OECD 1999 Trends in International Migration

O R G A N I S A T I O N
F O R
E C O N O M I C
C O - O P E R A T I O N
A N D
D E V E L O P M E N T
INTERNATIONAL
OECD
1999 EDITION SOPEMI
TRENDS IN
MIGRATION
OECD, 1999. Software: 1987-1996, Acrobat is a trademark of ADOBE. All rights reserved. OECD grants you the right to use one copy of this Program for your personal use only. Unauthorised reproduction, lending, hiring, transmission or distribution of any data or software is prohibited. You must treat the Program and associated materials and any elements thereof like any other copyrighted material. All requests should be made to: Head of Publications Service, OECD Publications Service, 2, rue Andr e-Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, France.
SOPEMI
TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

Continuous Reporting System on Migration
ANNUAL REPORT
1999 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 Korea (12th December 1996). The Commission of the European Communities takes part in the work of the OECD (Article 13 of the OECD Convention).
OECD CENTRE FOR CO-OPERATION WITH NON-MEMBERS

The OECD Centre for Co-operation with Non-Members (CCNM) was established in January 1998 when the OECDs Centre for Co-operation with the Economies in Transition (CCET) was merged with the Liaison and Coordination Unit (LCU). The CCNM, in combining the functions of these two entities, serves as the focal point for the development and pursuit of co-operation between the OECD and non-member economies. The CCNM manages thematic and country programmes. The thematic programmes, which are multi-country in focus, are linked to the core generic work areas of the Organisation (such as trade and investment, taxation, labour market and social policies, environment). The Emerging Market Economy Forum (EMEF) and the Transition Economy Programme (TEP) provide the framework for activities under the thematic programmes. The EMEF is a exible forum in which non-members are invited to participate depending on the theme under discussion. The TEP is focused exclusively on transition economies. Regional/Country programmes, providing more focused dialogue and assistance, are now in place for the Baltic countries, Brazil, Bulgaria, China, Romania, Russia, the Slovak Republic (a candidate for accession to the OECD), and Slovenia.
Publi e en fran cais sous le titre : TENDANCES DES MIGRATIONS INTERNATIONALES

RAPPORT ANNUEL
OECD 1999 Permission to reproduce a portion of this work for non-commercial purposes or classroom use should be obtained through the Centre fran cais dexploitation du droit de copie (CFC), 20, rue des Grands-Augustins, 75006 Paris, France, Tel. (33-1) 44 07 47 70, Fax (33-1) 46 34 67 19, for every country except the United States. In the United States permission should be obtained through the Copyright Clearance Center, Customer Service, (508)750-8400, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 USA, or CCC Online: http://www.copyright.com/. 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
This twenty-fourth annual report of the OECD Continuous Reporting System on Migration (known under its French acronym SOPEMI), published as Trends in International Migration, draws in large part on thirty written contributions from national correspondents (listed p. 327), and on the summary of their discussions at their last annual meeting (December 1998). Following Denmark, Ireland and Mexico in 1994, the Slovak Republic joined the SOPEMI network in 1995 and Korea in 1998. The 1999 Edition is divided into three parts complemented by a Statistical Annex. Part I describes the overall trends in international migration. It focuses on the magnitude, the nature and the direction of flows. 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 and in the various sectors of economic activity. This section is completed by an overview of migration policies, in particular those relating to the control of flows, the integration of immigrants in host countries and international co-operation. Part II is composed of country notes describing recent developments in migration flows and policies in twenty-seven OECD countries (New Zealand and Iceland are not covered) and three non-member countries (Bulgaria, the Slovak Republic and Romania). A note on the Baltic States is presented for the first time. Part III analyses the economic and political issues surrounding clandestine immigration in OECD countries. The different situations of irregularity are described as well as the methods of measuring their extent, most often partial or indirect. This part also considers the impact of illegal immigration on the labour market, the attempts to curb illegal immigration and the sanctions imposed on employers. The statistical annex presents the most recent available data on foreign and immigrant populations, foreign workers, migration flows and naturalisations. This volume is published on the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD.
OECD 1999
TABLE OF CONTENTS
GENERAL INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Part I MAIN TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION A. MIGRATION, POPULATION AND THE LABOUR MARKET. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Trends in migration movements and changes in the foreign population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Immigration and population growth in OECD countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Immigrants and the labour market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN ASIA AND CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Migration flows of Asian origin to OECD countries and the impact of the financial crisis in Asia on migration movements between Asian countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Recent migration trends in Central and Eastern Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. AN OVERVIEW OF MIGRATION POLICIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Policies for regulating and controlling flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Policies aimed at integrating immigrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Migration and international co-operation to promote economic development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Part II RECENT CHANGES IN MIGRATION MOVEMENTS AND POLICIES (COUNTRY NOTES) Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Austria. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Baltic States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Belgium. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bulgaria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Czech Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Greece . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ireland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 97 103 108 114 117 124 127 131 134 141 147 151 155 159 163 Korea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Luxembourg. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Poland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Romania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Slovak Republic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sweden. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Turkey. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 172 175 178 183 187 191 196 200 204 207 210 213 216 222 17 17 24 41 46 47 60 64 64 77 85 13
Part III CLANDESTINE IMMIGRATION: ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL ISSUES Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. ILLEGAL MIGRATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Illegal migration: a multi-faceted concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Measurement methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. THE ECONOMIC IMPACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. The behaviour of labour supply and demand. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229 229 229 231 235 236
5
OECD 1999
Trends in International Migration
2. Undocumented migrant workers and the hidden economy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Impact on the labour market. Empirical results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. The macroeconomic impact, distribution and taxation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. COMBATING CLANDESTINE IMMIGRATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Frontier control and controlling the length of stay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Employment controls and penalties against employers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Policies designed to reduce the propensity to emigrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . STATISTICAL ANNEX A. SOURCES AND COMPARABILITY OF MIGRATION STATISTICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Sources of migration statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Measurement of migration flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Stocks of migrants and characteristics of the immigrant population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. STATISTICAL SERIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF SOPEMI CORRESPONDENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
237 237 238 241 241 243 245 246
253 253 254 257 257 327
OECD 1999
Table of contents
LIST OF FIGURES 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. Tables I.1. I.2. I.3. I.4. I.5. I.6. I.7A. I.7B. I.8. I.9A. I.9B. I.10. Entries of temporary workers in certain OECD countries by principal categories, 1992, 1996-1997 . . . . . . . . . . . Conditions for the recruitment and residence of the categories of temporary foreign workers mentioned in Table I.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Distribution of the worlds population by principal region in 1999 and the projected distribution in 2025 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Youthfulness indicator by principal regions in 1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foreign or foreign-born population and labour force in selected OECD countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maghrebian, Turkish and former Yugoslavian residents in selected European OECD countries, total population and labour force, 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stock of Asian nationals in selected OECD countries in 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stock of immigrants born in an Asian country in Australia, Canada and the United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unemployment rates in some Asian countries, 1997 and 1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foreign residents who are nationals of central and eastern European countries in selected European OECD countries, latest available year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Immigrants born in central and eastern European countries residing in selected OECD countries, latest available year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Main regularisation programmes of immigrants in an irregular situation in selected OECD countries, by nationality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Part II RECENT CHANGES IN MIGRATION MOVEMENTS AND POLICIES (COUNTRY NOTES) Charts II.1. II.2. II.3. II.4. II.5. Flows of permanent and long-term residents, Australia. Fiscal years 1982/83-1997/98 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Components of population change, 1983-1997, Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stocks of foreigners holding a work permit in Austria, 1980-1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Migratory flows in the Baltic States, 1989-1997. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Components of foreign and Belgian populations change, 1983-1997, Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 99 100 104 109 25 26 35 36 38 40 48 48 51 61 61 76 Inflows of foreigners in some OECD countries, 1980-1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Immigration flows into selected OECD countries by main categories in 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inflows of migrants by country of origin to selected OECD countries, latest available year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inflows of asylum seekers as a proportion of the foreign population (or born abroad) at the beginning of the year, 1984-90, 1991-97, 1998. Top ten host countries for asylum applicants in 1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Components of total population growth in the European Union and in selected OECD countries, 1960-1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Natural increase in total population and net migration in OECD countries, 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Share of foreign births in total births relative to the share of foreigners in the total population in selected OECD countries, 1980 and 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foreigners in total population and labour force and European Union citizens in total foreign population and labour force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Participation rate and unemployment rate by sex, place of birth and nationality in some OECD countries, 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Changes in employment of foreigners and in total employment during economic recoveries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Share of foreigners or the foreign-born in total unemployment relative to their share in the labour force in 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Naturalisation rate in some OECD countries, 10-year average (1988-1997) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Share of mixed marriages in total marriages in some OECD countries, last available year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 20 21 23 29 32 33 39 43 45 46 81 82
OECD 1999
II.6. II.7. II.8. II.9. II.10. II.11. II.12. II.13. II.14. 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. 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.
8
Inflows of permanent settlers by entry class and region of origin, Canada, 1980-1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Migration flows of foreigners, 1960-1997, Germany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Components of German population change, 1970-1997. National and foreigners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Change in employment and unemployment in Germany, 1981-1998, total population and foreigners . . . . . . . Trends and characteristics of migration, Ireland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Migration flows and components of foreign population change, 1980-1997, Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Permanent migratory flows in Poland, 1960-1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Demographic characteristics of permanent emigrants, 1990-1997, Romania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Immigration flows to the United Kingdom, 1987-1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
118 142 143 146 156 179 188 197 217
II.41.
Permanent and temporary migration programme outcomes, 1995-1998 and 1999 planning levels for permanent settlers, by category, Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Australias labour force by birthplace, August 1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on the components of total population change, on migratory flows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Austria. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bosnians in employment in Austria by type of permits, 1995-1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . National composition of population in the Baltic States based on the declared ethnic origin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on the components of total population change, on migratory flows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Employment and unemployment in Belgium by nationality and sex, 1995-1997. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Immigrant landings by type, 1994-1997, Canada. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Immigrant landings by type, 1993 and 1997, Canada. Top ten countries of origin in 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on migratory flows and stocks of migrants in Czech Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on migratory flows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Denmark . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on migratory flows and stocks of total and foreign populations in Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on migratory flows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foreign pupils attending public and private schools in France, 1994/95, 1996/97 and 1997/98 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on the components of total population change, on migratory flows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Germany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Residence permits issued to foreigners, by country of origin, 1994-1997, Greece. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on migratory flows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on migratory flows and stocks of total population and labour force in Ireland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on foreign population in Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Regularisation requests of immigrants in an illegal situation, three last regularisation programmes, by region of residence, Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on migratory flows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inflows of foreigners by main categories and nationality, 1997, Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stock of foreign population in Korea by nationality, 1988, 1990, 1995-1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foreign workers in Korea by category, 1995-1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on the components of total population change, on migratory flows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Luxembourg. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mexican emigration to the United States, 1911-1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Socio-economic characteristics of undocumented Mexican immigrants to the United States, 1988, 1990, 1996-1998. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on migratory flows and stocks of total population and labour force in the Netherlands . . . . . . Foreign-born population by birthplace, 1 January 1998, Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on migratory flows and stocks of foreign population in Norway. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Permanent immigration and emigration, 1994-1997, Poland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on migratory flows and stocks of total population and labour force in Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . Regularisation programmes of immigrants in an illegal situation by country of origin, 1992-1993 and 1996, Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current migration figures in Romania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current migration figures, Slovak Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bilateral agreements on the employment of foreigners concluded by the Slovak Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on migratory flows and stocks of total population and labour force in Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on migratory flows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on the components of total population change, on migratory flows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Turkish workers sent abroad by the National Employment and Placement Office, by country or region of destination, 1994-1997, Turkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current figures on migratory flows and stocks of total population and labour force in the United Kingdom . .
95 97 98 101 105 110 111 119 120 125 128 132 135 139 144 148 152 158 160 163 164 167 169 170 173 176 177 180 181 184 189 192 195 199 201 203 205 208 211 215 219
OECD 1999
Table of contents
II.42. II.43.
Employment-based immigration, by preference, fiscal years 1994-1997, United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Non-immigrants admitted by class of admission, fiscal years 1994-1996, United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Part III CLANDESTINE IMMIGRATION: ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL ISSUES
224 226
Chart III.1. Tables III.1. III.2. Typology of the methods used to estimate clandestinity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tested or concieved methods to estimate clandestinity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234 235 Presentation of the various situations in which foreign migrants can find themselves. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
OECD 1999
STATISTICAL ANNEX 1. Summary table on the sources of migration statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. A.1. A.1.1. A.1.2. A.1.3. A.1.4. A.1.5. A.1.6. A.1.7. A.2. Cross national tables 255
Foreign and/or foreign-born population: stocks and flows Inflows of foreign population into selected OECD countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Outflows of foreign population from selected OECD countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Net migration of foreign population in selected OECD countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inflows of asylum seekers into selected OECD countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stocks of foreign-born population in selected OECD countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stocks of foreign population in selected OECD countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Acquisition of nationality in selected OECD countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foreign or foreign-born labour force: stocks and flows 266 266 267 262 262 262 263 263 264 265
A.2.1. Inflows of foreign workers into selected OECD countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.2.2. Inflows of seasonal workers in selected OECD countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.2.3. Stocks of foreign and foreign-born labour force in selected OECD countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. B.1. Tables by country of origin and by category of migrant
Foreign and/or foreign-born population: stocks and flows
B.1.1. Inflows of foreign population by nationality B.1.1. B.1.1. B.1.1. B.1.1. B.1.1. B.1.1. B.1.1. B.1.1. Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hungary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268 268 269 269 270 270 271 271 B.1.1. B.1.1. B.1.1. B.1.1. B.1.1. B.1.1. B.1.1. B.1.1. Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Switzerland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272 272 272 273 273 274 274 275
B.1.2. Outflows of foreign population by nationality B.1.2. B.1.2. B.1.2. B.1.2. B.1.2. Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 276 276 277 277 B.1.2. B.1.2. B.1.2. B.1.2. B.1.2. Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Switzerland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277 278 278 279 279
B.1.3. Net migration of foreign population by nationality B.1.3. B.1.3. B.1.3. B.1.3. B.1.3. Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 280 280 281 281 B.1.3. B.1.3. B.1.3. B.1.3. B.1.3. Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Switzerland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282 282 282 283 283
B.1.4. Inflows of asylum seekers by nationality B.1.4. B.1.4. B.1.4. B.1.4. France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283 284 284 285 B.1.4. Switzerland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B.1.4. United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B.1.4. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 285 286
B.1.5. Stock of foreign-born population by country of birth

