.7 8.0 6.5 6.7 5.3 6.9 5.3 5.4 5.1 5.6 2.7 3.5 58.3 360.7 158.1

54.1 53.5 30.5 28.6 22.6 13.6 21.6 7.4 14.2 6.8 10.5 8.0 6.8 7.2 5.7 7.1 5.6 5.7 5.3 5.9 3.0 4.0 65.6 393.1 173.1

61.3 58.2 34.1 32.3 25.5 15.9 21.6 10.0 14.3 9.2 11.1 8.4 7.8 7.6 6.2 7.0 5.8 5.7 5.0 5.9 3.5 4.2 69.7 430.4 192.1

63.9 62.3 38.2 34.9 28.5 17.8 19.9 12.8 14.5 12.5 12.1 9.1 8.1 8.3 6.6 6.8 6.0 6.0 5.4 5.6 4.6 4.5 72.9 461.4 210.2

74.9 65.3 41.9 37.0 30.8 19.8 18.4 15.1 14.9 14.5 13.0 9.7 9.2 8.9 7.0 6.5 6.2 6.2 5.9 5.6 .. .. 89.2 499.8 235.6

234

Note: Numbers of foreigners with a residence permit. Permits of short duration (less than 6 months) as well as students are excluded. Data refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. 1. The decrease is the result of a clean-up of the register of foreigners. 2. Data include 108 372 permits delivered following the 1991 regularisation programme.

Table B1.

SWEDEN, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995 1993 1994 1995

Finland Former Yugoslavia Norway Iran Denmark Iraq Turkey Poland Germany Chile United Kingdom United States Ethiopia Iceland Greece Romania Italy Lebanon Vietnam France Hungary Spain Netherlands Austria Switzerland Other countries Total Total women

138.6 38.4 26.4 8.3 25.1 3.5 21.5 15.5 12.0 9.2 8.9 6.4 1.8 3.4 9.4 1.2 4.0 1.7 2.5 2.3 1.9 2.9 2.3 2.9 2.1 36.4 388.6 192.7

134.2 38.4 26.7 13.3 24.8 3.9 21.9 15.6 11.9 10.2 8.8 6.5 2.0 3.5 8.0 1.6 3.9 2.2 2.1 2.4 1.9 2.8 2.3 2.8 2.1 37.0 390.8 193.8

130.8 38.7 27.3 20.4 24.7 4.0 22.4 15.1 11.9 11.8 9.0 6.8 3.0 3.5 7.4 2.3 3.9 2.5 1.9 2.5 2.0 2.8 2.3 2.8 2.1 39.1 401.0 198.8

127.9 38.9 28.6 28.4 25.6 4.9 23.0 14.3 11.9 14.0 9.3 7.1 4.4 3.6 7.1 3.4 3.9 3.1 2.1 2.6 2.2 2.8 2.5 2.8 2.1 44.5 421.0 207.9

123.9 39.6 35.0 35.1 28.1 6.0 24.1 14.7 12.0 19.1 9.6 7.5 6.1 4.5 6.7 4.4 4.0 4.8 2.3 2.7 2.8 2.8 2.5 2.8 2.1 52.8 456.0 223.5

119.7 41.1 38.2 39.0 28.6 7.7 25.5 15.7 13.0 19.9 10.1 8.0 7.9 5.3 6.5 5.3 4.0 6.5 3.1 2.9 3.2 2.9 2.6 2.8 2.1 62.1 483.7 237.5

115.0 41.0 36.7 40.0 27.9 9.3 26.4 16.1 12.9 19.1 10.5 8.5 9.6 5.1 6.0 5.5 4.0 7.3 3.7 3.0 3.3 3.0 2.6 2.8 2.2 72.3 493.8 243.7

111.5 39.6 35.3 38.9 27.2 9.0 26.5 16.4 12.9 17.9 10.7 9.5 12.5 5.6 8.1 5.6 4.0 5.7 3.4 3.0 3.4 3.1 2.6 2.8 2.2 81.7 499.1 247.5

108.9 32.4 33.9 36.1 26.6 16.3 23.6 16.1 12.9 15.9 10.9 9.1 9.1 4.9 5.2 5.0 4.0 7.6 4.4 3.2 3.4 3.0 2.6 2.8 2.2 107.4 507.5 253.0

106.7 40.4 33.0 32.7 26.7 19.0 22.0 16.1 13.1 14.1 11.0 9.1 7.7 4.9 4.8 4.7 4.0 6.6 4.0 3.1 3.2 2.9 2.6 2.7 2.2 140.1 537.4 292.8

104.9 38.4 32.3 29.3 26.5 21.3 20.3 16.0 13.4 13.0 11.2 9.2 6.3 4.9 4.6 4.2 4.0 3.8 3.8 3.3 3.0 2.9 2.8 2.7 2.3 147.4 531.8 256.5

59.8 15.9 17.5 17.1 11.5 4.0 11.9 10.9 6.2 7.8 4.0 4.2 4.0 2.5 2.0 2.8 1.2 3.6 2.2 1.4 1.9 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 56.4 253.0

58.7 19.6 17.0 15.9 11.4 7.9 11.1 10.9 6.3 6.8 4.0 4.1 3.4 2.5 1.8 2.7 1.2 3.1 2.0 1.3 1.9 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 95.0 292.8

57.9 18.6 16.7 14.4 11.3 9.1 10.3 10.9 6.4 6.3 4.0 4.1 3.1 2.5 1.8 2.4 1.2 2.0 2.0 1.4 1.8 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.0 63.9 256.5

235

Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated.

Table B1.

SWITZERLAND, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995 1993 1994 1995

Italy Former Yugoslavia Portugal Spain Germany Turkey France Austria United Kingdom Netherlands United States Greece Belgium Vietnam Sweden Former CSFR Poland Hungary Other countries Total Of which: EU Total women

392.5 69.5 30.9 108.4 81.0 50.9 47.1 29.2 15.4 10.8 9.1 8.7 4.8 6.8 3.8 7.1 4.3 5.4 54.0 939.7 702.7 419.1

388.4 77.4 39.2 110.4 80.3 52.8 47.2 28.7 15.5 10.8 9.2 8.5 4.9 6.9 3.9 6.5 4.4 5.0 56.0 956.0 708.4 425.2

385.0 87.6 48.0 112.6 80.4 54.6 47.6 28.8 15.8 11.2 9.2 8.4 5.1 7.0 4.0 6.1 4.5 4.8 58.0 978.7 717.5 434.3

382.3 100.7 57.6 114.0 80.3 56.8 48.0 28.6 16.1 11.3 9.3 8.4 5.2 7.2 4.2 5.9 4.6 4.7 61.3 1 006.5 726.6 445.2

379.4 116.8 69.0 114.7 80.9 59.5 48.7 28.5 16.2 11.4 9.4 8.3 5.4 7.1 4.4 5.7 4.8 4.5 65.6 1 040.3 737.7 458.2

378.7 140.7 85.6 116.1 83.4 64.2 50.0 28.8 16.7 11.9 9.7 8.3 5.6 7.2 4.6 5.7 5.0 4.5 73.4 1 100.3 760.2 483.7

377.4 171.2 101.2 115.3 85.1 69.5 50.7 28.9 17.1 12.2 10.4 8.2 5.7 7.4 4.8 5.6 5.2 4.5 82.8 1 163.2 777.2 510.2

372.0 208.3 112.4 109.4 86.6 73.1 51.4 28.7 17.5 12.5 10.5 8.0 5.9 7.3 5.0 5.5 5.1 4.3 89.7 1 213.5 780.4 538.0

367.7 245.0 121.1 105.9 87.1 75.6 51.7 28.4 17.7 12.7 10.6 7.7 6.0 7.3 5.1 5.4 5.1 4.2 96.0 1 260.3 782.2 565.7

364.0 272.4 128.6 103.7 89.1 77.1 52.7 28.3 18.0 13.1 11.0 7.4 6.2 6.7 5.2 5.2 5.1 4.0 102.2 1 300.1 787.4 589.1

358.9 294.2 134.8 101.4 90.9 78.6 53.6 28.1 18.4 13.6 11.4 7.1 6.3 6.1 5.1 5.0 4.8 3.8 108.4 1 330.6 824.9 608.7

157.3 112.5 57.2 47.7 39.0 34.4 23.9 11.9 7.6 6.1 4.9 3.4 2.9 3.4 2.6 2.5 2.5 1.8 43.9 565.7 347.4

156.1 126.0 61.1 46.8 40.2 35.3 24.6 12.1 7.8 6.3 5.1 3.2 3.0 3.2 2.7 2.5 2.6 1.8 48.8 589.1 351.4

154.2 137.7 64.3 45.9 41.3 36.1 25.2 12.1 8.0 6.5 5.3 3.1 3.1 2.2 2.7 2.5 2.5 1.0 55.1 608.7 369.9

236

Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. Number of foreigners with an annual residence permit or with a settlement permit (permanent permit). Seasonal and frontier workers are excluded.

Table B1. UNITED KINGDOM, stock of foreign population by country or region of nationality
Thousands
Of which: women 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1993 1994 1995

Ireland India United States Western Africa Caribbean and Guyana Pakistan Italy Central and Eastern Europe1 France Bangladesh Germany Australia Jamaica Eastern Africa Canada Spain Portugal Turkey Malaysia Netherlands Japan New Zealand Sri Lanka China Greece Philippines Northern Europe Other countries Total Of which: EU Total women

569 138 86 43 135 49 83 68 27 41 36 28 .. 28 .. 28 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 17 355 1 731 796 ..

564 162 123 27 144 71 65 65 24 45 43 32 .. 24 .. 33 16 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 16 366 1 820 791 ..

559 160 110 36 137 62 77 58 34 54 52 33 .. 31 .. 28 19 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 18 371 1 839 809 ..

621 151 100 42 96 67 91 53 37 34 40 31 .. 24 .. 21 20 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 15 378 1 821 881 ..

515 162 115 47 106 55 86 66 37 57 42 39 .. 24 .. 39 20 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 14 388 1 812 803 963

478 156 102 37 82 56 75 58 38 38 41 44 .. 39 34 25 21 12 15 .. 22 .. .. .. .. .. 17 333 1 723 731 910

469 136 87 45 68 84 86 61 38 42 41 33 .. 40 28 30 20 29 16 .. 28 .. .. .. .. .. 25 344 1 750 740 926

504 150 104 70 103 82 75 68 47 60 35 41 54 59 35 38 18 29 19 25 24 27 23 20 23 10 22 220 1 985 787 1 051

465 151 110 82 106 98 72 78 41 73 34 47 60 48 37 33 14 31 30 22 27 28 24 16 25 17 27 205 2 001 720 1 088

473 125 81 71 88 89 78 74 55 66 46 43 54 47 33 41 32 44 30 29 33 26 26 27 19 16 28 172 1 946 792 1 071

443 114 110 87 82 81 80 75 60 53 51 47 46 40 36 31 30 29 29 26 25 23 20 18 17 16 391 2 060 902 1 089

248 93 63 45 55 54 35 39 25 38 23 26 32 27 22 17 13 15 13 18 15 13 10 11 12 17 109 1 088 390

245 80 48 37 50 48 35 37 35 34 31 27 30 26 19 23 17 22 15 17 19 13 15 15 13 20 100 1 071 424

241 63 55 48 46 42 39 38 38 25 35 24 26 21 18 19 13 13 16 14 14 11 11 219 1 089 490

237

Note: Estimated from the annual labour force survey. Fluctuations from year to year may be due to sampling error. The symbol indicates that gures are less than 10 000. 1. Including former USSR.

Table B2.

AUSTRIA, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women

1988

1989

19901

19911

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996 1994 1995 1996

Former Yugoslavia Turkey Bosnia-Herzegovina2 Croatia3 Poland Hungary Romania Slovenia Czech Republic Slovak Republic Former CSFR4 China5 Philippines India Bulgaria Egypt Germany Other countries Total Of which: EU6 Total women Total including foreign unemployed
7

83.1 34.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 12.0 21.6 150.9 .. 57.9 160.9

90.8 39.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 12.3 25.1 167.4 .. 64.2 177.9

110.5 50.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 13.1 43.4 217.6 .. 76.4 236.0

129.1 57.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 13.7 66.1 266.5 19.1 90.2 286.9

133.6 55.6 .. 1.2 11.1 10.1 9.2 1.3 .. .. 10.7 1.8 2.4 1.6 1.7 1.9 13.6 18.1 273.9 18.8 91.7 295.9

126.6 54.5 .. 6.4 11.0 10.0 9.3 4.3 1.0 0.5 9.5 1.8 2.4 1.8 1.5 1.7 13.7 21.6 277.5 19.1 93.4 304.6

118.6 55.6 14.4 11.7 11.1 9.9 9.5 5.5 2.7 1.8 6.4 2.0 2.3 1.9 1.5 1.7 12.4 268.8 89.0 316.5

108.0 55.7 22.8 16.0 10.8 9.6 9.3 5.8 3.6 2.9 3.9 2.0 2.1 1.8 1.5 1.5 12.5 269.7 89.5 325.2

94.2 52.2 28.1 19.2 10.1 9.2 8.7 6.0 4.0 3.7 2.1 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 12.0 257.2 85.7 ..

46.6 12.5 .. 4.0 3.3 2.4 3.1 1.4 0.8 0.5 2.1 0.5 1.4 0.8 0.6 0.1 8.9 89.0

43.0 12.7 .. 5.6 3.1 2.3 3.0 1.5 1.1 0.8 1.4 0.5 1.3 0.7 0.6 11.9 89.5

38.6 12.2 10.1 6.7 2.8 2.0 2.8 1.5 1.2 1.1 0.8 0.5 1.1 0.6 0.5 3.2 85.7

238

97.0

97.2

..

Note: Annual average. Data by nationality are from valid work permits. Figures may be over-estimated as a result of persons holding more than one permit. The self-employed are excluded. 1. Data not corrected (see note 1 to Table A.5.). 2. Including in former Yugoslavia until 1993. 3. Including in former Yugoslavia until 1991. 4. Citizens from the former CSFR who did not need to renew their work permit since the split of the Czech and Slovak Republics. 5. Including Chinese Taipei. 6. From 1994 on, EEA members no longer need work permits. 7. From 1994 on, data on employment are from Social Security records and include EEA nationals.

Table B2. BELGIUM, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1988 1989

Italy Morocco Spain Turkey Portugal Greece Former Yugoslavia Algeria Tunisia Other countries Total Total women

61.1 16.5 15.4 10.4 3.5 3.7 1.7 1.5 1.5 67.2 182.5 ..

59.4 16.5 15.2 10.2 3.5 3.5 1.7 1.5 1.5 66.7 179.7 ..

58.8 17.0 15.1 10.0 3.5 3.4 1.7 1.5 1.5 66.7 179.2 ..

57.5 17.2 14.5 9.9 3.5 3.3 1.6 1.5 1.5 66.1 176.6 ..

58.1 18.1 14.3 9.5 3.6 3.3 1.7 1.7 1.6 67.5 179.4 49.2

60.6 21.1 14.5 11.4 3.9 3.5 1.9 1.9 1.7 76.0 196.4 54.1

14.7 4.1 4.9 2.0 1.3 1.0 0.5 0.4 0.2 20.2 49.2

15.2 5.0 5.0 2.4 1.4 1.1 0.6 0.4 0.3 22.7 54.1

Note: Data exclude the unemployed and the self-employed.

239

Table B2.

DENMARK, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994 1992 1993 1994

Turkey United Kingdom Norway Germany Former Yugoslavia Sweden Pakistan Iceland Finland Other countries Total Of which: EU Total women

9.3 5.6 5.5 4.6 4.1 4.5 2.5 1.2 1.1 15.1 53.6 14.0 22.4

10.1 5.9 5.7 4.8 4.2 4.7 2.5 1.4 1.1 16.1 56.5 14.8 23.6

10.9 6.3 5.8 5.1 4.4 4.8 2.5 1.5 1.1 17.8 60.1 15.8 24.9

11.4 6.4 5.8 5.2 4.6 4.9 2.4 1.4 1.1 19.6 62.7 16.1 25.9

12.0 6.3 5.8 5.2 4.7 4.8 2.4 1.3 1.1 21.5 65.1 16.1 26.7

12.4 6.2 5.8 5.1 4.8 4.6 2.2 1.3 1.0 23.4 66.9 16.7 27.3

12.8 6.2 5.8 5.1 4.9 4.6 2.2 1.3 1.0 25.0 68.8 16.7 28.3

13.4 6.5 5.9 5.3 5.1 4.7 2.1 1.3 1.0 25.9 71.2 17.3 29.5

13.7 6.6 5.9 5.4 5.4 4.7 2.2 1.4 1.0 27.8 74.0 17.7 30.8

14.4 6.8 6.0 5.5 5.7 4.8 2.3 1.5 1.0 29.7 77.7 18.4 32.8

13.8 7.1 6.0 5.7 5.5 5.0 2.4 1.8 1.1 31.9 80.3 19.5 33.7

5.5 2.1 3.4 2.2 2.3 2.7 0.8 0.7 0.7 10.4 30.8 6.1

5.9 2.1 3.5 2.3 2.4 2.8 0.9 0.8 0.7 11.6 32.8 6.4

5.4 2.1 3.4 2.3 2.3 2.8 0.9 0.9 0.7 12.8 33.7 6.6

Note: Data are from population registers and give the count as of the end of the given year (end of November until 1991, end of December from 1992).

240

Table B2.

FRANCE, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996 1994 1995 1996

Portugal Algeria Morocco Spain Tunisia Italy Turkey Former Yugoslavia Poland Other countries Total Of which: EU1 Total women

408.2 271.6 177.3 129.2 72.6 116.2 38.7 35.8 15.9 290.2 1 555.7 722.7 489.7

393.2 249.3 176.0 119.3 71.5 113.6 56.5 39.8 12.2 293.5 1 524.9 693.5 474.1

396.1 268.8 179.9 114.4 81.5 104.2 60.8 34.3 13.8 303.2 1 557.0 699.1 489.9

413.3 258.5 187.0 101.5 76.2 103.8 65.0 30.7 16.6 341.2 1 593.8 707.3 503.7

428.5 248.5 168.1 108.5 74.7 96.9 53.9 29.6 15.1 325.6 1 549.5 716.2 484.7

421.7 236.3 175.6 98.9 63.9 96.6 42.0 24.7 13.4 333.1 1 506.0 689.6 492.5

426.5 243.7 176.6 81.6 75.5 87.5 56.8 19.5 12.3 337.9 1 517.8 674.1 502.4

381.8 237.4 179.5 81.9 71.0 98.3 73.5 24.3 8.4 385.6 1 541.5 658.7 526.7

393.4 241.9 197.1 84.2 78.3 90.3 75.6 25.1 6.2 401.8 1 593.9 664.4 560.4

375.0 245.6 197.5 82.1 81.0 76.6 66.4 32.3 7.1 409.6 1 573.3 629.1 553.6

359.0 253.3 203.1 85.6 75.2 74.3 72.5 31.8 10.1 439.7 1 604.7 612.3 581.0

159.4 77.3 53.0 34.5 20.6 28.0 17.7 10.7 2.5 156.9 560.4 266.9

154.7 72.7 58.2 33.1 22.5 21.9 12.8 12.2 3.1 162.4 553.6 252.9

155.1 79.9 55.9 28.9 22.8 21.3 17.7 10.7 5.2 183.6 581.0 247.3

Note: Data are derived from the labour force survey and refer to the month of March. 1. 12 rst members of the European Union for all years.

241

Table B2.

GERMANY, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995 1993 1994 1995

Turkey Former Yugoslavia Italy Greece Portugal Spain Other countries Total Total women

589.0 324.9 232.8 115.4 38.3 73.7 449.3 1 823.4 578.5

604.3 322.9 222.1 114.3 38.5 72.2 459.4 1 833.7 583.6

622.5 323.6 214.4 113.2 39.5 70.5 481.8 1 865.5 595.7

638.5 327.0 211.6 114.3 40.8 69.4 509.0 1 910.6 617.3

651.6 329.3 206.6 116.4 42.5 67.3 526.9 1 940.6 628.4

680.2 339.0 199.8 117.8 45.5 66.3 576.5 2 025.1 668.6

725.3 360.5 194.1 117.4 48.1 63.9 669.8 2 179.1 718.6

758.5 422.5 195.7 120.3 47.8 59.6 755.7 2 360.1 779.4

766.6 476.6 234.8 142.0 54.9 61.7 839.3 2 575.9 869.8

758.6 473.1 241.9 141.2 56.6 59.1 829.1 2 559.6 863.7

752.0 468.9 245.1 139.4 58.1 56.4 849.3 2 569.2 873.8

241.7 183.3 66.8 55.3 20.3 22.3 280.1 869.8

236.3 180.1 68.5 55.3 20.8 21.7 281.0 863.7

235.9 178.6 69.6 54.1 21.2 20.9 293.5 873.8

Note: Data are for September 30th of each year and include cross-border workers but not the self-employed. Figures cover only western Germany for all years.

242

Table B2. LUXEMBOURG, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

France Portugal Belgium Germany Italy Former Yugoslavia Spain Other countries Total Of which: EU Total women

11.2 15.7 8.9 5.5 8.5 0.7 0.9 3.6 55.0 52.3 18.4

12.3 16.3 9.8 6.0 8.5 0.7 0.9 4.2 58.7 55.7 19.7

13.9 17.4 10.9 6.7 8.6 0.7 0.9 4.6 63.7 60.3 21.0

15.9 18.9 11.9 7.2 8.6 0.8 1.0 5.1 69.4 65.6 23.6

18.3 20.5 13.2 8.1 8.5 1.0 1.0 5.6 76.2 71.9 26.3

21.2 22.8 14.6 9.1 8.5 1.2 1.0 6.3 84.7 79.8 29.4

24.1 24.7 16.0 9.9 8.5 1.4 1.0 7.0 92.6 87.0 32.1

26.9 25.7 16.7 10.4 8.3 1.8 1.0 7.4 98.2 92.1 34.2

28.4 26.0 17.2 11.1 7.9 1.8 0.9 7.7 101.0 96.4 35.6

30.7 26.4 18.4 12.0 7.8 1.7 0.9 8.4 106.3 99.5 37.8

33.2 27.3 19.6 12.7 7.7 1.7 1.0 8.6 111.8 105.4 39.9

Note: Data are for 1st October of each year and cover foreigners in employment, including apprentices, trainees and cross-border workers. The unemployed are not included.

243

Table B2.

NETHERLANDS, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995 1993 1994 1995

Turkey Morocco Belgium United Kingdom Germany Spain Other countries Total Of which: EU Total women

35 25 21 15 16 8 45 166 65 40

35 24 22 15 17 8 48 169 78 41

35 24 24 16 18 8 51 176 83 46

33 23 25 16 18 8 53 176 85 48

36 25 24 17 19 8 63 192 88 53

41 27 24 18 18 8 61 197 88 53

45 30 24 19 19 8 69 214 92 64

49 34 24 21 17 8 76 229 93 69

44 30 23 21 15 8 78 219 91 67

41 30 22 21 16 7 79 216 88 67

39 32 22 22 15 7 84 221 98 69

11 7 10 6 4 3 26 67 29

10 7 9 6 4 3 28 67 28

7 8 10 6 4 4 30 69 34

Note: Estimates are for March 31st and include cross-border workers, but exclude the self-employed, family workers and the unemployed. From 1990 onwards, foreigners legally residing in the Netherlands but working abroad are excluded.

244

Table B2. NORWAY, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Denmark Sweden United Kingdom United States Sri Lanka Germany Pakistan Finland Netherlands Chile Turkey India Poland Other countries Total

9.2 6.2 5.1 3.1 1.5 1.9 2.6 1.8 1.2 1.0 1.6 1.2 0.9 12.1 49.5

8.8 5.9 4.9 3.0 1.7 1.9 2.4 1.6 1.2 1.1 1.4 1.2 0.9 11.6 47.7

8.6 5.5 4.6 2.8 1.9 1.9 2.2 1.5 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.2 0.8 11.4 46.3

8.4 5.7 4.6 2.8 2.1 1.9 2.1 1.4 1.2 1.4 1.3 1.1 0.8 11.5 46.3

8.5 5.8 4.7 2.9 2.2 1.9 1.9 1.4 1.2 1.4 1.2 1.1 0.7 11.5 46.6

8.7 6.2 4.9 3.0 2.4 2.0 1.8 1.5 1.3 1.4 1.1 1.1 0.7 11.7 47.9

8.9 6.9 5.1 3.0 2.6 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.3 1.5 1.1 1.0 0.7 12.6 50.3

9.1 7.5 5.3 3.1 2.2 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.0 0.6 13.3 51.9

Note: Data are for the 2nd quarter. The unemployed and the self-employed are not included.

Table B2. PORTUGAL, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
1991 1992 1993 19941 19951

Cape Verde Brazil Angola Guinea-Bissau United Kingdom Spain Germany United States France Mozambique Venezuela Other countries Total

16.9 5.4 1.7 2.3 4.2 3.9 3.0 2.7 2.1 1.6 1.0 10.1 54.9

17.7 6.3 1.9 3.1 4.5 4.0 3.1 2.7 2.3 1.6 0.9 11.1 59.2

18.1 7.2 2.3 3.5 4.7 4.2 3.4 2.7 2.5 1.7 0.9 12.0 63.1

20.6 8.9 6.6 6.0 5.0 4.5 3.8 2.9 2.7 1.8 0.8 13.9 77.6

21.8 9.6 7.9 7.0 5.4 4.7 4.1 3.0 2.8 1.8 0.7 15.5 84.3

Note: Workers who hold a valid residence permit (including the unemployed). 1. Figures include workers beneting from the 1992-1993 regularisation procedures.

245

Table B2.