10
B.1.5. Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B.1.5. Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
286 287
B.1.5. Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B.1.5. Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
287 288
OECD 1999
Table of contents
B.1.5. Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B.1.5. Sweden. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B.1.6. Stock of foreign population by nationality B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Czech Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Denmark. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . France. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Germany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Japan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Korea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
288 289
B.1.5. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
289
290 290 291 291 292 292 293 293 294 294
B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6.
Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
295 295 296 296 297 297 298 298 299
B.1.7. Acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality B.1.7. B.1.7. B.1.7. B.1.7. B.1.7. B.1.7. B.1.7. B.1.7. B.1.7. B.1.7. B.2. Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Denmark. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . France. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Germany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 300 300 300 301 301 302 302 303 303 B.1.7. B.1.7. B.1.7. B.1.7. B.1.7. B.1.7. B.1.7. B.1.7. B.1.7. Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303 304 304 304 305 305 305 306 306
Foreign or foreign-born labour force: stocks and flows
B.2.1. Foreign-born labour force by place of birth B.2.1. Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B.2.1. Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B.2.2. Stock of foreign labour by nationality B.2.2. B.2.2. B.2.2. B.2.2. B.2.2. B.2.2. B.2.2. B.2.2. Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Denmark. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . France. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Germany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Japan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308 309 309 309 310 310 310 311 B.2.2. B.2.2. B.2.2. B.2.2. B.2.2. B.2.2. B.2.2. B.2.2. Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311 311 312 312 313 313 314 315 316 307 307 B.2.1. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308
Notes related to the Statistical Annex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11
OECD 1999
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
In 1997, immigration increased in many OECD countries
Over the course of the 1980s and above all at the beginning of the 1990s, migration movements accelerated in many OECD countries. This trend reached its peak in 1993, notably in major immigration countries such as Germany, the United States and Canada. Certain countries (France, Switzerland, Australia and the United Kingdom) even went on to experience significant reductions in legal inflows and asylum applications. Since 1997, the beginnings of a reversal in trend have been perceptible. Immigration flows have increased notably in France, Japan, Sweden, Norway and the Netherlands. In Belgium and Switzerland, their rate of decline has decelerated markedly. The downward trend remains distinct however in Germany, Canada, Australia and the United States. Far behind the United States and Germany, Japan, Canada and the United Kingdom featured among the principal receiving countries in 1997-98. France, the Netherlands and Switzerland have also been receiving large numbers of foreigners. Over the last two years, growth in immigration flows has been highest in Japan and Norway, followed by the Netherlands and Denmark. Family-linked immigration predominates in almost all the Member countries of the OECD, in particular in Canada, France and the United States. As a proportion of total flows, that of refugees and asylum applicants is the highest in Sweden, followed by the Netherlands and Switzerland. Temporary labour migration is increasing, notably to Australia, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States. Finally, irregular migration persists, confirming the difficulties that host and origin countries are encountering in their attempts to control migration flows. In certain OECD countries, the acceleration of migration movements over the course of the last fifteen years has played a nonnegligible role in population growth. This tendency is particularly marked in those countries with low fertility rates (Germany, Italy, Greece, Sweden, Switzerland and Portugal). Births to foreigners and to people of foreign origin account for a large percentage of total births in many European OECD Member countries. Practical and political constraints militate against the formulation and implementation of migration policies based on the common strategic interests of countries experiencing falling populations and those whose population is growing rapidly. At the moment, increasing the labour supply through the implementation of specific programmes to facilitate the entry of temporary workers seems to be preferred to permanent settlement policies, even of the kind operated in Canada and Australia.
due, according to the country, to family-linked flows, labour migration or to asylum applications.
Positive net migration and the increasing relative importance of foreign births are contributing to population growth in host countries
13
OECD 1999
at the same time, the foreign and immigrant populations are increasing and diversifying
In almost all OECD countries, the foreign or immigrant population continues to increase. Over the last decade it has increased considerably in Germany, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Sweden, Austria, Italy, Greece and Japan. The relative size of the different communities varies across the host countries. In all of them, the range of nationalities is increasing. Certain European OECD Member countries have recorded increased numbers of nationals from Central and Eastern Europe and from the former Soviet Union. Others are recording larger numbers of migrants from North and sub-Saharan Africa. The proportion of immigrants from Asia is growing not only in the Nordic countries but also in Australia, Canada and the United States. Finally, the ethnic conflicts and wars which have taken place in the former Yugoslavia, most recently in Kosovo, have led to sizeable displacements of the resident populations towards OECD countries. The employment of foreigners fluctuates more markedly than total employment. In Portugal, Austria, Italy, Norway and Ireland in particular, their economic upturns have been accompanied by relatively higher increases in foreigners employment. In almost all countries the disparity between the unemployment rates of foreigners and nationals persists; in certain countries, for example Denmark and the Netherlands, the proportion of foreigners in the total unemployed is three times greater than their proportion of the labour force. In general, the unemployment rates of foreign women remain higher than those of foreign men. The disparity between the unemployment rates of foreign and native men is even more marked. Foreigners greater vulnerability to unemployment is clearly higher in the settlement countries (Australia, Canada and the United States). The financial crises recently experienced by certain Asian countries have not led to sizeable emigration flows towards OECD Member countries. However, unskilled foreign workers, in general illegal, have been disproportionately affected by the labour shedding which has been taking place in these countries. On the other hand, a number of indicators point to the continuing employment of undocumented foreigners as firms seek to hold down their costs in the face of increased competitive pressure. In Europe, East-West migration flows are much lower than those recorded at the beginning of the 1990s. At the same time, migration movements between the CEECs persist and those towards this zone from neighbouring counties to the East and South (NIS and the former Yugoslavia) are increasing. Many member countries have implemented new legislation concerning the entry, residence and employment of foreigners. Admission procedures for asylum applicants and refugees are becoming increasingly harmonised and measures to combat illegal immigration have been strengthened. Integration policies have focussed on access to the host countrys nationality, childrens education and training for adults as well as combating racism and employment-related discrimination.
The economic upturns have in some cases been accompanied by relatively higher rates of growth in foreigners employment than in total employment. Their unemployment rates remain relatively high however.
Following the recent financial crises in Asia the number of undocumented foreign workers in the region has grown accompanying freezes on the renewal of work permits.
14
New legislation has been introduced with the aim of improving foreigners integration. At the same time the criteria for entry, residence and employment have been tightened and measures to more effectively combat illegal immigration have been implemented.
OCDE 1999
General Introduction
The acceleration of regional economic integration and trade liberalisation can be expected, over the long-term, to facilitate the control of migration flows.
In the sphere of international co-operation, numerous measures have been taken in order to develop collaboration between OECD Member and non-Member countries in their attempts to better control migration flows. By promoting sustainable development and its accompanying employment creation, the acceleration of regional economic integration and trade liberalisation will, over the long-term, contribute to reducing incentives to emigrate in those countries of high migration potential. The conclusions of the Lisbon conference (November 1998) on Globalisation, migration and development emphasised the potential of this approach. As well as highlighting the key factors necessary for successful economic integration, proposals to facilitate the acceleration of economic convergence were put forward.
***
Part II of this report presents detailed country notes on the recent developments in migration movements and policies. Part III touches on a topical subject considered as a high priority by the member countries of the OECD: illegal migration. The economic dimension of illegal migration, its impact on domestic labour markets and the policies implemented to combat it are examined, as are the problems surrounding its measurement.
15
OCDE 1999
Part I
MAIN TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

The following analysis of the main trends in international migration has been divided into three sections. The first looks at changes in migration movements, in the total and foreign populations of the countries considered and in the situation of foreigners in the labour market. The second section focuses on two regions, Asia and Central and Eastern Europe. An overview of migration policies is presented in the third section in the course of which measures to better control and regulate flows and to promote the improved integration of immigrants in host countries are examined. Finally, particular attention is accorded to international co-operation in the sphere of migration and development. A. MIGRATION, POPULATION AND THE LABOUR MARKET unemployment rates of foreigners and of nationals. Although in several European OECD countries the economic upturn noticeable since 1996 has been accompanied by a reduction in foreigners unemployment rates, this reduction has been less marked than that experienced by nationals. 1. Trends in migration movements and changes in the foreign population
The slight upturn in migration flows noticeable in 1997-98 in many OECD countries, notably in Europe and Japan, has taken place in a context marked by an increase in immigration flows during the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s followed by a slowdown beginning in 1993 which continued through to 1996. In addition, the diversification of the modes of entry used by immigrants and the increase in the number of nationalities involved continues. At the same time, however, traditional flows persist and the regional character of migration is intensifying. Three additional characteristics of recent migration trends merit attention: the increase in the number of asylum applications in many European members of the OECD, the predominance of flows linked to family reunion and the increasing relative importance of temporary and highly-skilled workers in the total flows. a) Slight upturn in legal immigration flows
The analysis of migration movements during 1997-98 points to a slight upturn in legal immigration flows, marking a distinct break with the declines recorded in the majority of OECD countries over the four preceding years. The number of requests for asylum has significantly increased in certain member countries, notably in Europe. Immigration for family reasons continues to predominate although temporary migration is gaining in importance. The persistence of irregular migration, the volume of which is by definition impossible to determine with precision, indicates clearly that host and origin countries are encountering difficulties in their attempts to control migration flows. Immigration still plays a significant role in the annual population growth of certain OECD countries. The proportion of foreign births in total births is high and the foreign or foreign-born population is growing and diversifying. Foreign or immigrant labour maintains a visible presence in the labour market; in the majority of OECD countries this presence is spreading across an increasing number of sectors. Overall, there continues to exist however a gap between the
OECD 1999
During the 1980s and above all at the beginning of the current decade, inflows increased in almost all OECD countries (see Chart I.1). However, for several of them, notably the main immigration countries such as Germany, the United States, Japan and Canada, 1992 or 1993 marked a turning point. In others, notably Australia and the United Kingdom, the peak had occurred earlier. From 1992-93, onwards a large number of countries recorded declines in legal immigration flows; following the implementation of
17
Chart I.1. Inflows of foreigners in some OECD countries, 1980-1997 Thousands, per 1 000 inhabitants and per 100 foreigners
Inflows of foreigners, 1980-19971
Thousands
United States2 Germany Japan Canada
Inflows of foreigners in 1997

Thousands, per 1 000 inhabitants and per 100 foreigners Thousands 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0
1 250 1 000 750 500 250 0 1980 1985 1990 1995

d e s a s n y ia m m den rg rk ry nd ay ate man Japa anad gdo ranc tral land erlan lgiu e ma orw unga bou Finla s St r r F C Kin Sw Den N Be H xem Au ethe witz Ge ed t i d S N Lu Un ite Un
3
United Kingdom
France
Australia
Netherlands
Per 1 000 inhabitants 25.0 22.5 20.0 17.5 15.0 12.5 10.0 7.5 5.0 2.5 0
200 150 100 50 0 1980 1985 1990 1995

3 a rg and ay ds ny da en om ates pan nce land gary rk ali um ou t rl ma Cana orw erlan elgi nma ustr wed ngd Ja Fra Fin Hun i N mb itze Ger S dS B e A h e t D x d K nite Sw Ne e Lu t i U n U
Switzerland
Belgium
Sweden
Denmark
Per 100 foreigners4 20.0 17.5
125 100 75 50 25 0 1980 1985 1990 1995

3 n ay nds rk and om ary any urg den and ium nce pa Ja Norw erla nma Finl ingd ung erm mbo we iterl elg Fra S w B H G th xe De e S dK N Lu ite Un
15.0 12.5 10.0 7.5 5.0 2.5 0