SPAIN, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women

1988

1989

1990

19911

19921

19931

1994

19952 1993
1

1994

19952

Morocco Peru Dominican Republic Argentina Philippines China Senegal Colombia Gambia Poland Algeria Chile India United States Brazil Uruguay Cuba Ecuador Japan Cape Verde Switzerland Portugal United Kingdom Germany France Italy Netherlands Other countries Total Of which: EU Total women

5.0 0.6 0.5 3.5 3.3 1.3 .. 0.8 .. .. .. 1.3 1.6 2.3 .. 0.8 .. .. 0.7 .. .. 5.5 6.5 4.2 2.6 1.6 1.3 14.8 58.2 31.4 21.5

6.7 0.7 0.5 4.3 3.4 1.4 .. 1.0 .. .. .. 1.4 1.7 2.8 .. 1.0 .. .. 0.8 .. .. 6.4 7.9 5.2 3.4 2.1 1.6 16.8 69.1 34.7 25.2

8.8 0.9 0.7 6.3 4.1 1.7 .. 1.2 0.9 .. 0.2 1.7 1.9 3.5 0.5 1.2 .. .. 1.1 0.7 1.5 7.7 8.5 6.6 4.6 2.7 2.0 16.5 85.4 34.8 29.8

41.1 4.8 5.1 12.0 6.7 4.6 .. 2.7 1.9 .. 1.9 3.2 2.4 4.6 1.6 2.1 .. .. 1.4 1.2 1.8 11.6 10.2 8.6 6.2 3.8 2.6 28.8 171.0 46.5 57.6

52.5 6.2 5.5 11.5 6.6 5.7 3.2 2.9 2.7 3.3 2.9 3.3 2.4 3.2 1.8 2.1 0.9 0.6 1.4 1.2 1.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. 18.3 139.4 .. 40.1

43.4 6.1 5.2 9.0 6.0 5.0 2.8 2.4 2.3 2.7 2.2 2.6 2.1 2.5 1.5 1.6 0.8 0.5 1.2 1.0 1.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. 15.2 117.4 .. 34.9

45.0 8.6 7.6 8.0 6.4 5.7 3.0 2.6 2.2 2.6 2.0 2.5 2.2 2.3 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 14.0 121.8 .. 38.9

51.4 11.4 9.7 7.5 7.1 6.2 3.3 3.1 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.3 2.3 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.1 1.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 15.8 138.7 .. 46.2

6.4 3.5 4.5 3.0 3.9 1.3 0.1 1.4 .. 0.6 0.1 1.1 0.3 1.0 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.6 0.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. 4.7 34.9 ..

7.0 5.1 6.6 2.7 4.2 1.6 .. 1.6 .. 0.6 .. 1.1 0.3 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.6 .. 0.6 0.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. 4.3 38.9 ..

7.9 7.3 8.4 2.6 4.7 1.7 .. 2.0 .. 0.6 .. 1.2 0.3 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.9 .. 0.5 0.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. 5.0 46.2 ..

246

Note: Data are for 31st December of each year and are counts of valid work permits. From 1992 onwards, workers from the EU are not included. 1. Data include work permits delivered following the 1991 regularisation programme. 2. Provisional data.

Table B2.

SWEDEN, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995 1993 1994 1995

Finland Norway Iran Former Yugoslavia Denmark Poland Turkey Other countries Total Total women

85 14 .. 22 15 .. .. 79 216 100

83 14 .. 21 15 .. .. 81 215 99

81 15 .. 23 15 8 .. 74 215 103

79 14 .. 25 16 9 .. 77 220 103

77 17 .. 24 17 8 10 84 237 111

72 20 .. 21 17 8 11 97 246 114

69 21 16 21 16 8 10 80 241 112

66 18 12 20 16 7 10 84 233 108

61 18 12 15 16 8 9 82 221 101

58 18 14 10 14 8 7 84 213 96

56 19 15 15 13 9 7 86 220 98

34 9 3 7 7 5 4 32 101

32 8 5 4 6 5 2 34 96

33 9 5 5 6 6 2 32 98

Note: Annual average. Estimates are from the annual labour force survey.

247

Table B2.

SWITZERLAND, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
Of which: women

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995 1993 1994 1995

A. Resident workers Italy Former Yugoslavia Portugal Spain Germany Turkey France Austria United Kingdom Netherlands United States Other countries Total Of which: EU Total women

228.7 47.2 20.9 68.7 46.8 26.0 27.2 19.7 7.6 5.6 3.8 47.1 549.3 .. 185.1

229.8 51.8 26.6 70.5 47.8 27.0 27.8 19.8 7.9 5.8 3.9 48.2 566.9 .. 191.7 29.8 32.1 17.9 21.8 2.2 2.3 2.1 0.1 1.5 109.8 18.7

231.6 57.2 32.1 72.4 49.0 28.0 28.6 20.2 8.2 6.1 4.1 50.2 587.7 .. 199.7 32.2 34.8 17.5 21.4 2.3 2.5 2.5 0.2 1.2 114.6 19.1

232.3 63.8 37.8 73.4 50.0 29.3 29.3 20.3 8.5 6.3 4.3 52.5 607.8 447.0 206.8 35.4 38.5 16.9 20.8 2.5 2.5 2.5 0.1 1.4 120.6 19.9

232.7 72.0 45.3 74.1 51.2 30.7 30.3 20.5 8.7 6.5 4.5 55.3 631.8 458.6 215.1 37.5 40.2 15.1 18.1 2.5 2.6 2.6 0.1 1.4 120.1 20.0

234.3 84.4 55.2 75.1 53.6 33.2 31.5 20.9 9.2 7.0 4.8 60.5 669.8 476.1 228.7 40.5 44.5 13.5 14.6 2.4 2.5 2.5 1.3 121.7 20.3

234.7 98.1 63.8 74.4 55.0 35.8 32.1 21.0 9.5 7.3 5.1 65.6 702.5 487.4 238.8 39.4 45.6 11.3 10.6 2.7 2.3 2.6 1.5 115.9 20.5

231.5 110.7 69.3 70.2 55.7 36.7 32.2 20.9 9.6 7.6 5.1 67.1 716.7 512.7 246.0 33.7 36.2 8.0 6.6 2.4 2.2 2.3 1.6 93.1 18.9

228.0 121.3 74.5 67.9 55.0 37.2 32.2 20.3 9.6 7.6 5.1 67.3 725.8 485.2 252.3 26.9 26.8 6.0 4.2 2.2 2.0 2.0 1.8 71.8 16.8

224.7 133.0 78.8 66.5 55.7 37.4 32.7 20.0 9.8 7.9 5.2 68.6 740.3 485.2 261.2 24.4 19.1 5.8 4.1 2.3 2.0 1.7 1.8 61.1 14.3

214.3 134.6 80.5 63.5 56.3 35.6 32.3 19.4 9.9 8.1 5.4 68.7 728.7 499.2 261.3 23.8 12.2 6.1 4.1 2.3 2.0 1.6 1.7 53.7 12.7

73.7 41.0 30.4 25.8 19.3 13.0 12.1 6.8 2.8 3.0 1.5 23.0 252.3 171.0

73.2 45.1 32.6 25.5 19.9 13.1 12.6 6.8 2.9 3.1 1.6 24.8 261.2 173.7

70.1 46.8 33.6 24.4 20.3 12.5 12.5 6.5 2.9 3.2 1.7 26.9 261.3 179.6

248

B. Seasonal workers Portugal Former Yugoslavia Italy Spain Germany France Austria Turkey Other countries Total Total women
1. 2.

26.2 29.7 17.8 21.9 1.9 2.0 1.9 0.2 1.2 102.8 17.4

6.9 4.7 0.6 0.6 1.1 0.8 1.1 1.0 16.8

6.0 3.3 0.5 0.5 1.1 0.8 1.0 1.0 14.3

5.8 2.1 0.6 0.5 1.1 0.8 0.9 0.9 12.7

Data as of 31st December of each year and are counts of the number of foreigners with an annual residence permit or a settlement permit (permanent permit), who engage in gainful activity. Cross-border workers and seasonal workers are excluded. Data as of 31st August of each year, when seasonal work is at its peak.

Table B2. UNITED KINGDOM, stock of foreign labour by country or region of nationality
Thousands
Of which: women 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1993 1994 1995

Ireland Africa India Australia and New Zealand United States Italy France Germany Central and Eastern Europe2 Pakistan and Bangladesh Portugal Caribbean and Guyana Spain Other countries Total Of which: EU

269 51 66 23 37 56 17 18 25 27 77 14 128 808 382 ..

261 42 74 23 47 44 13 23 24 23 79 18 144 815 389 ..

258 43 73 21 41 50 18 26 21 25 12 72 17 138 815 401 ..

307 50 73 33 41 57 20 24 17 22 13 60 15 139 871 460 ..

279 51 84 40 45 55 20 24 20 28 13 62 25 168 914 451 ..

268 59 84 39 50 48 24 22 20 27 11 48 16 166 882 419 393

242 72 57 34 39 51 23 22 20 26 12 50 20 160 828 398 376

256 87 72 45 49 50 30 14 21 27 12 49 20 170 902 415 429

222 78 67 52 47 40 26 15 22 35 10 50 18 180 862 359 422

241 72 59 45 36 40 33 20 22 223 20 37 26 174 847 413 418

216 83 60 53 49 43 34 27 23 203 18 17 17 239 899 441 421

113 37 36 26 23 17 15 13 25 117 422 183

114 38 32 171 19 13 22 15 11 21 13 103 418 204

111 37 24 171 20 17 21 16 15 143 421 223

249

Total women

Note: Estimates are from the labour force survey. The unemployed are not included. The symbol indicates that gures are less than 10 000. 1. Australia only. 2. Including former USSR. 3. Pakistan only.

Table B3.

AUSTRIA, acquisition of nationality by country or region of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Former Yugoslavia Turkey Central and Eastern Europe Germany Others Total

1 731 509 1 985 1 125 2 883 8 233

2 323 723 1 664 886 2 874 8 470

2 641 1 106 2 118 517 2 817 9 199

3 221 1 809 2 413 455 3 496 11 394

4 337 1 994 1 839 410 3 340 11 920

5 791 2 688 1 858 406 3 659 14 402

5 623 3 379 2 672 328 4 268 16 270

4 538 3 209 2 588 202 4 772 15 309

Note: Figures include naturalisations granted to persons living abroad.

Table B3.

BELGIUM, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Morocco Turkey Italy Algeria France Tunisia Zaire Former Yugoslavia Netherlands Greece Spain Poland China India Lebanon Germany Philippines Vietnam Pakistan United Kingdom Portugal Romania Others Total

2 091 879 762 191 514 96 185 211 217 104 110 151 64 179 58 80 .. 28 89 58 63 273 2 054 8 457

6 862 3 886 22 362 932 2 179 486 454 386 1 179 940 1 795 237 113 165 103 299 .. 49 129 331 230 69 3 182 46 368

5 500 3 305 1 431 543 532 416 410 353 222 170 196 174 101 119 81 52 118 19 106 79 85 94 2 273 16 379

8 638 6 273 2 326 714 618 573 474 417 335 312 281 239 181 159 158 94 147 96 161 104 117 118 3 263 25 798

9 146 6 572 2 096 780 608 537 452 416 336 294 246 176 170 148 137 128 124 118 116 105 99 85 3 220 26 109

Note: Data cover all means of acquiring the nationality. From 1992 on, following a change in nationality law a signicant number of foreigners were granted Belgian nationality.

Table B3.

DENMARK, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Turkey Iran Former Yugoslavia Iraq Poland Sweden Pakistan Norway Vietnam Morocco Germany United Kingdom Others Total

437 23 117 14 166 189 394 175 650 181 240 118 1 040 3 744

195 21 133 9 120 143 611 158 583 109 175 121 880 3 258

107 73 130 20 152 131 433 188 501 114 167 106 906 3 028

376 989 128 181 317 163 551 165 568 202 231 133 1 480 5 484

502 1 083 78 236 278 177 265 174 209 167 158 109 1 668 5 104

560 710 138 241 219 188 192 164 169 168 134 85 2 069 5 037

915 491 806 166 151 154 203 163 125 136 140 94 2 192 5 736

797 531 413 177 175 149 145 143 137 122 118 82 2 271 5 260

250

Table B3.

FINLAND, acquisition of nationality by country or region of former nationality

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Europe Of which: Former USSR Nordic countries Asia Africa North America South America Oceania Stateless and unknown Total

817 .. 350 150 68 58 22 14 44 1 173

686 .. 331 152 63 44 43 9 66 1 063

1 000 .. 404 201 80 107 37 14 65 1 504

539 85 240 130 70 46 41 4 69 899

736 142 306 200 101 57 45 10 87 1 236

506 232 162 140 104 7 48 4 66 875

450 158 114 214 67 5 39 1 63 839

342 48 94 152 56 11 32 58 651

335 149 104 144 81 1 27 2 78 668

Table B3. FRANCE, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Morocco Algeria Tunisia Portugal Cambodia Turkey Vietnam Lebanon Former Yugoslavia Laos Italy Haiti Poland Cameroon Spain Zaire Others Total Total (estimates)
1

4 3 2 7 1 2 1 1 3 1 4 12

435 256 347 984 511 690 012 .. 015 294 081 .. 298 .. 460 .. 968

5 4 2 7 1 2 1 1 2 1 3 15

393 070 538 027 724 921 478 .. 249 305 576 .. 587 .. 320 .. 142

7 5 3 6 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 14

741 355 076 876 827 914 326 287 405 468 869 626 446 618 868 557 664

10 6 4 7 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

289 631 375 126 729 124 139 390 367 343 475 714 1 230 625 2 317 650 15 781 59 655 95 500

12 7 4 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

292 410 991 575 701 296 888 508 400 305 117 678 873 707 1 528 739 14 977 59 246 95 300

13 7 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1

131 909 370 233 847 515 775 568 652 187 936 744 755 729 1 385 795 14 271 60 007 95 500

22 10 9 6 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20

676 868 248 908 319 197 660 445 278 991 370 351 047 271 514 505 341

12 9 4 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1

249 499 182 775 445 143 950 689 499 496 022 962 892 809 780 .. 14 596 59 988 92 400

46 351 74 000

49 330 82 000

54 366 88 500

92 484 126 400

Note: From 1994 onwards, data broken down by nationality include children acquiring French nationality as a consequence of the parents naturalisation. Data exclude people automatically acquiring French nationality upon reaching legal majority (this procedure was in effect until 1993) as well as people born in France to foreign parents who declared their intention to become French in accordance with the legislation of 22 July 1993. 1. Including categories mentioned in the note.

251

Table B3.
1985 1986

GERMANY, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Kazakhstan Russian Federation1 Former USSR Turkey Romania Poland Former Yugoslavia Italy Austria Others Total naturalisations Of which: naturalisations by discretionary decision

1 1 12 5 2 9

.. .. 146 310 153 925 815 797 911 856

1 12 7 2 10

.. .. 945 492 386 251 721 597 794 460

1 1 11 9 2 10

.. .. 111 184 557 439 364 551 755 849

4 1 10 13 2 6

.. .. 810 243 881 958 119 618 756 398

13 1 11 24 2 13

.. .. 557 713 868 882 076 548 659 223

33 2 14 32 2 16

.. .. 339 034 410 340 082 437 537 198

55 3 29 27 2 21

.. .. 620 529 011 646 832 679 793 520

84 7 37 20 2 1 25

.. .. 660 377 574 248 326 218 959 542

105 12 28 15 5 1 29

.. .. 801 915 346 435 241 154 810 741

43 19 17 11 4 1 160

.. .. 086 590 968 943 374 417 772 020

101 60 35 31 12 10 3 1

000 000 477 578 028 174 623 281 493 218 952 313 606 31 888

34 913 13 894

36 646 14 030

37 810 14 029

40 783 16 660

68 526 17 742

101 377 20 237

141 630 27 295

179 904 37 042

199 443 44 950

259 170 26 295

Note: Data by nationality include naturalisations on the basis of a claim, which concern essentially ethnic Germans. 1. Including in former USSR before 1994.

252

Table B3. JAPAN, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Republic of Korea China Other countries Total

4 595 990 182 5 767

4 759 1 066 264 6 089

5 216 1 349 229 6 794

5 665 1 818 305 7 788

7 244 1 794 325 9 363

7 697 2 244 511 10 452

8 244 2 478 424 11 146

10 327 3 184 593 14 104

Table B3.

LUXEMBOURG, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Italy France Germany Belgium Netherlands Others Total

162 126 104 105 29 236 762

113 98 84 78 31 200 604

191 106 97 79 30 245 748

123 75 54 76 11 243 582

147 75 68 86 13 220 609

151 89 78 63 18 279 678

169 71 64 75 16 344 739

209 78 70 67 15 363 802

Note: Minor children acquiring nationality as a consequence of the naturalisation of their parents are excluded.

Table B3.

NETHERLANDS, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Turkey Morocco Surinam Former Yugoslavia United Kingdom Egypt Germany1 Italy Portugal Belgium Greece Spain France Stateless Others Total
1.

1 480 1 480 1 270 290 1 850 .. 1 860 910 200 530 170 450 310 680 7 280 18 760

1 400 1 440 1 340 260 2 210 .. 2 010 1 270 190 600 130 600 330 380 7 100 19 260

820 1 190 830 110 860 .. 270 90 70 110 40 50 30 400 4 240 9 110

3 280 6 830 3 570 520 1 880 .. 670 150 220 250 90 100 100 510 10 560 28 730

1 950 3 030 1 640 240 620 20 190 50 120 100 40 40 30 270 4 450 12 790

6 110 7 300 4 010 520 900 30 380 90 140 140 60 60 50 360 8 960 29 110

11 7 5 1

520 990 120 060 670 30 380 90 110 160 80 60 70 210 8 690

18 7 4 2

000 750 990 090 490 350 330 100 130 120 90 50 60 180 8 340

23 8 5 1

870 110 390 880 460 540 310 140 140 110 80 90 70 170 8 090

33 13 3 1

060 480 990 700 820 810 500 200 190 170 150 120 110 610 15 530 71 440

36 240

43 070

49 450

Western Germany until 1989, Germany as a whole from 1990 onwards.

253

Table B3. NORWAY, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Iran Pakistan Chile Turkey Former Yugoslavia Vietnam Poland India Philippines Morocco China Colombia Sweden Republic of Korea United Kingdom Denmark Others Total

10 428 105 281 109 457 105 141 203 111 31 131 75 233 65 144 735 3 364

23 582 127 280 160 940 332 131 219 124 51 211 117 149 100 200 876 4 622

15 899 106 304 111 1 039 264 149 294 128 48 199 72 138 96 156 739 4 757

39 778 82 474 140 1 082 234 166 235 280 76 270 103 95 93 108 800 5 055

72 1 054 81 238 201 931 215 220 298 299 95 221 108 107 107 108 777 5 132

317 664 117 393 274 746 265 242 213 275 149 217 153 105 106 119 1 183 5 538

1 287 616 310 752 659 710 275 251 243 257 148 204 150 135 136 187 2 458 8 778

1 419 997 923 793 754 727 374 346 343 248 235 143 130 121 110 102 4 013 11 778

Table B3. SPAIN, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Argentina Morocco Peru Dominican Republic Portugal Colombia Chile Philippines Uruguay Venezuela Cuba France United Kingdom Others Total

586 4 939 143 .. 519 .. 325 190 .. 149 271 224 169 1 293 9 085

806 3 091 209 .. 584 .. 487 236 .. 220 285 180 131 1 535 8 137

732 2 122 154 .. 404 .. 342 192 .. 136 144 167 90 1 435 5 918

1 096 1 675 242 156 496 260 440 318 266 237 163 178 117 1 389 7 033

639 427 136 105 234 174 249 188 147 139 119 108 19 1 068 3 752

944 597 212 146 447 247 344 283 187 183 146 114 92 1 338 5 280

1 532 986 246 298 424 433 725 380 268 373 .. .. .. 2 747 8 412

1 690 897 468 393 503 383 335 340 246 211 .. .. .. 2 336 7 802

1 314 785 658 499 372 364 317 281 217 130 .. .. .. 1 814 6 751

Note: Persons recovering their former (Spanish) nationality are not included.

Table B3. SWEDEN, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Former Yugoslavia Turkey Finland Chile Poland Norway Denmark Greece Germany United Kingdom Spain Others Total

1 197 1 173 4 294 633 2 260 512 542 478 209 161 75 6 432 17 966

1 318 832 4 611 667 1 397 671 574 669 188 135 73 6 417 17 552

1 152 832 3 532 663 1 205 480 397 457 130 102 62 7 758 16 770

832 358 208 323 309 539 407 783 169 143 74 14 518 27 663

2 1 4 1 1

969 569 805 305 294 445 418 377 141 138 49 15 816 29 326

3 1 3 1 1

10 4 3 1 1

940 201 070 762 164 291 283 464 155 101 34 20 194 42 659

352 742 974 446 998 450 345 244 137 107 38 19 251 35 084

6 2 2 1

3 550 2 836 2 125 946 895 363 318 140 128 96 33 20 563 31 993

254

Table B3.

SWITZERLAND, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Italy Former Yugoslavia Turkey France Germany Spain Former CSFR Hungary United Kingdom Austria Portugal Netherlands Others Total

2 558 556 189 979 1 799 613 462 270 247 676 135 226 2 646 11 356

2 479 528 238 1 025 1 404 560 344 277 183 579 160 149 2 416 10 342

1 995 552 211 684 1 144 401 352 202 141 431 170 153 2 222 8 658

1 802 607 333 677 971 408 362 186 135 478 146 111 2 541 8 757

1 930 936 614 809 1 099 353 338 223 307 465 101 90 3 943 11 208

2 778 1 454 820 862 890 319 415 207 347 413 89 76 4 258 12 928

3 258 1 821 966 935 657 305 370 243 263 256 119 57 4 507 13 757

4 376 2 491 1 205 871 706 432 385 297 278 261 175 52 5 266 16 795

Table B3.

UNITED KINGDOM, acquisition of nationality by country or region of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

New Commonwealth Of which: Pakistan British Overseas Citizens Europe Of which: EU Old Commonwealth South Africa United States Others Total

47 400 4 3 2 1 1 1 800 000 400 000 200 800 400 8 400

87 600 500 000 100 000 500 700 700 13 500 117 100 7 5 4 2 3 2

36 800 5 4 3 1 1 2 400 100 700 400 600 600 700 7 800

34 200 .. 300 900 500 100 600 700 10 800 4 4 1 2 1 58 600

22 100 4 3 1 2 1 .. 300 800 200 500 300 900 7 300

24 400 4 4 4 1 2 1 1 8 600 200 000 100 500 400 100 200

23 500 3 4 4 1 2 1 1 7 900 200 000 200 400 200 100 600

21 800 .. 800 500 100 400 900 1 000 7 100 3 3 1 2 40 500

64 600

57 300

42 200

45 800

44 000

255

Table C1.

AUSTRALIA, immigrant population by place of birth, census results of 1971, 1981, 1986 and 1991
Thousands
1971 1981 1986 1991

Europe United Kingdom Italy Former Yugoslavia Greece Germany Netherlands Poland Malta Ireland Others Asia Vietnam China2 Philippines Malaysia Lebanon India Hong Kong Sri Lanka Others New Zealand America United States Canada Others Africa South Africa Egypt Others Other and not stated Total % of total population
1. 2. Included with the United Kingdom. Excluding Chinese Taipei.

2 196.5 1 088.2 289.5 129.8 160.2 110.8 99.3 59.7 53.7

1

2 232.7 1 132.6 275.9 149.3 146.6 110.8 96.0 59.4 57.0

1

205.3 167.2 .. 17.6 2.6 14.9 21.2 29.2 5.6 9.1 67.0 80.5 55.8 30.0 12.8 12.9 61.9 12.7 29.2 21.1 17.5 2 579.3 20.2

205.0 370.1 41.1 25.9 15.4 31.6 49.6 41.7 15.7 17.0 132.2 176.7 96.2 32.6 17.7 45.9 90.2 27.0 30.6 32.6 37.8 3 003.8 20.6

2 221.8 1 083.1 261.9 150.0 137.6 114.8 95.1 67.7 56.2 44.1 211.2 536.2 83.0 37.5 33.7 47.8 56.3 47.8 28.3 22.5 179.1 211.7 116.5 42.4 20.4 53.6 108.5 37.1 30.6 40.9 52.8 3 247.4 20.8

2 300.3 1 122.4 254.8 161.1 136.3 114.9 95.8 68.9 53.8 52.4 239.7 822.2 122.3 78.8 73.7 72.6 69.0 61.6 59.0 37.3 247.9 276.1 147.0 50.6 24.1 72.4 132.3 49.4 33.2 49.7 75.4 3 753.3 22.3

256

Table C1.

CANADA, immigrant population by place of birth, census results of 1981, 1986 and 1991
Thousands
Of which: women 1981 1986 1991 1981 1986 1991

Europe United Kingdom Italy Poland Germany Portugal Netherlands Former USSR Former Yugoslavia Greece Hungary France Nordic countries Former CSFR Others Asia India China Hong Kong Philippines Vietnam Chinese Taipei Others America United States Caribbean Jamaica Others South America Others Africa Oceania Other and not stated Total % of total population

2 567.9 879.0 384.8 148.5 189.4 139.2 138.4 128.4 91.6 89.4 64.6 53.8 70.9 41.6 148.3 536.2 109.2 52.2 58.7 66.4 50.6 54.0 145.2 582.1 301.5 173.2 78.0 95.3 90.4 16.9 101.7 33.0 22.5 3 843.3 16.1

2 435.1 793.1 366.8 156.8 189.6 139.6 134.2 109.4 87.8 85.1 61.3 53.3 62.4 42.3 153.4 692.6 130.1 119.2 77.4 82.2 82.8 7.2 193.7 623.3 282.0 193.4 87.6 105.8 113.5 34.3 114.4 34.3 8.4 3 908.0 15.4

2 364.7 717.7 351.6 184.7 180.5 161.2 129.6 99.4 88.8 83.7 57.0 55.2 55.0 42.6 157.7 1 064.8 173.7 157.4 152.5 123.3 113.6 17.8 326.6 701.4 249.1 232.5 102.4 130.1 150.6 69.3 166.2 38.0 7.8 4 342.9 16.1

1 283.8 469.3 179.6 73.5 79.1 69.0 66.0 64.8 43.4 42.4 29.9 25.7 32.9 22.2 69.4 265.3 51.9 26.8 29.1 38.2 22.4 27.7 69.2 319.3 168.2 95.4 43.9 51.5 46.4 9.3 48.5 16.6 12.4 1 945.8

1 225.4 425.8 173.0 78.0 80.9 68.6 64.1 56.3 41.7 41.0 28.6 25.9 30.3 22.2 73.1 348.0 63.5 62.6 38.7 48.1 38.5 3.8 92.8 345.6 160.8 108.2 49.5 58.7 59.0 17.5 53.9 18.0 4.8 1 995.7

1 192.3 385.6 165.5 92.8 92.8 79.8 62.4 52.0 42.4 40.5 26.9 26.9 27.6 20.0 77.2 534.8 84.8 81.5 77.3 73.2 53.8 9.4 154.7 384.4 141.4 130.4 58.6 71.8 77.9 34.7 77.1 19.9 4.5 2 212.9

257

Table C1.