da ates ralia t t na Ca ed S Aus t i Un
Norway
Hungary
Luxembourg
Finland
40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
18
1980
1985
1990
1995
Note: Data for the United Kingdom are from the International Passenger Survey, for Australia, Canada, France and the United States, from permits of residence. For all other countries, data are based on Population Registers. 1. The host countries have been split into 4 groups according to the volume of inflows in 1997. 2. Excluding immigrants legalised under the 1986 IRCA regularisation programme. 3. 1996. 4. For Australia, Canada and the United States, the inflows in 1997 are related to the stocks of foreign-born residents (last census data). Sources: National Statistical Offices (for more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Statistical Annex).
OECD 1999
Main Trends in International Migration
restrictive measures these were sometimes very sharp (as in Germany, France and Switzerland). The left-hand side of Chart I.1 presents post-1980 time-series for foreign migrant inflows. The host countries are divided into four groups in descending order according to the volume of their 1997 inflows. On the right-hand side of this chart, only 1997 is analysed. The host countries are ranked in descending order according to their inflows in, respectively, absolute terms, per 1 000 inhabitants and per 100 foreigners. For a number of countries (France, Japan, Sweden, Norway and the Netherlands), 1997 marks a reversal in trend or (in the cases of Belgium and Switzerland) a deceleration in the rate of decline recorded after 1993. In those aforementioned countries where it is possible to estimate the departures of foreigners through the use of population registers, net migration has increased slightly (see Statistical Annex, Table A.1.3). Certain important exceptions are, however, worthy of merit. In Germany, inflows of foreigners have once again fallen and their net migration balance was negative for the first time since 1984. Immigration flows to the United States, after having increased in 1996 through the indirect effect of the 1986 regularisation programme (see the United States country note in Part II), immigration flows declined once more to just under 800 000. These latter two countries are still at the top of the host country rankings set out in Chart I.1 even though they received 58% of total flows as compared with 72% in 1993. Far behind Germany and the United States, Japan, Canada and the United Kingdom were, in absolute terms, the principal host countries in 1997. In that year they each received between 200 and 280 000 foreigners (or immigrants). France, Australia, the Netherlands and Switzerland received between 75 and 100 000 people. Emigration flows to Europe, then, are still largely directed towards Germany even though other countries such as the United Kingdom, France, the Netherlands and Switzerland receive sizeable numbers. If one relates the inflow data to the foreign or immigrant population at the beginning of the year rather than to the total population (see the right-hand side of Chart I.1), the rankings alter only slightly. In the preceding edition of Trends in International Migration it was shown that this ratio fluctuates considerably from one year to another, in particular in those countries where the proportion of foreigners in the total population is relatively small. In 1997, Japan, Norway, the Netherlands, Denmark and Finland received in relative terms the greatest numbers of foreigners. Moreover, the rate of these flows growth in 1997 was particularly high in Japan
OECD 1999
and Norway (respectively 22 and 28%, see Statistical Annex Tables B.1.1). 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 that the volume of entries is high relative to the size of the foreign population. Not all the OECD countries have recorded an upward trend in their inflows. Moreover, there is nothing to suggest that this trend will continue over the medium term. In France, Italy and in Greece the increase in recorded inflows has been due largely to regularisation programmes (which are, in principle, exceptional). In the United Kingdom, Denmark and in Sweden notably, the current trend is largely being driven by influxes of asylum seekers; it is therefore difficult to estimate the volume of future flows. Finally, the upward trend in inflows in northern Europe, due in large part to upturns in their economies (in particular in Norway and in Finland), has concerned only small numbers of people. b) Predominance of family-linked immigration
In a number of countries, changes in the volume of inflows have been accompanied by changes in their composition. In the preceding edition of Trends in International Migration, it was noted that since the beginning of the 1990s, the family members component has gained in importance in Australia, France, the United States and Sweden; in Canada and the United Kingdom the proportion of labour migrants (and their accompanying family members) has similarly increased in importance. The proportion of total immigration accounted for by each of the component flows (workers, accompanying families, family reunion and refugees) differs widely from one country to another (see Chart I.2). That said, inflows related to family reunion and to family members accompanying workers predominate in almost all the countries of the OECD, in particular to Canada, France and the United States. It is worth noting that in a number of countries family members who receive permanent residence status are also accorded the right to take up employment. In Canada, the relative share of family members accompanying foreign workers accounts for over half of the total family-linked immigration flows. In Sweden, refugee flows account for the greatest proportion of the total inflows. As for labour immigration, it is in the United Kingdom, Switzerland and Australia (country where workers and
19
Chart I.2.
Immigration flows into selected OECD countries by main categories1 in 1997 Percentages of total inflows
Family reunification Refugees 60 80 100
Workers Family members accompanying workers 0 20 40
United Kingdom2
Switzerland
Australia3
Canada4
France5
United States6
Sweden
20
40
60
80
100
Note: Countries are ranked by decreasing order of the percentage of workers in total inflows. 1. For Australia, Canada, the United States and Sweden, data concern acceptances for settlement. For Switzerland and France, entries correspond to residence permits delivered in general for a period longer than one year. For the United Kingdom, data are based on entry control at ports of certain categories of migrants (excluding European Economic Area citizens). For Switzerland, France and Sweden, family members accompanying workers are included under Family reunification. For Australia, Workers include accompanying dependents. 2. Passengers, excluding European Economic Area nationals, admitted to the United Kingdom. The data only include certain categories of migrants: work permit holders, spouses and refugees (excluding residents returning on limited leave or who previously settled). The category Workers include Commonwealth citizens with a United Kingdom born grandparent who are taking or seeking employment (UK ancestry). 3. Data refer to fiscal year (July 1997 to June 1998). Excluding the Special Eligibility programme. The category Workers includes accompanying dependents. 4. Excluding the retired. 5. Inflows of family members of EU citizens are estimated. Excluding visitors and persons who benefited from the regularisation programme. 6. Data refer to fiscal year (October 1996 to September 1997). Excluding immigrants who obtained a permanent residence permit following the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act. Sources: National Statistical Institutes.
their accompanying family members are grouped together) that this category of inflow accounts for the greatest percentage of total inflows. c) Diversification in regions of origin and the continuation of traditional flows
three countries, one finds among the principal origin countries both long-standing migration flows (from Turkey in all three cases, Poland as well in the case of Germany) as well as the emergence of new migration flows (from Russia, Hungary and Romania to Germany, and from China and the former Yugoslavia to the Netherlands). In the case of Germany and to a lesser extent Switzerland and the four Scandinavian countries (if we abstract from the movements of these countries nationals, particularly those of Norway and of Sweden), East-West flows account for the greater part of the total flows (for more details, see Section B below), with Poles predominating in Germany, nationals of the former Soviet Union in Finland and those of the former Yugoslavia in Denmark, Switzerland, Sweden and Norway. In addition, the long-standing predominance of migration flows from certain Asian countries is also worthy of note (in Australia, Canada, Japan and the United States) as is the emergence of flows from these countries to some European countries (for more details see Part B, below).
OECD 1999
20
Chart I.3 allows one to compare the structure by country of origin of permanent migrant entries into certain OECD countries. The most striking feature is that for most of the countries examined one or two origin countries predominate. These are often neighbouring traditional source countries (New Zealand for Australia, Russia for Finland, Algeria for France, China for Japan, Sweden for Norway, Mexico for the United States) or more rarely recent migration flows of refugees (Somalia for Denmark, former Yugoslavia for Switzerland and Sweden). In Finland, Japan and Luxembourg, the three principal origin countries account for almost one half all new permanent entrants. By contrast, in Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands, this proportion is under 25%. In these
Chart I.3.
Inflows of migrants by country of origin to selected OECD countries, latest available year1 As a percentage of total inflows2
Belgium
15 20
France (7.0) Netherlands (6.3) Morocco (3.9) United States (3.1) Germany (3.1) Italy (2.8) United Kingdom (2.7) Portugal (1.6) Turkey (1.4) Spain (1.2)
Australia
0
New Zealand (14.7) United Kingdom (9.2) Former Yug. (5.2) China (4.3) South Africa (4.3) H K (China) (3.2) India (2.8) Philippines (2.8) Vietnam (2.3) Chinese Taipei (1.5)
Canada
15 20
H K (China) (22.1) India (19.6) China (18.5) Chinese Taipei (13.3) Pakistan (11.2) Philippines (10.9) Iran (7.5) Sri Lanka (5.1) United States (5.0) United Kingdom (4.7)
10
10
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
Denmark
0
Somalia (2.5) Turkey (1.2) Iceland (1.2) Germany (1.2) Iraq (1.1) Norway (1.0) United Kingdom (1.0) Sweden (0.9) United States (0.6) Iran (0.5)
Finland
15 20
Former USSR (2.4) Sweden (0.7) Estonia (0.6) Iraq (0.5) Somalia (0.5) Iran (0.3) Turkey (0.2) Former Yug. (0.2) United Kingdom (0.2) United States (0.2)
France
15 20
(29.4) Algeria (12.2) Morocco (10.3) Turkey (5.1) Tunisia (3.6) Zaire (2.9) China (2.8) Haiti (1.9) Former Yug. (1.5) Japan (1.2) Poland (0.8)
10
10
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
Germany
0
Poland (71.2) Turkey (56.0) Italy (39.0) Former Yug. (31.2) Portugal (26.4) Russian Fed. (24.8) Greece (16.4) United States (15.1) Romania (14.2) Hungary (11.2)
Japan
15 20
China (53.3) Philippines (43.2) Brazil (39.6) United States (27.7) Korea (17.9) United Kingdom (6.9) Thailand (6.4) Chinese Taipei (5.1) Canada (4.8) Germany (4.3) United States (0.2) Spain (0.1) Belgium (1.2) Germany (0.7) Italy (0.5) Netherlands (0.3)
Luxembourg
15 20
Portugal (1.9) France (1.7)
10
10
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
21
OECD 1999
Chart I.3.
Inflows of migrants by country of origin to selected OECD countries, latest available year1 (cont.) As a percentage of total inflows2
Norway
20
Sweden (4.9) Denmark (1.8) United States (1.0) United Kingdom (1.0) Germany (0.8) Iran (0.6) Bosnia-Herzeg. (0.6) Pakistan (0.5) Somalia (0.5) Sri Lanka (0.4)
Netherlands
0
Turkey (6.5) Germany (5.7) Morocco (4.5) United Kingdom (4.3) United States (3.1) Suriname (2.6) Belgium (2.2) France (2.1) China (1.6) Former Yug. (1.6)
Sweden
15 20
(22.5) Former Yug. (3.9) Iraq (3.7) Finland (2.8) Bosnia-Herzeg. (1.8) Iran (1.7) Norway (1.5) Somalia (1.1) Denmark (1.0) United States (0.9) Turkey (0.8)
10
15
10
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
Switzerland
0
Former Yug. (12.8) Germany (8.5) Italy (5.0) France (4.8) Portugal (4.0) Turkey (3.4) United States (2.7) United Kingdom (2.4) Spain (1.8) Austria (1.3)
United Kingdom3
20
United States (42.5) Australia (26.5) India (16.1) South Africa (13.0) New Zealand (12.1) Japan (10.4) Pakistan (9.6) Canada (8.3) Philippines (7.5) Poland (5.4)
United States
20
Mexico (146.9) Philippines (49.1) China (41.1) Vietnam (38.5) India (38.1) Cuba (33.6) Dominican Rep. (27.1) El Salvador (18.0) Jamaica (17.8) Former USSR (16.7)
10
15
10
15
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
Note: The top ten source countries are presented by decreasing order. The abbreviation H K (China) means Hong Kong (China). Data for Australia, Canada and the United States refer to inflows of permanent settlers by country of birth, for France, to issues of certain types of permits and estimates of other flows (mainly inflows of European Economic Area family members). For the United Kingdom, the data are based on entry control at ports of certain categories of migrants. For all other countries, figures are from population registers or registers of foreigners. The figures for the Netherlands, Norway and especially Germany include substantial numbers of asylum seekers. For more details on sources, refer to the introduction to the Statistical Annex. 1. Fiscal year for Australia (July 1997 to June 1998) and the United States (October 1996 to September 1997), 1996 for Denmark and 1997 for the other countries. 2. The figures in brackets are inflows in thousands. 3. Passengers, excluding European Economic Area nationals, admitted to the United Kingdom. The data only include certain categories of migrants: work permit holders, spouses and refugees (excluding residents returning on limited leave or who previously settled). Sources: National Statistical Offices.
22
OECD 1999
d)
Asylum applications have increased in many OECD member countries
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 countries which 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 in the country either temporarily or on a more permanent basis. For example, in a number of OECD countries an ad hoc status was granted to Bosnians and more recently to Kosovars, accompanied generally by social assistance and the right of access to the labour market. In France, temporary residence authorisation has been provided to Algerians forced to leave their country. From the middle of the 1980s through to the beginning of the 1990s (see Statistical Annex, Table A.1.4) applications for asylum rose noticeably, sometimes spectacularly (Germany, Austria, Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States). During the first half of the 1990s the average annual inflows of asylum seekers were relatively high, most notably in Germany and the United States; in Canada, France and Austria the same phenomenon was observed during the period 1989-92. In 1998, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States had, in absolute terms, the highest number of asylum seekers, followed by the Netherlands and Switzerland. Relative to the resident foreign (or foreign-born) population at the beginning of each year (see Chart I.4), one observes that over the period 1984-90 that Sweden and Austria were, in relative terms, the principal OECD receiving countries of asylum seekers. Over the period 1991-97, Sweden remained the most important followed by the Netherlands and Germany. The available data for 1998 indicate that in relative terms the Netherlands and Switzerland received the greatest numbers of applications, followed by the United Kingdom, Sweden and Germany. Faced with an increasing number of asylum seekers, the OECD countries have reacted by speeding up the processing of applications and by introducing certain restrictive measures, among them the extension
Chart I.4. Inflows of asylum seekers as a proportion of the foreign population (or born abroad) at the beginning of the year, 1984-90, 1991-97, 1998 Top ten host countries for asylum applicants in 1998 Per 100 foreigners at the beginning of the year1
1984-90 0 Netherlands (45.2) Switzerland (41.2) United Kingdom (57.7) Sweden (13.0) Belgium (22.0) Austria (13.8) Germany (98.7) France (21.8) 1 2 3 1991-97 4 5 1998 6 7
Canada (22.6) United States (50.8) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Note: For the periods 1984-90 and 1991-97, an average of the ratios (annual flows of asylum applicants as a proportion of the foreign population at the beginning of the year) has been calculated. In the cases of the United States and Canada, the inflow of asylum applicants is compared with the foreign-born population, which explains why the figure is low for these countries. For Canada, France and the United States, the foreign (or foreign-born) population has been estimated from census data (and for France, from the Ministry of the Interior data too) on the assumption that the growth of the foreign population has been constant over the inter-census periods. The countries have been classed in descending order on the basis of the inflows of asylum applicants as a proportion of the foreign population in 1998. 1. Figures in brackets indicate the inflows of asylum seekers in 1998 (thousands). Sources: United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and OECD.
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 both of the United Nations Conventions on Refugees and on Human Rights, provided they have not previously passed through a country that has signed them. The measures taken to stem the flow of new arrivals (for more details see Section C on Migration policies), combined with the low rate of acceptance for refugee status applications have, with the exceptions of the United States and the United Kingdom,
23
OECD 1999
led to a sharp fall in the number of asylum requests since 1993 (see Statistical Annex, Table A.1.4). The Netherlands, which had registered continuous growth in the number of requests accepted, witnessed substantial declines both in 1995 and 1996. In 1997 and 1998, however, applications have clearly increased. In the United Kingdom, whilst asylum requests increased in 1994 and 1995, the implementation of new legislative framework was accompanied by a significant decline in applications in 1996. Nevertheless, they increased slightly the following year and considerably in 1998. Switzerland, Sweden, Belgium, Norway, Austria and Italy also recorded marked increases in the number of asylum applications in 1998, linked in large part to the ethnic conflict in Kosovo, to the degradation of the economic situation in Albania and to an influx of Kurds originating from Iraq and Turkey. Finally, as several countries of Central and Eastern Europe have signed the Geneva Convention on Refugees they recognise and can therefore accord refugee status to applicants. This explains the increase in demands recorded in Hungary and in the Czech Republic. e) Temporary labour migration and the migration of highly-skilled workers
OECD, a certain flexibility in the admissions procedures for this type of entrant. 2. Immigration and population growth in OECD countries
Migration plays a significant role in the annual population growth of many OECD countries. First of all, the presence of a foreign or foreign-born population contributes to the natural increase in the population (excess of births over deaths). The higher the fertility of foreign women relative to natives the more significant is this contribution. 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 and to the relationship between population ageing and migration. Finally, an analysis of changes in the foreign or immigrant populations in OECD countries will highlight the growth which has taken place in this population and confirm its trend towards increasing diversification. a) The components of total population growth
Although the admission of permanent foreign workers is currently very limited, particularly into the European Member countries of the OECD, the demand for temporary foreign workers is growing. The use of temporary foreign labour enhances host countries labour market flexibility and helps to alleviate sectoral labour shortages. Temporary migration also has other advantages, particularly in the short-term. During a period of restricted immigration, it may be a means of reducing the employment of foreigners in an irregular situation. Moreover, it avoids, in part, the sanctioning of permanent immigration with its attendant welfare costs and the necessity of implementing integration policies. Finally, temporary employment also promotes the movement of managerial staff and highly skilled workers (the 1998 edition of Trends in International Migration included a special chapter devoted to a detailed analysis of the temporary employment of foreigners in many OECD countries). Table I.1 sets out for a number of Member countries the inflows of temporary foreign workers by principal category. The upward trend in their inflows is clear in Australia, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States. Scrutiny of the recruitment and residence criteria for temporary workers (see Table I.2) reveals, in addition to the wide diversity of the regulations applied in the Member countries of the
In order to explain the respective contributions of net migration and the rate of natural increase to total population growth, the evolution of these components over the past three decades in the principal OECD geographic regions will be examined and a description of the current situation in the Member countries will be presented. Main demographic trends: a regional approach Chart I.5 covers the period 1960-97. 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 the countries of the European Union and other Member countries of the OECD. This comparative analysis illustrates the general trend of a slowdown in demographic growth. One will observe, however, that the rates of population growth at the beginning of the period are clearly higher in Turkey, Australia and the United States compared to the countries of the European Union and Japan where the demographic decline is much more marked. The increase in immigration flows to Europe, noticeable between 1989 and 1992, did not reverse the demographic decline.
OECD 1999
24
OECD 1999
25
Table I.1. Entries of temporary workers in certain OECD countries by principal categories, 1992, 1996-1997
Thousands
1992 1996 1997 1992 1996 1997
Australia Skilled temporary resident programme1 Working Holiday Makers Total Canada2 Highly skilled workers Workers whose employment requires approval3 Professionals4 Reciprocal employment4, 5 Workers with signicant benets for Canada4 Seasonal workers Total France Highly skilled workers Employees on secondment6 Researchers6 Seasonal workers Total Germany Workers employed under a contract for services Seasonal workers Trainees Total
14.6 25.9 40.5 (40.3) 66.4 5.3 5.6 4.6 11.1 92.9 (230.4) 0.9 0.9 13.6 15.4 (42.3) 115.1 212.4 5.1 332.6 (408.9)
15.4 40.3 55.7 (20.0) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.8 1.2 8.8 10.8 (11.5) 47.3 220.9 4.3 272.5 (262.5)
12.5 50.0 62.5 (19.7) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1.0 1.1 8.2 10.3 (11.0) 42.1 226.0 3.2 271.2 (285.4)
Japan Highly skilled workers Korea Highly skilled workers Trainees Total Switzerland Seasonal workers Trainees Total United Kingdom Highly skilled workers (long-term permits)7 Short term permit holders Working Holiday Makers Trainees Total United States8 Highly skilled workers Specialists (visa H-1B) Specialists (NAFTA, visa TN)9 Workers of distinguished abilities (visa O) Seasonal workers (visa H-2A) Industrial trainees (visa H-3) Total
108.1 .. 9.7 .. 126.1 1.6 127.8 (39.7) 12.7 14.0 24.0 3.4 54.1
78.5 36.7 53.2 90.0 62.7 0.7 63.4 (24.5) 16.9 16.8 33.0 4.0 70.7
93.9 42.2 51.1 93.3 46.7 0.7 47.4 (25.4) 18.7 19.0 33.3 4.7 75.7
110.2 12.5 0.5 16.4 3.4 143.0 (116.2)
144.5 27.0 7.2 9.6 3.0 191.2 (117.5)
.. .. .. .. .. .. (90.6)
Note: The categories of temporary workers differ from one country to another. Only the principal categories of temporay workers are presented in this table. The gures in brackets indicate the number of entries of permanent workers. 1. The data cover the scal year (from July to June of the indicated year) and include accompanying persons. 2. The gures are for the number of work permits issued. The data are likely to be over-estimates in as far as one person might obtain a number of permits in the course of the same year. 3. The list of eligible jobs excludes unskilled jobs, those restricted to Canadian citizens and those with a high rate of unemployment. 4. These workers do not require approval by the Government employment service. 5. This category concerns in particular academics and researchers admitted within the framework of bilateral agreements as well as certain specialists. 6. Beneciaries of provisional work permits (APT). 7. Long-term permits (one year and over) are mostly accorded to specialists and senior managers. 8. The data cover the scal year (October to September of the indicated year). A person is counted as many times as he enters the country over the course of the same year. The data may well therefore be over-estimates. 9. The gures include family members. Sources: Australia: Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (DIEA); Canada: Citizenship and Immigration Canada; France: Ofce des migrations internationales, Annuaire des migrations 97; Germany: Bundesanstalt fur Arbeit; Japan: Ministry of Justice; Korea: Ministry of Justice; Switzerland: Ofce fed eral des etrangers; United Kingdom: Department of Employment; United States: United States Department of Justice, 1996 Statistical Yearbook of Immigration and Naturalization Service.
Categories of workers by country Admission conditions
Skilled temporary residents
Working Holiday Makers (WHM)
Workers whose employment requires approval Workers who do not require approval Seasonal workers
Workers on secondment
Seasonal workers
Workers employed under a contract for services
Seasonal workers
26
Table I.2. Conditions for the recruitment and residence of the categories of temporary foreign workers mentioned in Table I.1.
Preliminary recruitment conditions Availability of domestic workers as grounds for refusal Authorised length of stay (possibility for renewal) Residence conditions Possibility for family reunication Possibility for changing status2
Quotas
Restrictions on activity1
Australia Nominated (generally by the employer) except for a stay shorter than 3 months Yes Labour Market Testing (LMT) No 2 years (renewable once) 4 years (renewable) for the category Education Between 3 months and 4 years for holders of a TBE visa Up to one year (not renewable) Yes Yes Yes
Bilateral agreements Age limit (generally between 18 and 25)
No
Yes (since 1995/1996 scal year)
Yes
No
Yes
Canada Preliminary authorisation Yes No 3 years maximum (renewable) 9 months maximum (renewable) 3 years maximum (renewable) France The employer must carry out the process of obtaining the work permit Recruitment procedure initiated by the employer Age limit (between 17 and 50) for an anonymous contract The worker must hold a temporary residence permit valid for the period of employment Yes, except for workers earning more than 21 000 FF per month No 9 months (renewable once, and in exceptional cases twice) Yes No No Yes Yes No (with a few exceptions)
Bilateral agreements Medical exam Agreements with certain countries
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
In the framework of certain bilateral agreements (Morocco and Tunisia for example)
The activity must not exceed 6 months in any 12 consecutive month period (8 months for certain activities) Minimum duration of 4 months for seasonal workers from distant countries (Morocco and Tunisia)
Yes, the permit is only valid for the requested occupation, in a pre-determined geographic zone for a single employer
No
No
Germany Bilateral agreements (seconded by the employer in the country of origin) Holding a work permit Bilateral agreements The request must be made by the employer Minimum age: 18 years No Yes 2 years maximum (3 years in exceptional cases) Yes No No
Yes
No, but placement is limited to certain sectors
3 months each year
Yes
No
No
OECD 1999
Guest workers (Gastarbeiter) Bilateral agreements Age limit (between 18 and 40)
No
Yes (by country)
12 to 18 months
Yes
No
No
OECD 1999
Table I.2. Conditions for the recruitment and residence of the categories of temporary foreign workers mentioned in Table I.1. (cont.)
Preliminary recruitment conditions Categories of workers by country Admission conditions Availability of domestic workers as grounds for refusal Authorised length of stay (possibility for renewal) Residence conditions Possibility for family reunication Possibility for changing status2
Quotas
Japan Highly skilled workers Obtaining an authorisation from the Ministry of Justice (very strict concerning skills) No Depends on the contract (renewal possible if they still have the same employment) Korea Highly skilled workers Very strict conditions imposed on skills Most of them are recruited by the Korean Federation on small businesses (KFSB) No No ceiling since 1997 Yes Yes Yes, but they cannot work No
Trainees
Yes
3 years maximum
Switzerland Seasonal workers Bilateral agreements Request made by the employer Yes Yes, at local level (Canton) Variable according to sector of activity 9 months maximum per year Renewable under certain conditions 1 year (6 months extension in special cases) Yes No Yes (after a certain duration of work)
Trainees
Bilateral agreements signed with 25 countries Proof of training or diploma Age limit (between 18 and 30)
No
Yes
Traineeship carried out in the same occupation as previous studies
No
No
United Kingdom Persons who need a work permit A work permit for a specic person must be requested by the future employer. Restricted to highly skilled persons (Keyworkers). Adequate command of English Being a Commonwealth national Age restriction (between 17 and 27 years) Unmarried Intention to take employment is incidental to holiday Sufcient nancial resources for return No need for a work permit Yes, except for some specic activities, i.e. intra-company transferees No Up to 4 years Renewals possible, subject to the same conditions Keyworkers will not normally exceed 36 months Yes, a change of employer is possible only in some specic conditions Yes, if nancial ressources and housing are acceptable Yes, after 4 years working in the United Kingdom
Working Holiday Makers
No
No
2 years (no renewals)
No
Yes, providing spouse qualies in own right and any child is less than 5 years old
No
27
Categories of workers by country Admission conditions
Trainees Professional or specialist qualication training
Work experience
H-1B (Specialty occupation)
O (Extraordinary ability) H-2A (agricultural activities)
H-3 (Industrial trainees)
28
Table I.2. Conditions for the recruitment and residence of the categories of temporary foreign workers mentioned in Table I.1. (cont.)
Preliminary recruitment conditions Availability of domestic workers as grounds for refusal Authorised length of stay (possibility for renewal) Residence conditions Possibility for family reunication Possibility for changing status2
Quotas
Sufcient level of education and adequate command of English Sufcient level of education and adequate command of English Person must not be lling a genuine vacancy
No
No
Restricted to the training period (up to 3 months) Extension depends on the results obtained 12 months Extension possible for up to 12 months
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
United States Prevailing wages required Minimum of Bachelor degree (4 years degree) + practice in the occupation Requires consultation with peers Temporary labour certication required Employers must respect certain conditions on wages Must justify why cannot be trained in his country A foreign residence must be maintained No Yes Initial admission for 3 years (can be renewed once) Yes, related to a specic activity Yes Yes
No Yes
No No
Up to 10 years Depends upon activity Initial admission for 1 year Extensions up to 3 years increments of 12 months each Generally 2 years maximum Consistent with the training programme
Must continue to work in the eld of expertise Yes, specic activity and location
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
No
No
Yes, specic activity and location
Yes
Yes
1. 2.
In the United Kingdom, there is no limitation to the geographical mobility of temporary workers. Therefore, comments on this column are only related to professional mobility. In the United States, limitations are seldom applied. However some applicants are obliged to engage in employment related to their visa. In the United States, except some J-1 visitors, most non-immigrants can adjust to other temporary or permanent categories, if they are qualied. If not, they are obliged to leave the country.
OECD 1999
Chart I.5.
Components of total population growth in the European Union and in selected OECD countries, 1960-1997 Per 1 000 inhabitants at the beginning of the year
Natural increase rate Net migration rate1
Per 1 000 20
European Union (15 members2)
France
Per 1 000 20
15
15
10
10
-5 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
-5
Per 1 000 20
Germany
Spain
Per 1 000 20
15
15
10
10
-5 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
-5
Per 1 000 20
Sweden
United Kingdom
Per 1 000 20
15
15
10
10
-5 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
-5
29
OECD 1999
Chart I.5.
Components of total population growth in the European Union and in selected OECD countries, 1960-1997 (cont.) Per 1 000 inhabitants at the beginning of the year
Natural increase rate Net migration rate1
Per 1 000 25 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 1960 1965 1970
Australia
Japan
Per 1 000 25 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
Per 1 000 25 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 1960 1965 1970 1975
Poland
Turkey
Per 1 000 25 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10
1980
1985
1990
1995
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
Per 1 000 25 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10
United States
30
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
The net migration figures are calculated residually using annual population estimates and data on births and deaths. 2. Excluding Austria, Italy and Ireland from 1996 on and Greece in 1997. Source: Labour Force Statistics, OECD, 1997.
1.
OECD 1999
In the United States (and also in Canada), the natural increase in the population is the principal component of total population growth. The contribution of net migration has hardly changed over the period studied except between 1979 and 1981 and between 1992 and 1993. The natural increase fell sharply between 1961 and 1973 and remained, on average, at the level of 7.5 per 1 000 inhabitants through to 1990 at which point it began to decline. In the United States and Canada, the natural increase in the population has steadily declined over the past three decades but it still remains the principal component of total population growth. This was also the case in Australia but only till the end of the 1970s. Since, the contribution of net migration, which varies greatly, has sometimes exceeded or equalled the contribution of natural increase in population growth. In the countries of the European Union, the situation is more contrasted. At the beginning of the 1960s, the relative share of the natural increase in total population growth was larger than that of net migration (except in France due to the massive inflows of repatriates from Algeria). From 1967 onwards, net migration grew while the natural increase continuously declined. Between 1987 and 1991, the relative contribution of net migration grew rapidly following an acceleration in immigration flows. The trend was then reversed. However, over the whole of the European Union (notably in Germany, in Spain and in Sweden, see Chart 1.5), the relative contribution of net migration remains more important than that of the natural increase, in contrast to the situation prevailing in the United States, Turkey, Japan and Poland. Turkey is experiencing a relatively high natural rate of population growth, approximately 16 per thousand in 1997, a sharp reduction, however, on the 1970s figure of 24 per thousand. Moreover, due to the return of former emigrants, net migration in Turkey is slightly positive, in contrast to the situation in Poland. A more detailed analysis by country for 1997 (see Chart I.6) reveals that Iceland, Poland and Japan have registered negative net migration; in the cases of the two latter countries this has been combined with a relatively low rate of natural increase. Germany, Italy and the Czech Republic have in common a negative natural increase rate and positive net migration. In Sweden as in Greece, it is due to net migration that the population increased in 1997. In New Zealand, Luxembourg and Canada, population growth is being driven more by the positive net migration than by the natural increase, itself relatively high. In the United States, and to a less marked
OECD 1999
degree in Australia, the natural increase remains the principal component of population growth. This component is the most important in Mexico and Turkey (at 28 and 16 per thousand respectively). Turkey has, however, recorded slightly positive net migration indicating that return movements of Turkish expatriates outweigh the emigration flows. By contrast, due to the sizeable volume of emigration flows, Mexico has been recording high negative net migration. Population growth in other European OECD countries has in general been rather weak. In the Netherlands, Norway, France, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and Finland it has been driven largely by the natural increase whereas in Denmark, Austria, Greece, Portugal and Spain the contribution of net migration has predominated. This analysis points to the conclusion that over a long period (be it by region or by country, 1960-97) and by cross section (by country, in 1997), natural increase is more important than net migration in total population growth in OECD countries. This is true not only in countries which have experienced large emigration flows, such as Ireland, Turkey and Mexico, but also in settlement countries such as the United States. 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 have been running at lower levels than in previous decades. The settlement of immigrants and members of their families has contributed, by means of foreign births or those of foreign origin, to the increase in the dominant role of the natural increases contribution to population growth (see below). The acceleration of migration movements has played a non-negligible role in population growth in certain of the OECD Member countries. This is notably the case in Canada, Sweden, Denmark, Italy, Portugal and Spain. The trend is all the more marked in those countries where fertility rates are low (Germany, Italy, Greece, Switzerland and Portugal). 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 well be that the predominance of familylinked immigration among total inflows and the younger age structure of the new arrivals exerts over the short and medium term a marked effect on the natural rate of increase in the population. The analysis of the changes in the components of population growth in OECD countries also reveals
31
Chart I.6.
Natural increase in total population and net migration in OECD countries,1 19972 Per 1 000 inhabitants as of 1 January 1997
3
Denmark
3
Netherlands
Net migration (per 1 000)
Greece Austria Portugal
Norway
France Finland
10
Spain
1
Switzerland
Luxembourg
New Zealand Canada Australia United States
United Kingdom Belgium
Net migration (per 1 000)
5 Italy 0
Sweden
0 0 Turkey 1 2
Natural increase (per 1 000)
0 3 4
Poland Japan Ireland Germany -5 Czech Rep. Mexico -10 0 5 10 15 20 Natural increase (per 1 000) 25 30 -10 -5 Iceland
Note: The net migration figures are calculated residually using annual population estimates and data on births and deaths. 1. The data for Korea and Hungary are not available. 2. 1996 for Spain, France, the United Kingdom, Iceland, Sweden and the Netherlands; 1994 for Ireland, Italy and Austria; 1995 for Canada; 1990 for Mexico. Source: Labour Force Statistics, OECD, 1997.
that migration movements fluctuate significantly in volume. In this regard, the situation observed in 1997 or in 1998 (depending on the country) has been one of significant change in comparison to 1996. Indeed, the relative importance of the migration component is very much dependent on developments in the political and economic situation in certain regions of the world (in so far as they affect the movements of asylum seekers and refugees) and in migration policy in each country. The fluctuational nature of migration movement volumes explains why it would be difficult to rely on the contribution of net migration to reduce or stem the marked demographic decline occurring in many of the OECD countries (see below). b) Foreign births: a brake on demographic ageing
tained halt to new immigration could eventually lead to a marked reduction in these beneficial effects insofar as the fertility rate of foreign women tends to converge with that of nationals. Measuring foreign births It is difficult to obtain comparable data on foreign births as the term foreign may apply to the child or to the parents. When reference to the parents is made in the definition, the number of foreign births will vary according to whether the criterion adopted 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 chosen is that of the mother. In Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Switzerland foreign births are those of children possessing foreign nationality. In France and Sweden, for example, foreign births are those born to female foreign nationals, in Japan those where both parents are foreign nationals, and in the United Kingdom they are those to mothers born outside the country. Data based solely on births to foreign mothers do not adequately reflect the contribution to total births linked to the presence of the foreign population or that of foreign origin. Moreover,
OECD 1999
32
In several European OECD countries, births to foreign nationals and to persons of foreign origin account for a sizeable percentage of total births; this percentage is often higher than that of foreigners in the total population. Foreign births contribute to the natural increase in the population and can therefore 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 sus-
in general, the degree to which the legislation on naturalisations is more or less liberal 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 as a proportion of total births compared to the proportion of foreigners in the total population The share of foreign births is, in some Member countries, very high (see Chart I.7). This is the case, for example, in Luxembourg (over 43%) and Switzerland (over 22%) in 1997. In France, the United Kingdom (England and Wales only), Germany and Sweden, foreign births accounted for between 10 and 13% of all births in 1997. In Sweden, France, Switzerland and
Japan the proportion of births to foreigners as compared with the proportion of foreigners in the total population was greater in 1997 than in 1980; the reverse was true for Belgium and the Netherlands. Except in Belgium and Japan, in 1997 the proportion of births to foreigners was in every case higher than the proportion of foreign nationals in the total population (more than twice in Sweden, more than one and a half times in France and the United Kingdom and only slightly less in Switzerland, the Netherlands, Germany and Luxembourg, see Chart I.7). A number of explanations can be put forward to account for the variations observed between 1980 and 1997, the relative importance of which depend on the country concerned: higher or lower levels of net migration; differences in
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 1997
1980 0 1 1997 2 10.2 13.0 Share of foreign births in total births (%)
Sweden
Increase
France Switzerland Japan
10.2 9.6 15.3 22.2 0.6 0.9
United Kingdom2 Germany3
13.3 12.8 10.9 13.2
Decrease
Netherlands Luxembourg Belgium4
7.5 6.1 37.1 43.2 15.5 8.0
1.
Foreign births are those 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 Japan, to foreign parents. For England and Wales, foreign births refer to those to mothers born outside the United Kingdom. The data for Japan and Germany refer to 1989 and 1991 respectively instead of 1980. The data for Sweden refer to 1993, for France, Japan and the United Kingdom to 1996 instead of 1997. 2. Data refer to England and Wales. The share of foreign births is relative to the share of the foreign-born in the total population. 3. Data cover Germany as a whole in 1991 and 1997. 4. Between 1980 and 1997, the fall in the number of foreign births can be explain 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 census and 1996 Labour Force Survey), and the United Kingdom (Labour Force Survey).
33
OECD 1999
fertility rates between nationals and foreigners; differences in distribution by age and by sex of the foreign and national populations; and changes to laws concerning the acquisition of nationality. c) Ageing populations and migration
In spring 1998 the OECD published a report on ageing populations, Maintaining Prosperity in an Ageing Society. The report highlights the prospect of rising shares of elderly in the population and falling shares of the population in employment to support pension and health systems. The report suggests that the range of possible demographic outcomes over the next three decades is fairly limited with migration and fertility capable only of partially alleviating the problem. The analysis underlying this thesis and likewise the practical and political issues involved in the implementation of an effective demographic cum labour market orientated immigration policy were presented in the 1998 edition of this report (see Trends in International Migration, OECD, 1998). Ageing populations are caused by declining fertility and by reduced rates of mortality amongst the elderly population. Declining fertility shifts the composition of the population towards older cohorts; reduced mortality rates tend to extend the life expectancy of the elderly populations. Whilst these processes have been going on for some time in many countries, OECD member countries have reached a particularly advanced stage. The proportions of the elderly in the total population, which are already at high levels, are set to increase further, particularly after around 2010 when the first of the baby-boom generations begins to retire. Table I.3 presents the distribution of the world population by principal region in 1999 and the projected distribution in 2025. It is clear that the relative share of the 29 OECD Member countries in the total world population will show a decline in 2025 (ceteris paribus, around 16% as against 19% in 1999). Among the Member countries, only a few (Mexico, Turkey, Canada, the United States and Australia) will experience significant population growth (i.e. equal to or slightly above the world average). The European continent as a whole will witness a population decline over the period (with a more important decrease in Eastern Europe and in Russia) whereas the population of Africa will increase by two-thirds and those of Asia and America by more than one-third. A Youthfulness indicator by principal region and for some OECD Member countries is presented in Table I.4, based on calculations carried out by
INED (Institut national dtudes dmographiques, Paris). This indicator is obtained by substracting the proportion of those aged over 64 years from the proportion of those aged below 15 years. The higher the indicator, the younger the population. Among the OECD Member countries, only Mexico and Turkey are ranked above the world average, whereas in Spain, Italy and Japan, the share of those aged over 64 years exceeds the share of those aged below 15 years. France, the United Kingdom, Sweden and Germany are experiencing situations similar to the three latter countries. The demographic situation described in these two tables shows that population ageing is clearly more significant in European countries and Japan. It is in these countries that global labour shortages will be the strongest at the approach of 2010, even if during the transition period, improved productivity and the use of surplus labour force temporarily ease labour demand. This demographic challenge should be met with medium-term and long-term strategies. It is with this in mind that policies aiming to enhance the fertility rate and policies calling for increased immigration are the most often referred to (for fertility policies, see the 1998 edition of Trends in International Migration). Regarding immigration, there exist a number of practical and political constraints in formulating an immigration policy aimed at achieving demographic change. A number of these difficulties were outlined in Migration; The Demographic Aspects (OECD, 1991). However, increased immigration possesses the advantage of having an immediate and relatively strong impact on the working age population due to the young age structure of net migration. In addition, fertility rates amongst immigrant women are often relatively high which can help to boost fertility and hence long-term population growth. Migration policies based on convergent strategic interests are possible between countries deeply affected by demographic decline and those experiencing high population growth, if the motivation for such policies is strong enough. At present, there is a preference for mechanisms which cater for temporary labour migration to increase labour supply rather than policies calling for permanent immigration. However, the ease with which countries may shift the focus of immigration policy towards demographic objectives varies widely. Some countries already have a comprehensive and co-ordinated approach towards immigration (notably Canada and Australia) including age-related selection criteria for some categories of immigrant. Other countries may find that
OECD 1999
34
Table I.3.
Distribution of the worlds population by principal region in 1999 and the projected distribution in 2025
Millions and percentages
Population 1999 Millions % Projection 2025 Millions %
Asia Western Asia Central-southern Asia South-east Asia East Asia America North America Central America Caribbean South America Africa North Africa West Africa East Africa Central Africa Southern Africa Europe (non including the Russian Fed.) Northern Europe Western Europe Eastern Europe Southern Europe Russian Federation Oceania World of which: OECD of which: United States Japan Mexico Germany Turkey United Kingdom France Italy Spain Poland Canada Australia Sweden
Source:
3 637 186 1 451 520 1 481 815 303 135 37 339 771 170 223 235 94 49 582 95 183 159 145 147 30 5 982 1 112 273 127 100 82 66 59 59 58 39 39 31 19 9
61 3 24 9 25 14 5 2 1 6 13 3 4 4 2 1 10 2 3 3 2 2 1 100 19 5 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
4 923 303 2 101 722 1 798 1 083 374 200 46 463 1 290 249 408 387 188 57 580 99 188 150 143 138 41 8 054 1 257 335 121 141 80 88 63 64 55 39 41 39 23 9
61 4 26 9 22 13 5 2 1 6 16 3 5 5 2 1 7 1 2 2 2 2 1 100 16 4 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
1999 World Population Data Sheet, Population Reference Bureau in Populations et societ es, No. 348, July-August 1999, Institut national detudes demographiques.
new immigration programmes and a change in approach to immigration policy are required. d) Changes in the foreign or immigrant population in OECD countries
For the European OECD countries and likewise for Korea and Japan, the most detailed statistics on the foreign population refer to residents nationality (see Tables A.I.6 and B.I.6 of the Statistical Annex).
OECD 1999
Thus people born in the country may be counted among foreigners, while others born abroad (and who are therefore immigrants) may have acquired the nationality of the host country and are no longer counted as members of 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 the number
35
Table I.4.
Youthfulness indicator1 by principal regions in 1999

Percentages
Proportion aged below 15 years Proportion aged over 64 years Youthfulness1 indicator
Africa North Africa West Africa East Africa Central Africa Southern Africa Asia Western Asia Central-southern Asia South-east Asia East Asia of which: China America North America Central America Caribbean South America Oceania Russian Federation Europe (not including the Russian Federation) Northern Europe Western Europe Eastern Europe Southern Europe World OECD of which: Mexico Turkey Australia United States Poland Canada France United Kingdom Sweden Germany Spain Italy Japan
43 38 45 46 47 35 32 37 37 34 25 26 29 21 36 31 32 26 20 18 19 17 20 17 31 21 35 31 21 21 21 20 19 19 19 16 15 15 15
3 4 3 3 3 5 6 4 4 4 8 7 8 13 4 7 6 10 13 15 15 15 13 16 7 13 5 5 12 13 12 12 16 16 17 16 16 17 16
40 34 42 43 44 30 26 33 33 30 17 19 21 8 32 24 26 16 7 3 4 2 7 1 24 8 30 26 9 8 9 8 3 3 2 1 2 1
1. Proportion aged below 15 years (%) minus the proportion aged over 64 years (%). Source: Calculations by INED (Institut national detudes demographiques) from Population Reference Bureau data.
of immigrants residing in the country to be calculated, whatever their nationality. Certain European countries such as Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden have begun to publish statistics on the number of people born abroad by country of birth (see Statistical Annex, Tables A.1.5 and B.1.5). Variations over time in the number of immigrants or foreigners do not follow a uniform pattern across
36
countries. Such variations are dependent, inter alia, on migration policy, on entries and departures, on the demographics of the foreign population and on the number of naturalisations (which correspondingly reduces the stock of foreigners). Nonetheless, in nearly all of the OECD countries the foreign or immigrant population continues to increase. It is also clear that the extension of the geographical sphere of reference of international migration, a consequence of the
OECD 1999
political and economic changes which have taken place over the last decade, is reflected in the diversification of the composition by nationality of foreign populations and in the greater dispersion of immigrants of the same origin across host countries. The foreign or foreign-born population is increasing Compared with the situation which prevailed in the mid-1980s, the proportion of foreigners and foreign-born in the total population has increased in the majority of OECD countries, the exceptions being Belgium and France (due in part to considerable numbers of naturalisations). In Australia and Canada, immigrants accounted for a high percentage of the resident population in 1996 at close to 25% and over 17% respectively. In the United States the figure was 9% (see Table I.5). In this latter country the immigrant population increased by almost 6 million between the last two censuses (1980 and 1990), as compared to a little over one million in Canada and just under 700 000 in Australia over the intercensal period 1986-96. The foreign presence in the total population varies widely across the European OECD countries (see Table I.5). It is relatively high in Luxembourg and Switzerland 33% and 19% respectively in 1995. In the other traditional immigration countries, the proportion of foreigners in the total population varies between 3.6% (the United Kingdom) and 9% (Belgium). In the new immigration countries such as Spain, Italy, Portugal and Finland, the proportion of foreigners remains small (between 1 and 2%), the large increase in entries over the last decade notwithstanding. The foreign population has grown considerably in Germany (an increase in excess of 60% over the period 1987-97) due principally to a marked acceleration from 1989 onwards in the immigration flows from the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. The foreign population has also increased in the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Sweden and Austria. In Japan, although the foreign population increased by approximately 60% between 1985 and 1996, the percentage of foreigners in the total population remains low (just over 1%). Similarly, although the number of foreigners resident in Korea has more than tripled over the course of the last ten years, the percentage of foreigners remains (at 0.3%) one of the lowest of the OECD Member countries. and is becoming more diversified In general, the composition by nationality of the foreign or immigrant population (see Statistical Annex,
OECD 1999
Tables B.1.5 and B.1.6) varies across host countries depending on migration traditions, the extent and nature of existing networks established by previously installed migrant communities, employment opportunities and the geographical proximity of the respective origin countries. The political and economic developments of the last decade, notably the liberalisation of population movements in Central and Eastern Europe, have extended the geographical sphere of reference of international migration (see the later sections devoted to developments in Asia and in Central and Eastern Europe). In particular, they have led to the emergence of new flows and an increase in the diversity of origin countries. As a result, both the composition by nationality of the foreign population within host countries and the dispersion of migrants of the same origin across different host countries have modified. In the countries of the European Union, the proportion of foreigners who have come from nonEU countries has increased. As part of this overall trend, certain origin countries have emerged as being important or seen their importance increase relative to others of longer standing in the region. In Germany, for example, this observation applies to nationals of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, in France to Moroccans and Senegalese, and in the Netherlands to nationals of the former Yugoslavia. As for the Nordic countries, the proportion of foreigners who have come from neighbouring countries has diminished in Finland, in Norway and in Sweden as newer foreign communities have increased in size: Asians (Pakistanis, Vietnamese, Iranians and Sri Lankans and Turks) in Norway and Sweden; and nationals of the former Yugoslavia in Finland, Norway and Sweden. These transformations reflect not only the changes in the origins of the flows but also the changes in their nature (an increase in the number of asylum seekers). Regarding immigration in the countries of Southern Europe, two characteristics stand out: there exists a sizeable group of immigrants from the developing countries of Africa and Asia, and another of foreign residents from Europe, North America and Latin America. These flows differ markedly in nature: the former, partly clandestine, is essentially (unskilled) labour migration; the latter is linked to multinational firms and to foreign direct investment together with flows of retired persons. In Portugal, for example, the largest foreign community is African, originating from Portugals former colonies and from other countries of Portuguese language and culture such as Cape Verde and Angola. The
37
Table I.5.
Foreign or foreign-born population and labour force in selected OECD countries