UNITED STATES, immigrant population by place of birth, census results of 1970, 1980 and 1990
Thousands
1970 1980 1990

Mexico Caribbean Cuba Dominican Republic Jamaica Canada Central America South America Colombia Peru Ecuador Asia Philippines Republic of Korea Vietnam China India Japan Others Europe Germany United Kingdom Italy Former USSR Poland Portugal Greece Ireland Former Yugoslavia France Hungary Netherlands Romania Austria Former CSFR Sweden Norway Others Other and not stated Total % of total population

759.7 523.6 439.0 .. .. 812.4 55.7 255.3 .. .. .. 824.9 184.8 88.7 .. 172.2 51.0 120.3 207.9 5 712.0 833.0 708.2 1 008.7 463.5 548.1 91.0 177.3 251.9 158.7 105.4 188.3 110.6 70.7 214.0 160.9 127.1 97.2 397.5 675.7 9 619.3 4.7

2 199.2 1 258.4 607.8 169.1 196.8 842.9 353.9 561.0 143.5 .. 86.1 2 539.8 501.4 289.9 231.1 286.1 206.1 221.8 803.4 5 149.3 849.4 669.1 831.9 406.0 418.1 211.6 211.0 197.8 153.0 120.2 144.4 103.1 67.0 145.6 112.7 77.2 63.4 367.8 1 175.4 14 079.9 6.2

4 298.0 1 938.3 737.0 347.9 334.1 744.8 1 134.0 1 037.5 286.1 144.2 105.6 4 979.0 912.7 568.4 543.3 529.8 450.4 290.1 1 684.3 4 350.4 711.9 640.1 580.6 398.9 388.3 210.1 177.4 169.8 141.5 119.2 110.3 96.2 91.1 87.7 87.0 53.7 42.2 244.2 1 285.2 19 767.3 7.9

258

Table C2.
1986

AUSTRALIA, inows of permanent settlers by entry class

Thousands
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

Family Preferential1 Concessional2 Skill Employer nominations Business skills Occupational shares system3 Special talents Independent4 Humanitarian Refugees5 Special humanitarian programmes6 Special assistance7 Other visaed Special eligibility Other visaed Non-visaed New Zealand citizens Other non-visaed Total

49.8 24.2 25.6 12.6 6.3 1.6 4.6 0.0 0.1 11.8 7.8 4.0 .. 0.6 0.6 .. 17.6 15.0 2.6 92.4

60.3 28.6 31.7 22.7 8.4 3.5 9.0 0.2 1.6 11.1 6.0 5.1 .. 1.2 1.2 .. 18.0 15.7 2.2 113.3

69.6 30.1 39.4 34.8 8.2 7.2 7.1 0.2 12.1 11.1 5.3 5.8 .. 1.6 1.6 .. 26.4 24.2 2.2 143.5

59.6 31.4 28.2 43.8 8.1 10.1 8.3 0.1 17.1 10.9 3.6 7.3 .. 1.7 1.7 .. 29.4 27.2 2.1 145.3

49.9 30.0 19.9 42.8 10.1 10.0 .. 0.2 22.5 11.9 1.5 10.4 .. 1.2 1.2 .. 15.3 13.3 1.9 121.2

53.9 31.4 22.5 48.4 6.7 8.1 .. 0.1 33.5 7.7 1.3 6.5 .. 1.0 0.5 0.5 10.6 8.3 2.3 121.7

48.6 27.3 21.3 40.3 3.7 6.4 .. 0.1 30.2 7.2 2.4 4.3 0.5 1.4 0.3 1.1 9.9 8.2 1.7 107.4

32.1 23.9 8.2 22.1 2.0 3.6 .. 0.1 16.5 10.9 2.7 3.2 5.1 1.2 0.3 0.9 10.0 8.4 1.6 76.3

33.6 25.5 8.1 12.8 1.8 1.8 .. 0.1 9.2 11.4 3.8 2.6 4.9 0.7 0.3 0.4 11.3 9.6 1.7 69.8

37.1 29.1 7.9 20.2 1.9 2.1 .. 0.1 16.1 13.6 4.0 3.8 5.9 0.5 0.4 0.1 16.0 13.6 2.4 87.4

46.5 38.4 8.1 20.0 2.5 4.3 .. 0.1 13.1 13.8 4.1 3.6 6.1 0.5 0.5 .. 18.3 16.2 2.1 99.1

259

Note: Except for the family entry class, counts include both principal applicants and their accompanying dependents, if any. Data refer to scal years (July to June of the given year). 1. Preferential family provides for the sponsorship of spouses, anc es, unmarried dependent children, parents and special need relatives. This category is demand-driven and not subject to quotas. 2. Concessional family allows for the sponsorship of non-dependent children, brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews. Applicants in this category must satisfy a points test. 3. The Occupational shares system was a component of the immigration programme whereby particular occupations for which skilled people were in short supply were nominated and the number of individuals needed specied. The immigration programme then actively sought to recruit potential immigrants with these skills until the target number was achieved. 4. The category of Independents gives unsponsored people with specic skills access to the labour market. Applicants must pass a points test which links their skills to the current needs of the Australian labour market. 5. Persons meeting the conditions established by the United Nations Convention on Refugees. 6. Persons who do not strictly meet the conditions established by the United Nations Convention on Refugees. 7. Persons who do not meet the criteria for the humanitarian programmes but who nevertheless are considered by the Government to be in special need.

Table C2.
1985 1986

CANADA, inows of permanent settlers by entry class

Thousands
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Family class

38.5 6.1 10.7 7.4 5.0 1.5 .. 13.1 2.1 84.3

42.2 6.5 12.7 5.9 5.9 1.6 22.6 1.8 99.2

53.6 7.5 14.1 12.3 8.4 2.3 0.3 50.9 2.7 152.1

51.3 8.7 18.1 15.6 11.4 2.7 1.0 49.9 3.2 161.9

60.8 10.2 26.8 21.5 13.0 2.3 2.3 51.6 3.6 192.0

73.5 11.4 28.3 25.4 12.3 2.0 4.2 53.7 3.5 214.2

86.4 18.4 35.0 22.2 9.9 2.0 5.2 47.5 4.2 230.8

100.0 28.7 23.2 19.9 15.7 2.8 9.6 47.5 5.5 252.8

112.1 22.3 8.1 0.1 22.9 16.7 3.4 12.6 46.9 3.0 7.7 255.8

93.9 18.0 1.1 1.3 27.5 14.2 2.7 10.5 42.4 5.0 7.4 223.9

77.1 23.9 0.6 3.5 29.3 11.4 2.8 5.2 52.4 5.4 0.3 0.4 212.2

Humanitarian Convention refugees2 Designated class3 Other Economic classes Assisted relatives4 Entrepreneurs5 Self-employed Investors6 Independents7 Live-in-caregivers Retirees Others Total

260

Note: Except for the family entry class, counts include both principal applicants and their accompanying dependents, if any. Figures include backlog clearance. 1. Immigrants sponsored by Canadian residents (spouses, dependent children, parents and persons in their charge). 2. Persons meeting the conditions established by the United Nations Convention on Refugees. 3. Persons who do not strictly meet the conditions established by the United Nations Convention on Refugees. 4. Family members in the broad sense (primarily siblings of Canadian residents and independent children), subject as well to a selection test based on economic criteria. 5. Heads of rms employing a certain minimum number of Canadian citizens or permanent residents. 6. Immigrants who are willing and able to invest specied sums of money in risk ventures in Canada. 7. Immigrants able to pass a selection test based on economic criteria.

Table C2.
1985

UNITED STATES, inows of permanent settlers by entry class

Thousands
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

1986

Immediate relatives of US citizens Relative preferences2 Worker preferences3 IRCA legalization4 Refugees5 Diversity Programme6 Legalization dependants7 Others Total

204.4 213.3 53.4 95.0 3.9 570.0

223.5 212.9 56.6 104.4 4.3 601.7

218.6 211.8 57.5 96.5 17.1 601.5

219.3 200.8 58.7 110.7 53.5 643.0

217.5 217.1 57.7 478.8 84.3 35.5 1 090.9

231.7 214.6 58.2 880.4 97.4 54.3 1 536.5

237.1 216.1 59.5 1 123.2 139.1 52.2 1 827.2

235.5 213.1 116.2 163.3 117.0 33.9 52.3 42.6 974.0

255.1 226.8 147.0 24.3 127.3 33.5 55.3 35.0 904.3

249.8 212.0 123.3 6.0 121.4 41.1 34.1 16.8 804.4

220.4 238.1 85.3 4.3 114.7 47.2 0.3 10.2 720.5

Note: With the exception of immediate relatives of US citizens, immigrants in a class of admission include principal beneciaries, i.e. those aliens who directly qualify for the class of admission under US immigration laws, and derivative beneciaries, i.e. the spouses and unmarried children of principal immigrants. Data refer to scal years (October to September of the given year). 1. Numerically unrestricted immigrants comprising spouses, unmarried minor children, and orphans adopted by US citizens as well as parents of adult US citizens. 2. Numerically restricted relatives comprise the following four preference classes: i) Unmarried adult sons and daughters of US citizens; ii) Spouses and unmarried sons and daughters of permanent resident aliens; iii) Married sons and daughters of US citizens; iv) Brothers and sisters of adult US citizens. 3. Prior to scal year 1992, data include members of the professions or persons of exceptional ability in the sciences and arts, skilled and unskilled workers in short supply, and special immigrant visas. Data include immigrants issued employment-based preference visas from scal year 1992 on. 4. Under the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, foreigners who had been accorded temporary legal status could apply, between December 1988 and December 1990, for a permanent residence permit. 5. Refugees were admitted under various laws. The Refugee Act of 1980 now governs all refugee admissions. 6. Under the Immigration Act of 1990, a 3-year programme (1992-1994) authorized 40 000 visas annually for natives of the 34 countries determined to have been adversely affected by the 1965 immigration reform. In 1995, a permanent programme authorized 55 000 visas annually. 7. Under the Immigration Act of 1990, a 3-year programme (1992-1994) provided for a maximum of 55 000 visas annually for the spouses and children of legalized aliens.

261

Table C3.
1986

AUSTRALIA, inows of permanent settlers by country of birth

Thousands
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

New Zealand United Kingdom China Former Yugoslavia Hong Kong India Vietnam Philippines South Africa Sri Lanka Fiji Chinese Taipei United States Lebanon Former USSR Malaysia Germany Ireland Poland Portugal Others Total

13.2 14.7 3.1 1.9 3.1 2.1 7.2 4.1 3.1 1.6 1.1 0.4 1.7 2.8 0.2 2.3 1.0 1.4 1.3 1.0 24.9 92.4

13.6 20.2 2.7 2.6 3.4 2.5 6.6 6.4 4.7 2.8 1.6 0.8 1.8 2.9 0.2 3.9 1.4 2.3 1.6 1.2 30.1 113.3

20.9 24.6 3.3 3.3 5.6 3.0 6.0 10.4 3.8 2.9 3.0 1.1 2.0 4.2 0.4 6.3 1.5 2.7 1.9 1.4 35.2 143.5

23.5 23.9 3.8 2.9 7.3 3.1 8.0 9.2 3.0 2.9 2.7 2.1 2.1 2.8 1.0 7.7 1.3 4.0 1.6 1.0 31.3 145.3

11.2 23.5 3.1 2.0 8.1 3.0 11.2 6.1 2.4 2.2 2.6 3.1 1.9 2.2 1.7 6.4 1.1 2.1 1.7 1.0 24.8 121.2

7.5 20.7 3.3 1.9 13.5 5.1 13.2 6.4 2.1 3.3 2.4 3.5 1.9 2.9 0.9 5.7 0.9 1.1 1.6 0.9 22.9 121.7

7.2 14.5 3.4 2.5 12.9 5.6 9.6 5.9 1.3 2.8 2.1 3.2 1.7 1.6 2.0 3.1 0.8 0.7 1.9 0.4 24.1 107.4

6.7 9.5 3.0 4.2 6.5 3.6 5.7 3.7 1.0 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.0 2.7 1.6 0.7 0.6 1.0 0.2 18.8 76.3

7.8 9.0 2.7 4.3 3.3 2.6 5.4 4.2 1.7 1.4 1.3 0.8 1.4 1.1 1.4 1.3 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.1 18.1 69.8

10.5 10.7 3.7 6.7 4.1 3.9 5.1 4.1 2.8 2.0 1.5 0.8 1.8 1.2 2.3 1.1 0.8 0.9 0.7 0.1 22.5 87.4

12.3 11.3 11.2 7.7 4.4 3.7 3.6 3.2 3.2 2.0 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.21 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.2 25.5 99.1

262

Note: Counts include both principal applicants and their accompanying dependents, if any. Data refer to scal years (July to June of the given year). 1. Exclude the Baltic States.