Thousands and percentages
Foreign population and labour force Foreign Thousands 19873 19974 population1 % of total population 1987 1997 19875 Foreign labour force2 Thousands 19976 % of total labour force 1987 1997
Austria Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Ireland Italy Japan Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom
326 863 136 18 3 714 4 241 77 572 884 103 592 124 95 335 401 979 1 839
3 7 1 1
1 2
733 903 250 81 597 366 114 241 483 148 678 158 175 610 522 341 066
4.3 8.7 2.7 0.4 6.8 6.9 2.2 1.0 0.7 26.8 4.0 2.9 1.0 0.9 4.8 14.9 3.2
9.1 8.9 4.7 1.6 6.3 9.0 3.1 2.2 1.2 34.9 4.4 3.6 1.8 1.5 6.0 19.0 3.6
158 270 63 .. 1 525 1 866 33 285 .. 648 176 499 46 58 215 58810 815
326 333 88 19 1 570 2 522 52 332 6607 1258 208 609 88 176 220 69310 949
5.4 6.8 2.1 .. 6.3 6.9 2.5 1.3 .. 37.6 3.0 2.3 1.0 0.4 4.9 16.6 3.3
9.9 7.9 3.1 0.8 6.1 9.1 3.4 1.7 1.0 55.1 2.9 2.8 1.8 1.1 5.2 17.5 3.6
Foreign-born population and labour force (Census data) Foreign-born population11 Thousands 198612 1996 % of total population 1986 1996 Foreign-born labour force11 Thousands 198612 199613 % of total labour force 1986 1996
Australia Canada United States

1.
3 247 3 908 14 080
3 908 4 971 24 600
20.8 15.4 6.2
21.1 17.4 9.3
1 901 2 359 7 077
2 239 2 681 14 300
25.4 18.5 6.7
24.6 18.5 10.8
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 Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom. Data for Austria, Germany and Luxembourg are from Social Security registers, for Denmark and Norway from the register of population and the register of employees respectively. Data for Italy, Portugal, Spain and Switzerland are from residence or work permits. Figures for Japan and the Netherlands are estimates from national Statistical Ofces. For the other countries, data are from Labour Force Surveys. 3. 1982 for France; 1988 for Portugal. 4. 1990 for France; 1996 for Denmark. 5. 1988 for Norway, Portugal and Spain; 1991 for Italy; 1986 for Belgium. 6. 1995 for Italy; 1996 for Denmark. 7. Data are estimates and include those of Japanese descent, students and illegal workers. 8. Including cross-border workers. 9. Excluding the self-employed. 10. Number of foreigners with an annual residence permit or a settlement permit who engage in gainful activity. Seasonal and cross-border workers are excluded. 11. Data are from censuses except for the United States in 1996 (estimates from the Current Population Survey). 12. 1980 for the United States. 13. 1991 for Canada. Sources: National Statistical Institutes.
38
OECD 1999
Chart I.8. Foreigners in total population and labour force and European Union citizens in total foreign population and labour force European OECD countries, 1997
Foreign residents and labour force, all nationalities
Share of foreigners in total population (%) Share of foreign labour force in total labour force (%) 0 Luxembourg Austria Germany France Sweden Greece Portugal Spain Italy Switzerland1 Belgium Netherlands United Kingdom Ireland Denmark Finland 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 (19.0) (17.5) Spain Portugal Finland Austria Italy Greece 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 2 4 6 8 10 12 (34.5) (40.6) Luxembourg Ireland Belgium Switzerland1 United Kingdom France Netherlands Sweden Denmark Germany 0 10
European Union citizens