Table C3.
1985

CANADA, inows of permanent settlers by region or country of origin

Thousands
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Asia and the Pacic Hong Kong India Philippines China Sri Lanka Chinese Taipei Vietnam Other Asian countries Europe Bosnia-Herzegovina United Kingdom Poland Other European countries Africa and the Middle East Lebanon Other African countries America United States El Salvador Other American countries Total

34.3 7.4 4.0 3.1 1.9 0.8 0.5 10.5 6.0 18.9 .. 4.5 3.6 10.8 9.0 1.7 7.4 22.2 6.7 2.9 12.6 84.3

35.3 5.9 6.9 4.1 1.9 1.8 0.7 6.8 7.2 22.7 .. 5.1 5.2 12.4 12.3 2.3 9.9 28.9 7.3 3.2 18.5 99.2

57.9 16.2 9.7 7.3 2.6 4.2 1.5 5.8 10.6 37.6 .. 8.5 7.0 22.0 19.8 3.4 16.4 36.9 8.0 3.5 25.4 152.1

70.0 23.3 10.4 8.3 2.8 2.4 2.2 6.3 14.3 40.7 .. 9.2 9.2 22.3 22.3 3.1 19.2 29.0 6.6 2.7 19.7 161.9

76.5 19.9 8.8 11.4 4.4 2.4 3.4 9.4 16.7 52.1 .. 8.4 16.0 27.7 31.0 6.2 24.9 32.4 6.9 2.8 22.6 192.0

89.6 29.3 10.6 12.0 8.0 3.1 3.7 9.1 13.8 51.9 .. 8.2 16.6 27.1 38.3 12.5 25.8 34.5 6.1 4.3 24.1 214.2

97.6 22.3 12.8 12.3 13.9 6.8 4.5 9.0 15.9 48.1 .. 7.5 15.7 24.8 41.6 12.0 29.7 43.5 6.6 7.0 29.9 230.8

120.9 38.9 12.7 13.3 10.4 12.6 7.5 7.7 17.9 44.9 .. 7.1 11.9 25.9 41.6 6.5 35.1 45.4 7.5 5.6 32.3 252.8

130.8 36.6 20.5 19.8 9.5 9.1 9.9 8.3 17.2 46.6 2.8 7.2 6.9 29.7 36.5 4.7 31.9 41.9 8.0 2.9 31.0 255.8

128.2 44.2 17.2 19.1 12.5 6.7 7.4 6.2 14.9 38.6 4.9 6.0 3.4 24.3 29.4 2.6 26.8 27.6 6.2 1.2 20.3 223.9

112.7 31.7 16.2 15.1 13.3 8.9 7.7 3.9 15.8 41.2 6.3 6.2 2.3 26.5 32.8 1.9 30.9 25.6 5.2 0.7 19.7 212.2

263

Note: Counts include both principal applicants and their accompanying dependents, if any. Figures include backlog clearance.

Table C3. UNITED STATES, inows of permanent settlers by region or country of birth
Thousands
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Asia Philippines Vietnam China India Republic of Korea Pakistan Chinese Taipei Iran Hong Kong Bangladesh Thailand Laos Cambodia Other Asian countries North and Central America Mexico Dominican Republic Cuba Jamaica Haiti Canada El Salvador Guatemala Honduras Nicaragua Other North or Central American countries Europe Former USSR Poland United Kingdom Germany Ireland Other European countries South America Colombia Peru Guyana Ecuador Other South American countries Africa Oceania Total

264.7 48.0 31.9 24.8 26.0 35.3 5.7 14.9 16.1 5.2 1.1 5.2 9.1 13.6 27.8 182.0 61.1 23.8 20.3 18.9 10.2 11.4 10.2 4.4 3.7 2.8 15.3 63.0 3.5 9.5 13.4 7.1 1.4 28.1 39.1 12.0 4.2 8.5 4.5 9.9 17.1 4.1 570.0

268.2 52.6 30.0 25.1 26.2 35.8 6.0 13.4 16.5 5.0 1.6 6.2 7.8 13.5 28.5 207.7 66.5 26.2 33.1 19.6 12.7 11.0 10.9 5.2 4.5 2.8 15.1 62.5 2.6 8.5 13.7 7.0 1.8 29.0 41.9 11.4 4.9 10.4 4.5 10.7 17.5 3.9 601.7

257.7 50.1 24.2 25.8 27.8 35.8 6.3 11.9 14.4 4.7 1.6 6.7 6.8 12.5 28.8 216.6 72.4 24.9 28.9 23.1 14.8 11.9 10.7 5.7 4.8 3.3 16.1 61.2 2.4 7.5 13.5 7.2 3.1 27.5 44.4 11.7 5.9 11.4 4.6 10.8 17.7 4.0 601.5

264.5 50.7 25.8 28.7 26.3 34.7 5.4 9.7 15.2 8.5 1.3 6.9 10.7 9.6 30.9 250.0 95.0 27.2 17.6 21.0 34.8 11.8 12.0 5.7 4.3 3.3 17.3 64.8 2.9 9.5 13.2 6.6 5.1 27.4 41.0 10.3 5.9 8.7 4.7 11.3 18.9 3.8 643.0

312.1 57.0 37.7 32.3 31.2 34.2 8.0 14.0 21.2 9.7 2.2 9.3 12.5 6.1 36.6 607.4 405.2 26.7 10.0 24.5 13.7 12.2 57.9 19.0 7.6 8.8 21.8 82.9 11.1 15.1 14.1 6.7 7.0 28.9 58.9 15.2 10.2 10.8 7.5 15.2 25.2 4.4 1 090.9

338.6 63.8 48.8 31.8 30.7 32.3 9.7 15.2 25.0 9.4 4.3 8.9 10.4 5.2 43.2 957.6 679.1 42.2 10.6 25.0 20.3 16.8 80.2 32.3 12.0 11.6 27.4 112.4 25.5 20.5 15.9 7.4 10.3 32.7 85.8 24.2 15.7 11.4 12.5 22.1 35.9 6.2 1 536.5

358.5 63.6 55.3 33.0 45.1 26.5 20.4 13.3 19.6 10.4 10.7 7.4 10.0 3.3 40.1 1 211.0 946.2 41.4 10.3 23.8 47.5 13.5 47.4 25.5 11.5 17.8 26.0 135.2 57.0 19.2 13.9 6.5 4.8 33.9 79.9 19.7 16.2 11.7 10.0 22.4 36.2 6.2 1 827.2

357.0 61.0 77.7 38.9 36.8 19.4 10.2 16.3 13.2 10.5 3.7 7.1 8.7 2.6 50.8 384.0 213.8 42.0 11.8 18.9 11.0 15.2 26.2 10.5 6.6 8.9 19.2 145.4 43.6 25.5 20.0 9.9 12.2 34.2 55.3 13.2 9.9 9.1 7.3 15.9 27.1 5.2 974.0

358.0 63.5 59.6 65.6 40.1 18.0 8.9 14.3 14.8 9.2 3.3 6.7 7.3 1.6 45.1 301.4 126.6 45.4 13.7 17.2 10.1 17.2 26.8 11.9 7.3 7.1 18.2 158.3 58.6 27.8 18.8 7.3 13.6 32.2 53.9 12.8 10.4 8.4 7.3 14.9 27.8 4.9 904.3

292.6 53.5 41.3 54.0 34.9 16.0 8.7 10.0 11.4 7.7 3.4 5.5 5.1 1.4 39.5 272.2 111.4 51.2 14.7 14.3 13.3 16.1 17.6 7.4 5.3 5.3 15.6 160.9 63.4 28.0 16.3 7.0 17.3 28.9 47.4 10.8 9.2 7.7 5.9 13.8 26.7 4.6 804.4

267.9 51.0 41.8 35.5 34.7 16.0 9.8 9.4 9.2 7.2 6.1 5.1 3.9 1.5 36.7 231.5 89.9 38.5 17.9 16.4 14.0 12.9 11.7 6.2 5.5 4.4 13.9 128.2 54.5 13.8 12.4 6.2 5.3 35.9 45.7 10.8 8.1 7.4 6.4 13.0 42.5 4.7 720.5

264

Note: Data refer to scal years (October to September of the given year). From 1989 to 1995 data include respectively 478 814, 880 372, 1 123 162, 163 342, 24 278, 6 022 and 4 267 immigrants who obtained a permanent residence permit following legalization under the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act.

Table C4.

AUSTRALIA, inows of temporary residents by region or country of citizenship

Thousands
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

United Kingdom and Ireland Northern Europe Southern Europe Asia (excluding Middle East) Middle East United States and Canada South and other America Africa Oceania Other and not stated Total Total women

21.4 10.0 2.6 22.9 1.1 21.8 0.7 0.6 1.4 0.1 82.5 24.5

28.6 11.1 3.4 23.1 0.9 24.5 0.8 0.6 1.1 0.1 94.3 31.4

38.2 13.8 3.4 32.2 0.9 29.2 0.9 0.6 1.4 0.1 120.9 41.5

51.2 15.8 4.4 40.9 1.2 33.2 1.1 0.6 2.7 0.2 151.4 56.6

53.6 15.6 3.4 39.5 1.2 32.8 1.0 0.6 0.9 0.4 149.0 55.5

47.0 15.5 3.9 38.0 0.9 29.5 1.0 1.0 1.7 0.4 139.0 52.4

34.9 14.4 2.7 34.9 1.0 26.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 0.6 117.8 44.0

26.5 12.7 2.9 26.1 0.9 20.8 1.1 0.9 1.2 0.1 93.2 34.8

35.7 15.9 3.3 30.6 1.1 24.1 1.4 1.9 1.1 0.1 115.2 43.2

42.1 16.9 3.0 30.4 1.1 26.1 1.0 2.2 1.4 0.2 124.4 51.3

61.7 38.0 6.7 98.4 2.6 65.3 2.2 4.8 4.8 0.9 285.51 93.3

Note: Inows of temporary residents (i.e. excluding students). Data refer to scal years (July to June of the given year). 1. Including 155 353 holders of a Temporary Business Entry (TBE) visa. This new visa was introduced on 1 November 1995.

265

Table C4. CANADA, inows of temporary workers by country of origin

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 19941

United States Philippines China Japan United Kingdom Sri Lanka Jamaica Mexico France Somalia Other countries Total
Note: Employment authorisations issued. 1. Provisional data.

47.3 17.9 12.0 6.8 10.5 .. 8.2 5.8 5.9 .. 174.8 289.2

49.1 25.0 16.3 7.9 11.1 6.3 8.8 6.8 6.6 4.1 87.5 229.5

47.3 26.4 11.7 8.8 10.0 4.3 7.5 6.6 6.3 .. 104.8 233.8

46.8 24.4 9.3 9.8 6.7 8.5 6.0 5.7 5.5 .. 107.7 230.4

46.4 17.5 11.2 9.6 8.0 7.1 6.6 5.8 5.4 3.0 65.1 185.6

45.8 10.8 9.7 9.0 7.2 6.8 6.0 5.5 5.4 2.8 63.8 172.9

266

Table C4. UNITED STATES, inows of temporary workers by country or region of citizenship
Thousands
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

North America Canada Mexico Caribbean Asia Philippines India Other Asian countries Europe United Kingdom Other European countries South America Oceania Africa Central America

31.2 11.7 5.1 14.5 12.0 3.6 .. 8.3 24.9 10.3 14.6 3.3 1.4 0.9 0.7 0.5 74.9

34.6 12.4 7.2 15.0 14.8 4.0 1.4 9.4 27.8 10.7 17.1 3.9 1.4 1.3 0.9 0.6 85.4

37.8 13.3 9.0 15.6 18.1 4.4 2.1 11.7 32.0 12.2 19.8 4.5 1.7 1.7 1.1 0.4 97.3

41.6 13.3 12.0 16.2 23.3 5.9 2.6 14.8 36.8 13.7 23.1 5.7 2.5 2.0 1.1 0.5 113.4

56.4 15.2 22.6 18.6 29.0 7.5 3.1 18.4 42.2 15.2 27.1 7.0 3.0 2.0 1.2 0.4 141.3

47.2 16.3 11.9 19.0 34.5 9.0 3.2 22.2 47.4 16.9 30.5 7.9 3.4 2.3 1.6 0.6 144.9

51.9 19.4 14.0 18.5 46.6 9.9 5.4 31.4 52.9 19.0 33.9 9.4 3.8 2.5 2.0 0.5 169.6

53.3 23.4 14.0 15.9 49.9 11.0 8.7 30.2 53.5 19.5 34.0 9.7 4.3 2.7 1.7 0.6 175.8

59.0 27.8 16.8 14.4 48.8 10.0 12.7 26.1 52.7 18.5 34.1 11.0 4.8 3.5 1.8 0.7 182.3

67.5 36.0 17.8 13.7 56.6 11.6 18.5 26.6 60.7 20.6 40.0 13.6 5.2 4.5 1.9 0.9 210.8

65.3 34.1 19.2 12.0 64.6 12.6 24.1 27.9 63.4 21.8 41.6 14.6 5.1 4.9 2.1 0.5 220.7

267

Other and not stated Total

Note: Includes trainees, excludes intracompany transferees and treaty traders/investors. Data refer to scal years (October to September of the given year). Figures may be overestimated because of multiple entries by the same person.