Share of EU citizens in total foreign population (%) Share of EU labour force in total foreign labour force (%) 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Note: In both charts, the host countries have been split into two according to whether the proportion of foreigners (or Community citizens) in the labour force is higher or lower than their proportion in the total population (or in the total foreign population). 1. The data are from registers of foreigners. Figures for the labour force do not include seasonal and cross-border workers. Sources: Labour Force Survey, Eurostat, 1997; Office fdral des trangers (Switzerland).
second largest group is comprised of European Union and United States nationals. Regarding the European countries of the OECD (see Chart I.8), the highest percentages of EU (at 15 members) nationals, as a proportion respectively of their total foreign population and of their foreign labour force, were to be found in 1997, in decreasing order of importance, in Luxembourg (90 and 94%), Ireland (85 and 87%), Belgium (68 and 75%) and Switzerland (61 and 67%). At the opposite end of the scale, with the corresponding percentages of 18 and 12, Austria had the lowest proportions in both. In Australia, Canada and the United States, the proportion of European residents has declined in favour of immigrants from the developing countries (see Statistical Annex, Tables B.1.5). In the
OECD 1999
United States, the number of European residents has fallen while that of immigrants from Asia (see the later section on Asian migration in Section B) and from the American continent have increased. Between 1980 and 1990 the number of Mexican, Vietnamese and Chinese nationals almost doubled; those from India and the Dominican Republic more than doubled. In Canada, the number of Europeans (notably nationals from the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany and Italy) fell sharply between 1986 and 1996 while the immigrant population of Asian provenance doubled. The same phenomenon has been observed in Australia: conspicuous growth in immigration flows from Asia, New Zealand and Africa, while those of European provenance remained stable.
39
Table I.6.
Maghrebian, Turkish and former Yugoslavian residents in selected European OECD countries, total population and labour force, 1997
Foreign population1 Total foreign population
of which:
Algeria
Morocco
Tunisia
Turkey
Former Yugoslavia
Belgium Denmark France Germany Italy Netherlands Norway Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom
903.2 249.6 3 596.6 7 365.8 1 240.7 678.1 158.0 609.8 522.0 1 340.8 2 066
8.9 .. 614.2 17.5 .. 1.1 .. .. .. .. ..
1.0 .. 17.1 0.2 .. 0.2 .. .. .. .. ..
132.8 3.6 572.7 83.9 131.4 135.7 1.2 111.1 .. .. ..
14.7 1.4 15.9 1.1 10.6 20.0 0.8 18.2 .. .. ..
4.7 .. 206.3 25.4 48.9 1.5 .. .. .. .. ..
0.5 .. 5.7 0.3 3.9 0.2 .. .. .. .. ..
73.8 37.5 197.7 2 107.4 .. 114.7 3.4 .. 18.4 79.6 56
8.2 15.0 5.5 28.6 .. 16.9 2.2 .. 3.5 5.9 2.7
8.1 33.9 52.5 1 209.02 85.0 28.4 17.3 .. 33.6 313.5 ..
0.9 13.6 1.5 16.4 6.9 4.2 10.9 .. 6.4 23.4 ..
Foreign labour force3 Total foreign labour force
of which:
Algeria
Morocco
Tunisia
Turkey
Former Yugoslavia
Austria4 Belgium Denmark France Germany5 Netherlands Spain7 Sweden8 Switzerland9 United Kingdom
1.
247.3 333.0 88.0 1 569.8 2 521.9 208 176.0 220 692.8 949.0
.. 3.0 .. 246.1 .. .. 3.7 .. .. ..
.. 0.9 .. 15.7 .. .. 2.1 .. .. ..
.. 38.5 .. 205.0 .. 35 67.7 .. .. ..
.. 11.6 .. 13.1 .. 16.8 38.5 .. .. ..
.. 1.2 .. 85.0 .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. 0.4 .. 5.4 .. .. .. .. .. ..
50.1 19.1 13.6 65.8 745.2 29 .. 7 33.1 23.0
20.3 5.7 15.5 4.2 29.5 13.9 .. 3.2 4.8 2.4
136.8 .. 7.3 23.2 348.06 .. .. 31 138.2 ..
55.3 .. 8.3 1.5 13.8 .. .. 14.1 19.9 ..
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 Denmark are for 1996. 2. Data are for Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia. 3. Figures include unemployed except for Austria and the Netherlands. Data for Belgium, France, Sweden and the United Kingdom are from the Labour Force Survey; for the other countries, see the notes at the end of the Statistical Annex. 1996 for Denmark. 4. Annual average of valid work permits. Unemployed and self-employed are not included. 5. Data (as of 30 September) refer to salaried workers only. Figures cover only western Germany. 6. Data are for Serbia and Montenegro. 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.
The distribution 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 of the Southern and Eastern shores of the Mediterranean Basin (this aspect of migration flows from the coun-
tries of Asia and of Central and Eastern Europe is examined in Section B). The distribution in Europe of nationals from the three Maghrebian countries (Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia), Turkey and the former Yugoslavia has changed over the past 15 years. Although France remained in 1997 the principal host country for Maghrebians (in total, close to 1.4 million residents, see Table I.6) and
OECD 1999
40
indeed Algerian emigration remains concentrated almost entirely there, Moroccan and Tunisian migrants have been going in greater numbers to other host countries. Already present in Belgium and the Netherlands (140 000 persons in each country), Moroccans have widened the range of their destinations and now form sizeable communities in Italy, Germany, and Spain. In 1997, far behind France, it was in Italy, followed by Germany, that the largest Tunisian communities were located. With the extension of the conflict in the Balkan region, most recently to Kosovo, migrants from the former Yugoslavia have increasingly gone to new host countries. Although in 1997 Germany remained, by some distance, the country with the greatest number of immigrants from the former Yugoslavia (over 750 000 nationals of Serbia and Montenegro and approximately 550 000 Croatians and Bosnians), Italy was by then the forth host country after Switzerland and Austria. The Nordic countries (principally Sweden and Norway) also feature among the new host countries along with Greece, Hungary and Bulgaria. Turkish immigrants, the largest number of whom are to be found in Germany, have also settled in other European OECD countries, notably, in decreasing order of importance, in France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Austria and Denmark. Numbering just over 2.1 million, the Turkish community in Germany accounts for almost 30% of the resident foreign population in that country. Although Turks are far less numerous in the Netherlands than in France they account for approximately 17% of the total foreign population there; the corresponding percentage in France is less than 6%. In Switzerland the figure is also 6%, in Belgium 9% and in Denmark 16%. In Austria, one in five salaried foreign workers is of Turkish origin. Foreigners or immigrants from 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 most analyses of migration, focus is rarely placed on the latter group even though their numbers are relatively high. The recent admission of several new countries to the OECD has boosted this trend. In 1997, Turks headed the rankings by nationality of foreigners residing in the European Members of the OECD. The Italians and the Portuguese were respectively third and fourth (behind nationals of the former Yugoslavia). The Korean predominance in Japan merOECD 1999
its highlighting, as does that of the Mexicans in the United States. 3. Immigrants and the labour market
The net annual change in the foreign labour force is not simply identical to the net change in foreigners migration flows: changes in the foreigners labour force participation rate, alterations in their demographic profile and modifications to naturalisation policies are potentially no less important. Over the course of the past fifteen years, changing economic conditions combined with the upward trend in migration movements and the entry onto the labour market of family members of immigrants already settled in the host country have had significant repercussions on the employment of foreigners. The foreign labour force has grown in almost all the OECD countries and its characteristics have changed, in ways which vary from country to country. The heterogeneous character both of the foreign presence in the various economic sectors and of their share of total employment is the product of a number of factors the importance of which vary from country to country, the most significant generally being the countrys migration history. Other factors include, most notably, 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 clear that foreign workers have penetrated all sectors, thus showing the same general evolution as total employment over the past decade. a) The proportion of foreigners in the labour force
Over the last decade, the proportion of foreigners or the foreign-born in the total labour force has increased in several OECD countries, notably in Luxembourg, Austria, Belgium, Germany, and the United States (see Table I.5). By contrast, throughout the period the proportion has declined slightly in France and Australia. Classified by the size of the foreign or foreign-born proportion of total employment, three groups of countries could be distinguished in 1997: a first group comprised of (in descending order) Luxembourg, Australia, Canada and Switzerland, with proportions between 55 and 18%; a second group, comprised of the United States, Austria, Germany, Belgium, France and Sweden where the proportion was at a much lower level, between 10 and 5%; and a third group comprised of Norway, the
41
Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Denmark, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Japan with foreign proportions of total employment at less than 5%. b) Participation rates of foreigners by sex and place of birth
only to nationals) employs the lowest proportion of foreigners (the exceptions being agriculture in Australia and the United Kingdom and mining and quarrying in Canada and the United States). In the 1998 edition of the same publication, the focus was placed on changes in total employment and the employment of foreigners between 1993 and 1997, a period during which the European countries examined (excepting Germany) experienced employment growth. The study demonstrated that for all workers, nationals and foreigners considered together, reductions in employment in the industrial sector have been more than offset by increases in the tertiary sector. Although the employment of foreigners followed the broad overall tendency, employment creation in the tertiary sector had not been sufficient to outweigh the massive job losses in the industrial sector in Belgium, France and Germany. A more detailed sectoral analysis clearly revealed the fragility of foreigners employment, which was particularly high in the construction sector in Belgium, and to a lesser extent in France and the United Kingdom. This fragility also concerns mining and quarrying activities and/ or manufacturing in Germany, Luxembourg, France and the Netherlands. The degree of fragility is correspondingly more significant the greater is the concentration of foreign labour. The study also showed that the situation in the service sector is similarly contrasted. In certain branches foreigners have benefited relatively more than nationals from employment creation, for example, in the hotel and restaurant sector of all the economies considered except those of France and Holland. Except in the Netherlands, this is also the case in the business services sector and real estate. Turning to the transport sector, the employment of foreigners has increased at a faster rate than that of nationals in the United Kingdom, Luxembourg and France; in the Netherlands, foreigners have been less affected than nationals by the decrease in the total number employed; in Germany although the total number employed has also diminished, the number of foreigners employed has actually increased; in Belgium, the overall decline has had the opposite result. In the other service activities the results differ according to the country. The employment situation in the banking sector has been unfavourable to foreigners in Germany and the United Kingdom, likewise has that prevailing in the retail sector in Germany, France and the Netherlands, and in the health and social services sector in Belgium, the United Kingdom, Germany and France. In conclusion, over the course
OECD 1999
In the 1998 edition of Trends in International Migration, a study devoted to female labour immigration revealed that over the past 15 years this category had a tendency to increase in some OECD Member countries. In this edition, special attention is given to the participation and unemployment rates of foreigners by sex, place of birth and nationality in some OECD countries. It appears, in 1997 (see Chart I.9), that the participation rate of female nationals is generally higher than that of foreign females, with the exceptions of Italy (a new immigration country) and Luxembourg where labour immigration is largely predominant. Excluding Austria and Sweden, the participation rate of foreign-born females is, on the whole, higher than that of foreign females. The same type of comparison gives the same results for men, except in Italy, Luxembourg and Austria, i.e. the participation rates of male nationals are higher than that of foreign males. The difference is however less marked for males than for females. The participation rates of foreign-born males are higher than those of foreign males and in some cases of nationals, for example, in France, Italy, Luxembourg and Austria. It is important to bear in mind that a cross-section analysis (1997) does not take into account the fact that participation rates also depend on the length of stay. Indeed, the differences according to place of birth and nationality tend to reduce considerably beyond a period of stay greater than ten years. c) Recent developments in the employment of foreigners and the increasing presence of foreign labour in the service sector
42
In the 1997 edition of Trends in International Migration, an analysis of the distribution of foreign labour by economic sector revealed concentrations in certain sectors, the sectors concerned varying from country to country (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). It was underlined that the degrees of concentration similarly display country-dependent variability. In the overwhelming majority of the countries examined, public administration (posts which are generally open
Chart I.9. Participation rate and unemployment rate by sex, place of birth and nationality in some OECD countries, 1997
Foreign-born
Unemployment rate (%) 30 25 Belgium 20 Italy 15 10 5 0 40 50 60 70 80 90 Participation rate (%) 40 50 60 70 80 90 Participation rate (%) Australia Denmark Netherlands United Kingdom Austria Canada France Belgium Denmark United Kingdom Netherlands Canada Austria Australia Luxembourg 0 Italy 5 Women Men Unemployment rate (%) 30 Sweden 25 20 15 10
Sweden France
Luxembourg
Foreigners
Unemployment rate (%) 30 France 25 Belgium 20 Germany 15 10 5 Luxembourg 0 40 50 60 70 80 90 Participation rate (%) 40 50 60 70 80 90 Participation rate (%) Italy Denmark Denmark Netherlands Belgium France Germany 15 10 Italy Luxembourg 5 0 20 Women Men Sweden 25 Unemployment rate (%) 30
Sweden
Netherlands United Kingdom Austria
United Kingdom Austria
Nationals
Unemployment rate (%) 30 25 20 Italy 15 Belgium 10 Australia1 5 0 Luxembourg 40 50 60 70 80 90 Participation rate (%) 40 50 France Germany Netherlands Canada
1
Women
Men
Unemployment rate (%) 30 25 20 15
Sweden Denmark
Austria United Kingdom
France Sweden Canada1 10 Italy United Australia1 Germany Kingdom Belgium 5 Austria Denmark Netherlands Luxembourg 0 60 70 80 90 Participation rate (%)
1. Women (or men) born in the country of residence. Sources: Labour Force Survey, Eurostat, 1997; Labour Force Survey 1998 (Australia); 1991 Census data (Canada).
43
OECD 1999
of the period 1993-97, in certain sectors, the employment of foreigners grew faster than that of nationals, in others the opposite was true. The trend of increasingly widespread use of foreign labour across the various sectors of the economy has continued. In this edition, we have sought to compare developments in foreigners employment with those in total employment over a period of eight years, equally spread across the indicated year corresponding to the start of an economic upturn (see Chart I.10). The reference year, (trough index = 100) differs only slightly across the countries examined (see Box). Overall, one observes that foreigners employment fluctuates more markedly than total employment. The upturns in Portugal, Austria, Italy, Norway and in Ireland were accompanied by comparatively stronger growth in foreigners employment. In the cases of Italy, Portugal and Ireland, which have recently become immigration countries, the growth in foreigners employment predated the year of the upturn and concerned relatively small numbers of people who were probably concentrated in a limited number of sectors. In France, Germany and the Netherlands, upturns in economic activity appear to have been less favourable to foreigners. That said, in the latter two countries foreigners employment grew more strongly than total employment during the period immediately preceding the upturn, whereas in the case of France the number of foreign workers declined throughout the period with the exception of one year (1995). In Australia, the trend in foreigners employment has followed that of the economic cycle. This was also the case in Norway and the United Kingdom, although foreigners employment did rise more strongly during the upturn. d) Foreigners are more vulnerable to unemployment than nationals
(see Chart I.9); the exceptions are Austria, Denmark, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. On the other hand, the differential between the unemployment rates of foreign men and their native counterparts is greater than that between foreign and native women. In general, foreign-born men and women have, regardless of whether or not they are nationals, a lower rate of unemployment than their foreign counterparts. This phenomenon could be explained, in the cases of the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, France and Belgium, by the high percentage of those born abroad possessing the nationality of one of these countries. In the settlement countries (Australia, Canada and the United States), this over-representation is much less marked and, in general, the discrepancy between the unemployment rates of those born inside and those born outside the country is considerably lower than that observed between foreigners and nationals in Europe. The differences between the unemployment rates of foreigners and nationals and the fact that in any particular country, foreign nationals from different countries are typically not affected to the same degree, are due to a series of factors. These factors include, most notably, changes in economic performance and the nature of the posts occupied by the different ethnic groups, the demographic structure and the order of the various waves of migration into the host country. The profile of the immigrants has an important bearing on their degree of employability: variables such as age, gender, nationality, level of education, training and experience, mastery of the host countrys language and the length of stay in the host country play a non-negligible role among the factors which explain the degree of vulnerability to unemployment. In many countries, foreign male labour is concentrated in sectors which are in decline or undergoing major restructuring (notably mining and manufacturing) or in activities particularly susceptible to swings in the business cycle (such as construction and public works). The foreign workers made redundant, often approaching retirement age and having undertaken over the course of their working lives a series of lowskilled manual jobs in precarious sectors, have little likelihood of finding new employment. The recent arrival of large numbers of immigrants has also contributed to the swelling of foreigners unemployment, especially since labour market conditions are far from favourable in many OECD countries, particularly for unskilled workers. Those
OECD 1999
44
In general, foreigners are more vulnerable to unemployment than nationals. The causes of this greater vulnerability are multiple. In almost all of the European Member countries of the OECD, the foreign-born populations relative exposure to unemployment is greater than the proportion of the labour force for which they account. According to the most recently available data, presented in Chart I.11, it is in Denmark and the Netherlands that this discrepancy is the greatest, on average three times more. The situation is also critical in Belgium and Sweden. The rate of unemployment among foreign women is, in general, higher than that of their male counterparts
Chart I.10. Changes in employment of foreigners and in total employment during economic recoveries1 Index: trough = 100
Employment of foreigners Total employment
Portugal
110 100 90 80 70 60 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 Years from trough -4 -3 -2
Austria
Spain
110 100 90 80 70 60
-1
1 2 3 4 Years from trough
-4
-3
-2
-1
1 2 3 4 Years from trough 110 105 100 95 90 85
110 105 100 95 90 85 -4 -3 -2 -1
France
Germany
Netherlands
-4
-3
-2
-1
-4
-3
-2
-1
Italy
110 105 100 95 90 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 Years from trough -4 -3 -2
Australia
United Kingdom2
110 105 100 95 90
-1
-4
-3
-2
-1
1 2 3 4 Years from trough Current recovery Trough
150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 -4 -3 -2
Norway
Ireland
150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 Australia Austria France Germany Ireland Italy Netherlands Norway Portugal Spain United Kingdom
-1
-4
-3
-2
-1
1992 1993 1993 1996 1993 1993 1993 1991 1994 1996 1993
Note: Data on foreign employment for the Netherlands are estimated by the CBS. These data are derived from work permit issues for Germany, Italy, Portugal and Spain, from Social Security registers for Austria, from population registers for Norway and from the Labour Force Survey for all other countries. Data on total employment are from OECD (OECD Economic Outlook, No. 65, June 1999). 1. The troughs in activity correspond to the greatest disparity between actual and potential GDP (output gap), according to OECD estimates (OECD Economic Outlook, No. 65, June 1999). 2. Data on foreign employment are from the Labour Force Survey. Fluctuations from one year to the other can be due to sampling errors. Sources: National Statistical Institutes and OECD Economic Outlook, No. 65, June 1999.
45
OECD 1999
Chart I.11.
Share of foreigners or the foreign-born in total unemployment relative to their share in the labour force in 19971
1 1. August 1998 for Australia, 1991 for Canada and 1990 for the United States. For these three countries, data refer to the foreign-born. In all other countries, data refer to the foreign population. Sources: For European Union countries: Labour Force Survey, Eurostat; Australia: Labour Force Survey, Australian Bureau of Statistics; Canada: 1991 Census data, Statistics Canada; United States: 1990 Census data, US Department of Commerce, Census Bureau.
lia
es
ce
ria
an
en
s nd D en
ur
ad
do
an
ra
at
an
st
iu
ed
bo
nl
an
Au
St
ng
Fr
Au
Sw
Fi
Be
er
xe
Ki
te
Lu
ni
who have entered as refugees or as asylum seekers have, when they are permitted to work, considerable difficulties (notably linguistic) in some host countries in finding employment during the first years of their stay. This would explain the foreigners high rates of unemployment in Sweden, Denmark and Norway, countries in which the annual flows of refugees and asylum seekers are relatively high compared with other categories of entrants. Indeed, in general new arrivals frequently need to go through a period of adaptation prior to their successful entry into the host countrys labour market, be it due to the need to attain a mastery of the language, understand the administrative formalities, become sufficiently aware of the particular modes of entry into the labour market (acquire fresh job search techniques) or adapt to new working conditions. All of these factors play a decisive role in finding and retaining a job. B. Recent developments in Asia and Central and Eastern Europe
ni
te
et
he
rla
st
lg
extension: Asia and Central and Eastern Europe. Characterised by a diversification of the nationalities involved and the growing importance of flows between neighbouring countries sharing common historical, economic and cultural traditions, both regions are exemplars of the globalisation and regionalisation of migration movements not only are Asia and Central and Eastern Europe zones of emigration, notably towards the countries of the OECD, they are also experiencing extensive intraregional migration. In the case of Asia, regional migration had until very recently been taking place within a context characterised by strong economic growth, increasing trade and capital flows, and a strong momentum towards further regional economic integration. East and Southeast Asias 1997-98 financial crises have affected countries simultaneously concerned with both immigration and emigration. In this report we present first a brief review of the immigration flows of Asian provenance into the OECD area. Particular attention is then accorded to the initial impacts of the recent financial crises on migration flows within the region (including undocumented flows) as well as to the changes in migration policies recently effected there. In Central and Eastern Europe, the recent economic and political changes reinforced by social and
OECD 1999
46
In the three most recent editions of Trends in International Migration (OECD, 1995, 1997, 1998), particular attention was accorded to the widening over recent years of the area of reference to be considered in analyses of migration movements and policies. Two regions in particular have contributed to this
ar
ethnic tensions have been the principal determinant factors behind population movements. Allied to these factors, the economic imbalances within the Central and Eastern European countries (CEECs) (and likewise in the countries on their eastern borders) have played a non-negligible underlying role in the recent trends in migration movements within the region. Following a presentation of these trends, a second sub-section will be devoted to an examination the CEECs role as a regional migration pole. An analysis of the contents of the association agreements concluded between the European Union and several of the CEECs will be developed further in Section C of this synthesis. 1. Migration flows of Asian origin to OECD countries and the impact of the financial crisis in Asia on migration movements between Asian countries
those coming from Europe. In Australia, residents born in Asia accounted for less than 6% of the total foreignborn population in 1971; the corresponding figure for those born in Europe was 85%. Over the last fifteen years, the foreign population of Asian provenance (including the Middle East) has more than doubled, passing from close to 400 000 in 1981 to reach a figure of nearly one million in 1996. Although as a proportion of the foreign population those of European origin remain in the majority, accounting for almost two thirds, those of Asian origin now account for just over a quarter of the total (see Table I.7). The increase in Asias importance as a region of origin is brought into sharp relief by an examination of the composition of the inflows. Whereas in 1982/83, approximately 30% of the immigrants authorised to settle in Australia were Asian, by 1991/92 that figure had reached 50%. Since then, however, this upward trend has been slightly moderated by increased flows from Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. Nevertheless, in 1997 there remained six Asian countries among the ten most important sending countries for new permanent entrants (see Chart I.3). Immigration from Asia has also increased in Canada. In 1981, the number of immigrants born in Asia (including the Middle East) stood at close to 540 000, i.e., 14% of the total immigrant population. In 1996, they accounted for almost a third of the total. Since 1993, more than half of immigrant entries have been from Asian countries; eight feature in the top ten source countries for new immigrants (in descending order of importance, Hong Kong (China), India, China, Chinese Taipei, Pakistan, the Philippines, Iran and Sri Lanka) (see Chart I.3). This progression in the rankings accompanied fallbacks in the flows from Europe and the United States. The same phenomenon a decline in European migration and an increase in flows from Asia is clearly in evidence in the United States. Immigrants of Asian origin (including the Middle East) numbered 5 million in 1990, twice the figure of 1980. In 1997, four Asian countries (in decreasing order of importance, the Philippines, China, Vietnam and India) were among the top ten source countries for permanent immigrants. The intensification of traditional flows from Asia is also apparent in the United Kingdom and France. In the latter country, the proportion of Asian residents increased between the censuses of 1982 and 1990 from 4 to 6% of the total foreign population. Cambodia, Vietnam and Laos are the principal send-
Although counting among its number many immigration countries, Asia is presently one of the principal sending regions (both for settlement and labour migration) as well as being one of the chief origins of refugees and displaced persons. Over recent years, Asian migration to OECD countries has been displaying a broad tendency of mutually reinforcing increases both in volumes and in the degree of diversification. 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 flows of immigrants or refugees from Asia. Since the early 1960s, such flows to the United States, Canada and Australia have registered steady increases and in so doing have gradually supplanted those from Europe. Recent Asian migration to OECD countries has been characterised by two clear trends both of which correspond to the standard evolution of the migration process: on the one hand, a strengthening of previously formed ties, and on the other, a widening of the range of immigrant nationalities, destination countries and entry categories involved. Immigration flows from Asia surpass those from Europe From the early 1980s onwards, flows from Asia to the United States, Canada, Australia and several European countries have intensified. In North America and in Australia, the increase in these flows has gone hand in hand with the reduction in the numbers of
OECD 1999
47
A.
Table I.7. Stock of Asian nationals1 in selected OECD countries in 1997