Table C5. AUSTRALIA, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

United Kingdom New Zealand Vietnam Former Yugoslavia China Philippines India United States Fiji Ireland Sri Lanka Italy Turkey South Africa Former USSR Malta Poland Lebanon Iran El Salvador Others Total

23 3 7 3 2 1 1

1 1 1 1 2 23

732 406 445 133 197 913 058 .. .. 685 547 .. 892 481 .. 940 670 388 .. .. 090

26 3 6 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 23

574 973 668 871 371 723 231 .. .. 025 347 .. 775 030 .. 892 475 476 .. .. 787

42 6 9 3 2 5 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 3 30

883 995 815 999 911 024 547 .. .. 650 113 .. 186 211 .. 378 774 115 .. .. 539

39 7 8 4 3 9 1 1 2 2 3 2 2 4 34

495 538 256 726 342 504 933 .. .. 921 516 .. 331 029 .. 496 227 090 .. .. 453

36 6 6 3 1 9 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 3 35

488 562 723 679 743 275 960 .. .. 520 576 .. 910 569 .. 409 901 405 .. .. 790

41 8 9 3 5 6 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 31

963 502 697 487 018 763 130 .. .. 459 003 .. 500 006 .. 954 111 585 .. .. 980

39 9 12 2 4 6 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 28

876 772 406 972 872 633 645 .. .. 980 104 .. 252 781 .. 325 069 976 .. .. 422

36 7 10 3 5 6 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 89

401 786 713 043 242 600 836 634 018 805 691 988 728 595 061 178 940 122 887 365 270

36 9 7 3 5 5 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1

134 033 772 534 971 408 107 912 204 882 730 079 468 324 329 017 707 392 895 1 077 23 782 114 757

35 11 7 5 4 4 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

431 724 741 188 250 021 638 272 815 688 644 469 307 262 239 237 160 105 870 602 22 974 111 637

76 577

81 218

119 140

127 857

118 510

125 158

122 085

181 903

268

Table C5. CANADA, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Hong Kong Poland Philippines China India United Kingdom Sri Lanka Lebanon Iran Vietnam El Salvador Jamaica United States Portugal Somalia Trinidad and Tobago Haiti Guyana Pakistan Chinese Taipei Ghana Romania France Former USSR Former Yugoslavia Nicaragua Guatemala Syria Italy Morocco Israel Republic of Korea Fiji Afghanistan Turkey Former CSFR Greece Cambodia South Africa Stateless and others Total

2 2 2 2 2 7 1 3 1 1 1 2

16

888 808 525 736 456 710 570 880 185 469 081 763 223 189 .. 762 733 527 .. .. .. .. 717 .. 559 .. .. .. 783 .. 335 524 .. .. .. 562 593 253 274 979

3 3 3 3 3 11 1 1 1 5 2 2 1 2 1 1 2

25

502 674 235 995 284 015 034 750 621 884 111 574 999 871 .. 856 338 684 .. .. .. .. 094 .. 716 .. .. .. 108 .. 590 638 .. .. .. 882 776 504 398 743

5 5 3 4 3 8 2 2 2 8 2 3 1 3 2 1 3

1 1 26

556 853 932 574 893 908 645 518 462 527 883 509 729 084 .. 683 670 803 .. .. .. .. 130 .. 931 .. .. .. 052 .. 730 694 .. .. .. 077 927 567 885 930

9 6 5 4 4 11 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 2 1 3

1 1

1 1 1

1 33

845 270 988 982 297 257 609 925 214 744 677 604 521 122 .. 608 681 249 .. .. .. .. 334 .. 035 .. .. .. 894 .. 223 077 .. .. .. 776 790 924 198 984

13 7 6 4 4 9 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 1

1 1

26

347 155 776 706 946 131 164 992 329 623 014 122 266 093 271 429 389 654 887 121 387 521 166 408 226 588 449 688 544 525 025 817 353 526 290 676 556 553 .. 488

11 11 9 7 6 10 2 6 3 3 3 3 4 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

34

717 528 388 777 306 012 848 772 229 833 140 341 334 937 567 659 692 726 469 538 451 814 383 709 704 789 904 146 561 753 365 967 382 713 385 883 649 424 .. 775

17 16 11 14 8 12 5 15 5 5 5 4 5 4 2 3 2 3 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 5 2 1 1

109 384 508 228 953 620 768 875 124 223 314 159 244 797 420 369 207 177 597 036 113 288 769 509 114 373 306 768 048 283 548 966 933 872 636 1 201 711 367 .. 41 403

14 14 12 12 11 11 10 9 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

978 011 953 878 677 173 154 802 457 426 943 258 812 464 925 785 358 354 341 738 560 489 334 181 920 779 723 565 537 428 427 426 364 277 107 825 670 261 .. 48 360

58 810

87 478

104 267

118 630

116 201

150 570

217 320

227 720

269

Table C5.

UNITED STATES, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Mexico Philippines Vietnam China India Africa Cuba Former USSR Republic of Korea United Kingdom Colombia El Salvador Jamaica Dominican Republic Chinese Taipei Haiti Poland Canada Peru Guyana Italy Portugal Others Total

22 24 21 10 9 7 11 5 13 7 5 2 6 5 5 2 4 2 2 3 2 3 62

085 580 636 509 983 122 228 304 012 042 021 291 441 842 716 350 145 947 255 535 852 236 931

18 24 19 11 9 7 9 3 11 7 4 2 6 6 5 3 5 2 2 3 2 2 62

520 802 357 664 833 209 514 020 301 865 736 001 455 454 779 692 002 922 267 654 492 698 540

17 25 22 13 11 8 10 2 10 8 5 2 6 5 6 5 5 3 2 4 2 2 84

564 936 027 563 499 770 291 847 500 286 540 410 762 984 895 009 972 644 829 306 453 491 523

22 33 29 16 12 10 9 2 12 9 5 3 6 6 10 4 5 4 3 4 1 1 88

066 714 603 783 961 230 554 822 266 935 513 653 838 368 876 436 493 441 088 826 976 848 768

12 28 18 13 13 9 7 1 8 7 6 2 6 8 6 3 4 4 2 4 1 1 64

880 579 357 488 413 628 763 648 297 800 439 056 765 464 408 993 681 067 633 717 618 884 674

23 33 22 16 16 11 15 2 9 10 9 3 7 12 7 5 5 6 3 4 3 3 78

630 864 427 851 506 293 109 763 611 158 976 057 976 274 384 202 551 662 274 938 495 978 702

39 37 26 20 20 15 15 6 11 15 12 4 12 11 9 7 6 8 4 6 5 5 102

310 304 833 828 454 327 896 708 389 003 067 998 173 399 450 982 857 782 520 066 622 997 433

67 33 28 20 17 17 16 16 14 14 12 11 10 9 9 7 7 7 5 5 3 3 104

238 634 074 009 880 020 994 172 170 143 333 505 949 892 316 855 845 598 571 533 939 901 282

242 063

233 777

270 101

308 058

240 252

314 681

407 398

445 853

270

LIST OF SOPEMI CORRESPONDENTS

Mr. A. RIZVI Mrs G. BIFFL Mr. M. POULAIN Mrs D. BOBEVA Mrs E. RUDDICK Mr. C. LANGLOIS* Mr. Y. TURCOTTE* Mrs J. MARESOVA Mrs D. ELTARD Mr. S. LARMO Mr. A. LEBON Mr. E. TERNES Mr. N. PETROPOULOS Mrs J. JUHASZ Mr. J.J. SEXTON Mrs C. COLLICELLI Mr. C. ZUCCONI Mr. T. MIYATA Mr. T. SHIOGUSHI Mr. Y. IGUCHI* Mr. M. KUNIEDA* Mr. F. DELAPORTE Mr. J.A. BUSTAMANTE Mr. P. MUUS Mr. M. HOLTER Mr. M. OKOLSKI Mrs M. do C eu CUNHA REGO Mr. D. GEORGHIU Mrs M. LUBYOVA Mr. A. IZQUIERDO ESCRIBANO
* Correspondent for the 1995 report.

Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, Canberra, Australia Austrian Economic Institute, Vienna, Austria Demographic Institute, Catholic University of Louvain, Belgium Minister of Trade and Foreign Economic Co-operation, Soa, Bulgaria Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Ottawa Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Ottawa Directorate for Immigration Policy and Programmes, Montreal, Canada Research Institute of Labour and Social Affairs, Prague, Czech Republic Arbejdsmarkedsstyrelsen, Copenhagen, Denmark Ministry of Labour, Helsinki, Finland Minist` ere de lAm enagement du territoire, de la Ville et de lInt egration, Paris, France Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, Berlin, Germany Pedagogical Institute of Greece, Athens, Greece Hungarian Central Statistical Ofce, Budapest, Hungary The Economic and Social Research Institute, Dublin, Ireland CENSIS, Rome, Italy CENSIS, Rome, Italy Ministry of Labour, Tokyo, Japan Ministry of Justice, Tokyo, Japan Ministry of Labour, Tokyo, Japan Ministry of Justice, Tokyo, Japan Commissaire du gouvernement aux e trangers, Luxembourg El Colegio de la Frontera Norte, Tijuana, Mexico ERCOMER, University of Utrecht, Netherlands Royal Ministry of Local Government and Labour, Department of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs, Oslo, Norway University of Warsaw, Faculty of Economics, Poland Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Lisbon, Portugal National Commission for Statistics, Bucharest, Romania Slovak Academy of Sciences, Institute of Forecasting, Bratislava, Slovak Republic Faculty of Political Sciences and Sociology, Madrid, Spain

271

Mrs B. ORNBRANT Mr. B. CLERC Mr. A. GOKDERE Mr. J. SALT Mr. R. KRAMER

Ministry of Culture, Stockholm, Sweden Federal Ofce for Industrie, Arts, Trades and Labour, Berne, Switzerland University of Ankara, Turkey University College London, Department of Geography, London, United Kingdom US Department of Labor, Bureau for International Labor Affairs, Washington, United States

272

MAIN SALES OUTLETS OF OECD PUBLICATIONS PRINCIPAUX POINTS DE VENTE DES PUBLICATIONS DE LOCDE
AUSTRALIA AUSTRALIE
D.A. Information Services 648 Whitehorse Road, P.O.B 163 Mitcham, Victoria 3132 Tel. (03) 9210.7777 Fax: (03) 9210.7788

FINLAND FINLANDE
Akateeminen Kirjakauppa Keskuskatu 1, P.O. Box 128 00100 Helsinki Subscription Services/Agence dabonnements : P.O. Box 23 00100 Helsinki Tel. (358) 9.121.4403 Fax: (358) 9.121.4450

` GREECE GR ECE
Librairie Kauffmann Stadiou 28 10564 Athens Tel. (01) 32.55.321 Fax: (01) 32.30.320

AUSTRIA AUTRICHE
Gerold & Co. Graben 31 Wien I Tel. (0222) 533.50.14 Fax: (0222) 512.47.31.29

HONG-KONG
Swindon Book Co. Ltd. Astoria Bldg. 3F 34 Ashley Road, Tsimshatsui Kowloon, Hong Kong

*FRANCE
OECD/OCDE Mail Orders/Commandes par correspondance : 2, rue Andr e-Pascal 75775 Paris Cedex 16 Tel. 33 (0)1.45.24.82.00 Fax: 33 (0)1.49.10.42.76 Telex: 640048 OCDE Internet: Compte.PUBSINQ@oecd.org Orders via Minitel, France only/ Commandes par Minitel, France exclusivement : 36 15 OCDE

Tel. 2376.2062 Fax: 2376.0685

BELGIUM BELGIQUE
Jean De Lannoy Avenue du Roi, Koningslaan 202 B-1060 Bruxelles Tel. (02) 538.51.69/538.08.41 Fax: (02) 538.08.41

HUNGARY HONGRIE
Tel. (1) 111.60.61 Fax: (1) 302.50.35 E-mail: euroinfo@mail.matav.hu Internet: http://www.euroinfo.hu//index.html Euro Info Service Margitsziget, Eur opa H az 1138 Budapest

CANADA
Renouf Publishing Company Ltd. 5369 Canotek Road Unit 1 Ottawa, Ont. K1J 9J3 Tel. (613) Fax: (613) Stores: 71 1/2 Sparks Street Ottawa, Ont. K1P 5R1 Tel. (613) Fax: (613) 12 Adelaide Street West Toronto, QN M5H 1L6 Tel. (416) Fax: (416) Les Editions La Libert e Inc. 3020 Chemin Sainte-Foy Sainte-Foy, PQ G1X 3V6 Tel. (418) Fax: (418) Federal Publications Inc. 165 University Avenue, Suite 701 Toronto, ON M5H 3B8 Tel. (416) Fax: (416) Les Publications F ed erales 1185 Universit e Montr eal, QC H3B 3A7 Tel. (514) Fax: (514)

745.2665 745.7660

OECD Bookshop/Librairie de lOCDE : 33, rue Octave-Feuillet 75016 Paris Tel. 33 (0)1.45.24.81.81 33 (0)1.45.24.81.67 Dawson B.P. 40 91121 Palaiseau Cedex Documentation Fran caise 29, quai Voltaire 75007 Paris Economica 49, rue H ericart 75015 Paris

ICELAND ISLANDE
M al og Menning Laugavegi 18, P osth olf 392 121 Reykjavik Tel. (1) 552.4240 Fax: (1) 562.3523

238.8985 238.6041 363.3171 363.5963

Tel. 01.89.10.47.00 Fax: 01.64.54.83.26

INDIA INDE
Oxford Book and Stationery Co. Scindia House New Delhi 110001 Tel. (11) 331.5896/5308 Fax: (11) 332.2639 E-mail: oxford.publ@axcess.net.in 17 Park Street Calcutta 700016 Tel. 240832

Tel. 01.40.15.70.00

658.3763 658.3763

Tel. 01.45.78.12.92 Fax: 01.45.75.05.67

860.1611 860.1608

Gibert Jeune (Droit-Economie) 6, place Saint-Michel 75006 Paris Tel. 01.43.25.91.19 Librairie du Commerce International 10, avenue dI ena 75016 Paris Tel. 01.40.73.34.60 Librairie Dunod Universit e Paris-Dauphine Place du Mar echal-de-Lattre-de-Tassigny 75016 Paris Tel. 01.44.05.40.13 Librairie Lavoisier 11, rue Lavoisier 75008 Paris

INDONESIA INDON ESIE

Pdii-Lipi P.O. Box 4298 Jakarta 12042 Tel. (21) 573.34.67 Fax: (21) 573.34.67

954.1633 954.1635

IRELAND IRLANDE
Government Supplies Agency Publications Section 4/5 Harcourt Road Dublin 2

CHINA CHINE
Book Dept., China National Publications Import and Export Corporation (CNPIEC) 16 Gongti E. Road, Chaoyang District Beijing 100020 Tel. (10) 6506-6688 Ext. 8402 (10) 6506-3101

Tel. 661.31.11 Fax: 475.27.60

CHINESE TAIPEI TAIPEI CHINOIS

Good Faith Worldwide Intl. Co. Ltd. 9th Floor, No. 118, Sec. 2 Chung Hsiao E. Road Taipei Tel. (02) 391.7396/391.7397 Fax: (02) 394.9176

Tel. 01.42.65.39.95

ISRAEL ISRA EL
Praedicta 5 Shatner Street P.O. Box 34030 Jerusalem 91430 R.O.Y. International P.O. Box 13056 Tel Aviv 61130

Librairie des Sciences Politiques 30, rue Saint-Guillaume 75007 Paris Tel. 01.45.48.36.02 P.U.F. 49, boulevard Saint-Michel 75005 Paris Librairie de lUniversit e 12a, rue Nazareth 13100 Aix-en-Provence Documentation Fran caise 165, rue Garibaldi 69003 Lyon Librairie Decitre 29, place Bellecour 69002 Lyon Librairie Sauramps Le Triangle 34967 Montpellier Cedex 2 A la Sorbonne Actual 23, rue de lH otel-des-Postes 06000 Nice

Tel. (2) 652.84.90/1/2 Fax: (2) 652.84.93

Tel. 01.43.25.83.40

CZECH REPUBLIC ` REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE

National Information Centre NIS prodejna Konviktsk a5 Praha 1 113 57 Tel. (02) 24.23.09.07 Fax: (02) 24.22.94.33 E-mail: nkposp@dec.niz.cz Internet: http://www.nis.cz

Tel. 04.42.26.18.08

Tel. 04.78.63.32.23

Tel. (3) 546 1423 Fax: (3) 546 1442 E-mail: royil@netvision.net.il Palestinian Authority/Middle East: INDEX Information Services P.O.B. 19502 Jerusalem Tel. (2) 627.16.34 Fax: (2) 627.12.19

DENMARK DANEMARK
Munksgaard Book and Subscription Service 35, Nrre Sgade, P.O. Box 2148 DK-1016 Kbenhavn K Tel. (33) 12.85.70 Fax: (33) 12.93.87 J. H. Schultz Information A/S, Herstedvang 12, DK 2620 Albertslung Tel. 43 63 23 00 Fax: 43 63 19 69 Internet: s-info@inet.uni-c.dk

Tel. 04.72.40.54.54

ITALY ITALIE
Libreria Commissionaria Sansoni Via Duca di Calabria, 1/1 50125 Firenze Tel. (055) 64.54.15 Fax: (055) 64.12.57 E-mail: licosa@ftbcc.it Via Bartolini 29 20155 Milano Tel. (02) 36.50.83 Editrice e Libreria Herder Piazza Montecitorio 120 00186 Roma Tel. 679.46.28 Fax: 678.47.51 Libreria Hoepli Via Hoepli 5 20121 Milano Tel. (02) 86.54.46 Fax: (02) 805.28.86

Tel. 04.67.58.85.15 Fax: 04.67.58.27.36

Tel. 04.93.13.77.75 Fax: 04.93.80.75.69

EGYPT EGYPTE
The Middle East Observer 41 Sherif Street Cairo Tel. (2) 392.6919 Fax: (2) 360.6804

GERMANY ALLEMAGNE
OECD Bonn Centre August-Bebel-Allee 6 D-53175 Bonn Tel. (0228) 959.120 Fax: (0228) 959.12.17

Libreria Scientica Dott. Lucio de Biasio Aeiou Via Coronelli, 6 20146 Milano Tel. (02) 48.95.45.52 Fax: (02) 48.95.45.48

PORTUGAL
Livraria Portugal Rua do Carmo 70-74 Apart. 2681 1200 Lisboa

Tel. (01) 347.49.82/5 Fax: (01) 347.02.64

JAPAN JAPON
OECD Tokyo Centre Landic Akasaka Building 2-3-4 Akasaka, Minato-ku Tokyo 107

SINGAPORE SINGAPOUR
Tel. (81.3) 3586.2016 Fax: (81.3) 3584.7929 Ashgate Publishing Asia Pacic Pte. Ltd Golden Wheel Building, 04-03 41, Kallang Pudding Road Singapore 349316

Subscription Agency/Agence dabonnements : Dynapresse Marketing S.A. 38, avenue Vibert 1227 Carouge Tel. (022) 308.08.70 Fax: (022) 308.07.99 See also Voir aussi : OECD Bonn Centre August-Bebel-Allee 6 D-53175 Bonn (Germany) Tel. (0228) 959.120 Fax: (0228) 959.12.17

THAILAND THA ILANDE

Tel. 741.5166 Fax: 742.9356 Suksit Siam Co. Ltd. 113, 115 Fuang Nakhon Rd. Opp. Wat Rajbopith Bangkok 10200 Tel. (662) 225.9531/2 Fax: (662) 222.5188

KOREA COR EE
Kyobo Book Centre Co. Ltd. P.O. Box 1658, Kwang Hwa Moon Seoul Tel. 730.78.91 Fax: 735.00.30

SPAIN ESPAGNE
Mundi-Prensa Libros S.A. Castell o 37, Apartado 1223 Madrid 28001 Tel. (91) 431.33.99 Fax: (91) 575.39.98

MALAYSIA MALAISIE
University of Malaya Bookshop University of Malaya P.O. Box 1127, Jalan Pantai Baru 59700 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Tel. 756.5000/756.5425 Fax: 756.3246

TRINIDAD & TOBAGO, CARIBBEAN BES TRINITE-ET-TOBAGO, CARAI

Systematics Studies Limited 9 Watts Street Curepe Trinidad & Tobago, W.I. Tel. (1809) 645.3475 Fax: (1809) 662.5654 E-mail: tobe@trinidad.net

MEXICO MEXIQUE
OECD Mexico Centre Edicio INFOTEC Av. San Fernando no. 37 Col. Toriello Guerra Tlalpan C.P. 14050 Mexico D.F. E-mail: ocde@rtn.net.mx

Tel. (525) 528.10.38 Fax: (525) 606.13.07

E-mail: mundiprensa@tsai.es Internet: http://www.mundiprensa.es Mundi-Prensa Barcelona Consell de Cent No. 391 08009 Barcelona Tel. (93) Fax: (93) Libreria de la Generalitat Palau Moja Rambla dels Estudis, 118 08002 Barcelona (Suscripciones) Tel. (93) (Publicaciones) Tel. (93) Fax: (93)

488.34.92 487.76.59

TUNISIA TUNISIE
Grande Librairie Sp ecialis ee Fendri Ali Avenue Haffouz Imm El-Intilaka Bloc B 1 Sfax 3000 Tel. (216-4) 296 855 Fax: (216-4) 298.270

318.80.12 302.67.23 412.18.54

TURKEY TURQUIE
K ult ur Yayinlari Is-T urk Ltd. Atat urk Bulvari No. 191/Kat 13 06684 Kavaklidere/Ankara Tel. (312) 428.11.40 Ext. 2458 Fax : (312) 417.24.90 Dolmabahce Cad. No. 29 Besiktas/Istanbul Tel. (212) 260 7188

NETHERLANDS PAYS-BAS
SDU Uitgeverij Plantijnstraat Externe Fondsen Postbus 20014 2500 EAs-Gravenhage Tel. (070) 37.89.880 Voor bestellingen: Fax: (070) 34.75.778 Subscription Agency/ Agence dabonnements : SWETS & ZEITLINGER BV Heereweg 347B P.O. Box 830 2160 SZ Lisse Tel. 252.435.111 Fax: 252.415.888

SRI LANKA
Centre for Policy Research c/o Colombo Agencies Ltd. No. 300-304, Galle Road Colombo 3 Tel. (1) 574240, 573551-2 Fax: (1) 575394, 510711

` SWEDEN SU EDE
Tel. (08) 690.90.90 Fax: (08) 20.50.21 For electronic publications only/ Publications e lectroniques seulement STATISTICS SWEDEN Informationsservice S-115 81 Stockholm Tel. 8 783 5066 Fax: 8 783 4045 Subscription Agency/Agence dabonnements : Wennergren-Williams Info AB P.O. Box 1305 171 25 Solna Tel. (08) 705.97.50 Fax: (08) 27.00.71 Liber distribution Internatinal organizations Fagerstagatan 21 S-163 52 Spanga CE Fritzes AB S106 47 Stockholm

UNITED KINGDOM ROYAUME-UNI

The Stationery Ofce Ltd. Postal orders only: P.O. Box 276, London SW8 5DT Gen. enquiries Tel. (171) 873 0011 Fax: (171) 873 8463 The Stationery Ofce Ltd. Postal orders only: 49 High Holborn, London WC1V 6HB Branches at: Belfast, Birmingham, Bristol, Edinburgh, Manchester

NEW ZEALAND NOUVELLE-ZELANDE

GPLegislation Services P.O. Box 12418 Thorndon, Wellington Tel. (04) 496.5655 Fax: (04) 496.5698

` NORWAY NORV EGE

NIC INFO A/S Ostensjoveien 18 P.O. Box 6512 Etterstad 0606 Oslo

UNITED STATES ETATS-UNIS

OECD Washington Center 2001 L Street N.W., Suite 650 Washington, D.C. 20036-4922 Tel. (202) 785.6323 Fax: (202) 785.0350 Internet: washcont@oecd.org

Tel. (22) 97.45.00 Fax: (22) 97.45.45

PAKISTAN
Mirza Book Agency 65 Shahrah Quaid-E-Azam Lahore 54000

SWITZERLAND SUISSE
Tel. (42) 735.36.01 Fax: (42) 576.37.14 Maditec S.A. (Books and Periodicals/Livres et p eriodiques) Chemin des Palettes 4 Case postale 266 1020 Renens VD 1 Tel. (021) 635.08.65 Fax: (021) 635.07.80 Librairie Payot S.A. 4, place P epinet CP 3212 1002 Lausanne Tel. (021) 320.25.11 Fax: (021) 320.25.14 Librairie Unilivres 6, rue de Candolle 1205 Gen` eve Tel. (022) 320.26.23 Fax: (022) 329.73.18

Subscriptions to OECD periodicals may also be placed through main subscription agencies. Les abonnements aux publications p eriodiques de lOCDE peuvent e tre souscrits aupr e ` s des principales agences dabonnement. Orders and inquiries from countries where Distributors have not yet been appointed should be sent to: OECD Publications, 2, rue Andr e-Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, France. Les commandes provenant de pays o` u lOCDE na pas encore d esign e de distributeur peuvent e tre adress ees aux Editions de lOCDE, 2, rue Andr ePascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, France. 12-1996

PHILIPPINE PHILIPPINES
International Booksource Center Inc. Rm 179/920 Cityland 10 Condo Tower 2 HV dela Costa Ext cor Valero St. Makati Metro Manila Tel. (632) 817 9676 Fax: (632) 817 1741

POLAND POLOGNE
Ars Polona 00-950 Warszawa Krakowskie Prezdmiescie 7 Tel. (22) 264760 Fax: (22) 265334

OECD PUBLICATIONS, 2, rue Andre-Pascal, 75775 PARIS CEDEX 16 PRINTED IN FRANCE (81 97 02 1 P) ISBN 92-64-15508-2 No. 48829 1997