Japan2 Thousands Denmark France Germany Italy Korea
Thousands
Thousands
Thousands
Thousands
Thousands
Total foreigners Asia3 of which: Bangladesh China India Indonesia Korea Pakistan Philippines Sri Lanka Vietnam Total for the above nine countries
1 482.7 100.0 1 086.4 6.1 252.2 7.5 11.9 645.4 5.6 93.3 .. 11.9 1 033.8
249.6 53.2 .. 2.1 1.1 .. .. 6.9 2.1 5.4 5.2 22.9
100.0 3 596.6 100.0 7 365.8 100.0 1 240.7 100.0 21.3 .. 0.8 0.4 .. .. 2.8 0.8 2.2 2.1 9.2
227.0 .. 14.1 4.6 1.3 4.3 9.8 1.9 10.3 33.7 80.0
Spain
176.9 .. 7.9 35.4 .. 13.6 1.7 13.1 3.7 13.5 88.8
100.0 .. 4.5 20.0 .. 7.7 0.9 7.4 2.1 7.6 50.2
73.3 0.4 17.0 0.5 0.8 43.5 0.4 6.3 .. 0.8 69.7
6.3 .. 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.9 2.2
.. .. 36.7 35.6 .. 21.9 .. .. 60.3 87.9 242.5

Sweden
..
.. 0.5 0.5 .. 0.3 .. .. 0.8 1.2
225.5 .. 37.8 22.6 .. .. .. 61.3 28.2 .. 149.9
18.2 .. 3.0 1.8 .. .. .. 4.9 2.3 .. 12.1
3.3
Netherlands Thousands
Norway Thousands
Switzerland
United Kingdom Thousands
Thousands
Thousands
Thousands
Total foreigners Asia3 of which: Bangladesh China India Indonesia Korea Pakistan Philippines Sri Lanka Vietnam Total for the above nine countries
678.1 100.0 69.0 0.5 7.3 2.8 8.0 .. 3.2 2.4 2.4 2.0 28.5
158.0 31.5 .. 1.8 2.2 .. 0.2 7.5 1.6 3.8 3.5 20.7
100.0 19.9 .. 1.2 1.4 .. 0.1 4.7 1.0 2.4 2.2 13.1
609.8 100.0 49.1 .. 15.8 6.8 .. .. .. 11.4 .. .. 33.9
522.0 100.0 1 243.6 100.0 90.3 1.0 3.7 1.7 0.4 0.5 0.9 2.0 1.0 2.8 14.1
2 066 490 63 21 110 .. .. 68 15 26 .. 303
100.0 23.7 3.0 1.0 5.3 .. .. 3.3 0.7 1.3 .. 14.7
10.2 0.1 1.1 0.4 1.2 .. 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 4.2
8.1 .. 2.6 1.1 .. .. .. 1.9 .. .. 5.6
17.3 0.2 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.5 2.7
.. 0.3 3.4 4.4 0.9 0.8 1.2 3.0 7.0 7.4 28.4
.. 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.6 2.3
B.
Stock of immigrants born in an Asian

Australia (1996) Thousands
country4
in Australia, Canada and the United States

Canada (1996) United States(1990)
Thousands
Thousands
Total foreign-born Asia3
3 908.3 922.4 111.0 .. 68.4 77.5 .. .. .. 76.2 .. 92.9 47.0 151.1 624.1
100.0 23.6 2.8 .. 1.8 2.0 .. .. .. 1.9 .. 2.4 1.2 3.9 16.0
4 971.1 1 562.8 231.1 49.3 241.1 235.9 .. .. .. .. .. 184.6 .. 139.3 1 081.2
100.0 31.4 4.6 1.0 4.8 4.7 .. .. .. .. .. 3.7 .. 2.8 21.8
19 767.3 4 979.0 529.8 244.1 147.1 450.4 .. 290.1 568.4 .. .. 912.7 .. 543.3 3 685.9
100.0 25.2 2.7 1.2 0.7 2.3 .. 1.5 2.9 .. .. 4.6 .. 2.7 18.6
of which: China Chinese Taipei Hong Kong (China) India Indonesia Japan Korea Malaysia Pakistan Philippines Sri Lanka Vietnam
Total for the above twelve countries
1.
Data are from population registers (or registers of foreigners) except for France (census), Italy and Spain (residence permits) and the United Kingdom (Labour Force Survey). Figures are for 1990 for France, 1992 for Switzerland. 2. Data for China include Chinese Taipei. 3. Including the Middle East. 4. Census data. Sources: National Statistical Institutes.
48
OECD 1999
ing countries. Over the same period, the number of Asians possessing French nationality doubled. As for the inflows by nationality, in 1993 only Vietnam featured in the top ten countries of origin; by 1995 Japan was also present, and China since 1997. In the United Kingdom, despite the stabilisation indeed the decrease in flows from South Asia, Indians continue to constitute the second largest foreign community after the Irish (see Table I.7). The Bangladeshi and Pakistani communities remain sizeable. In 1997, India, Japan, Pakistan and the Philippines featured among the top ten sending countries for new immigrants. The diversification of Asian migration flows Alongside the intensification of traditional flows, the trend of the origin countries increasing diversification is confirming itself and likewise the enlargement of the range of receiving countries. In the United States during the 1980s, immigrant flows from Cambodia and Laos declined, while those from Thailand, Indonesia and Chinese Taipei stabilised. Those from Malaysia, Hong Kong (China), Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka increased, albeit to levels of a few thousand from each country. In Canada, in 1997, Sri Lanka and Chinese Taipei were in the top ten immigrant source countries (see Chart I.3). In Australia, from the beginning of the 1980s the numbers of immigrants of Vietnamese and Indian origin have continuously increased. This diversification has also concerned other Asian countries: the number of residents of Chinese origin more than tripled between 1986 and 1996 to reach over 111 000, those of Filipino origin now number 93 000. Over the same period, the number of immigrants of Malaysian origin increased by just under 60% (to 76 000); those from Hong Kong (China) and Sri Lanka have more than doubled. Much lower down the scale are Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Thailand, Chinese Taipei, Cambodia and Laos. Increased diversity in the means of entry also characterises the evolution of recent Asian migration to the United States, Canada and Australia. The desire on the part of these three host countries to increase the number of qualified and highly qualified entrants, manifested by offering entry opportunities other than family reunion (such as employment-related permanent immigration as well as entry for temporary work or study) has contributed to this diversification. The diversification in migration flows of Asian provenance is also illustrated by the broadening of the range of destination countries. These now include a wider range of European countries (southern as well as
OECD 1999
northern) and Japan. Whereas intra-European migration, notably from Spain, Italy, Greece and Portugal, has declined since the 1970s, flows from Asia have increased. Thus, Germany receives a high number of refugees from Indo-China (though lower than France and the United Kingdom). In 1997, of the 7.3 million foreigners resident in Germany, 88 000 were from Vietnam, 60 000 from Sri Lanka, 37 000 from China and roughly the same number from India (see Table I.7). During the 1980s, the number of immigrants of Pakistani and Sri Lankan origin received by the Netherlands similarly increased. In 1997, the Indonesians (despite the fact that most of them possess Dutch nationality) remained the largest Asian community, followed by the Chinese and the Pakistanis. Asian migration to the Nordic countries, almost negligible until the 1970s, increased considerably during the second half of the 1980s, largely through requests for asylum. In Denmark, this immigration is primarily from Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Vietnam; in Finland, from Malaysia, India, Vietnam, China and Bangladesh. Immigration from Pakistan, Vietnam and Sri Lanka has also developed in Norway. In Sweden, immigration from Asia involves above all the Vietnamese, the Chinese, Indians and Filipinos (see Table I.7). In Southern Europe, Asian immigration is mainly from the Philippines and China. In Italy and Spain, these migration flows, essentially of females, are linked to the development of the domestic service and health-care sectors. In 1986, Italy had 65 000 foreign residents of Asian origin (including the Middle East). By 1997 this number had more than tripled. The most numerous national groups, in decreasing order of size, were Filipinos (61 000), Chinese (38 000), Sri Lankans (28 000) and Indians (23 000). In Spain, the Chinese comprise the largest Asian community, followed by Filipinos and Indians. Since the beginning of the 1980s, migration to Japan has increased significantly. Although non-Asian immigration has also grown in importance, migration movements to Japan are principally regional in character, involving in the main neighbouring countries. In 1980, the large majority (80%) of foreigners settled in Japan were Korean. In 1997, Koreans still formed the largest group of foreigners, but other foreign communities had also developed, in particular of Chinese, Filipinos, Vietnamese, Indonesians and Indians. In addition, illegal immigration to Japan, estimated on the basis of the number of foreign nationals who have not left the territory upon the expiration of their visa or work permit, is mostly from
49
Asia (Korea, Thailand, China, the Philippines and Malaysia). Japan now appears to be becoming a regional migration pole. Indeed, an analysis of its 1997 immigration figures reveals that of the ten leading countries of origin, five were Asian. In Korea, the number of registered foreign nationals has considerably increased since 1991, a development largely attributable to the normalisation of diplomatic relations with China. They still accounted for less than 1% of the total population in 1997, composed principally of Chinese, Taipei Chinese, Japanese, Filipino and Vietnamese nationals. b) The impact of the recent financial crises in Asia on migration movements within the region11
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 recently effected 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, be they governmental or private, of which there are large numbers in the labour sending countries. They recruit and select migrants, arrange their transportation and look after the administrative formalities associated with employment contracts. The adverse effects of the financial crisis which began in Thailand in July 1997 as a result of a successful speculative attack on the countrys peg to the United States dollar, rendered vulnerable through excessive short-term overseas borrowing denominated in foreign currencies, quickly spread to other Asian countries due to the exposure of similar underlying weaknesses and/or the effects of their significant trade linkages. In respect of the crises impacts on economic growth and employment, the countries of the region can be classified into three groups. The first group, those most affected by the crises, comprises Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia and Korea. The situation in Indonesia, whose economy has been the hardest hit by the regional crises, is a source of particular concern given the severe poverty, the political instability and its population size estimated at just over 200 million. Confidence in the other countries in this group, Thailand, Malaysia and Korea, both domestically and from foreign investors, saw some signs of recovery towards the end of 1998, pointing to a modest upturn in 1999. The second group, rather less affected by the crises, comprises Hong Kong (China), Singapore and the Philippines. China and Japan are in a group apart. The former, although it has not succumbed to the financial crisis contagion, has suffered an indirect impact due to the importance of the Asian export market slowing its growth to a rate even further below that required to create net employment growth. The recession in Japan has deepened, for reasons largely unconnected with the financial crises affecting the majority of the regions economies. Deflationary pressures in goods, labour and asset markets have found themselves renewed.
From the 1960s onwards the economies of East and South-east Asia began to experience strong and, with the exception of Indonesia and the Philippines, sustained economic growth. As the region was and, indeed, remains characterised by substantial interand intra-national economic and demographic imbalances, advancement in the process of structural change in the regions labour markets and increases in the extent of regional integration stimulated rapid growth in migration flows. Migration flows between the countries of East and South-east Asia if one excludes the movements of refugees, notably to Thailand are essentially composed of temporary workers. These intraregional flows are largely a development of the 1980s and have since then continued to grow. In so doing they have overtaken the magnitude of those to the oil-producing economies of the Middle East. In fact, 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 fastgrowing Asian economies. Data on labour migration in Asia are scarce and not always reliable. International comparisons are therefore difficult to draw. Moreover, in several countries the estimated number of illegal immigrants far exceeds official count of those in possession of a valid residence or work permit. In the more developed countries of the region this situation is in large part a reflection of the shortages of unskilled workers: since these countries restrict the entry of unskilled workers, the number of
50
1. This sub-section was drafted by John Simpson, Consultant to the OECD, on the basis of the national reports delivered at the two most recent workshops on Migration and the Labour Market in Asia organised by the Japan Institute of Labour, the Japan Ministry of Labour, in collaboration with the ILO and the OECD and held in Tokyo in January 1998 and January 1999.
OECD 1999
Table I.8.
Unemployment rates in some Asian countries, 1997 and 1999

As a percentage of total labour force
19971 19992
Hong Kong (China) Indonesia Korea Malaysia Singapore Thailand
2.4 4.9 2.3 2.6 1.8 2.2
5.8 15.0 8.5 5.2 4.5 6.0
1. End of 1997 except for Indonesia (August 1997), Thailand (February 1997) and Korea (October 1997). 2. Estimate at September 1998 for Singapore, December 1998 for Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand and at January 1999 for Korea and Hong Kong (China). Sources: Government sources.
Regional impact on labour markets and on the employment of foreign workers
requiring employers to redouble their efforts to hold down costs. National labour markets and the employment of documented workers
In the crisis-affected economies, official estimates of unemployment have, at the median, almost tripled (see Table I.8). Of these economies only Korea provides laid-off workers with any unemployment benefits at all, and even there the coverage does not extend beyond certain categories of employees. Family networks notwithstanding, across the region there is limited scope for avoiding dire poverty if one is not employed. This would indicate, then, that there have taken place substantial transfers of labour from the formal to the informal economy. Whilst there is some consensus that the majority of the crisis-affected economies will have begun to experience modest growth by the end of 1999, there exists similar agreement that their labour markets are set to deteriorate further as sectoral contractions continue and large scale restructuring proceeds. Significant net employment creation within the formal sector is not expected in any of them before the end of 2000. Macroeconomic data on the extent of sectoral contractions in the crisis-affected economies indicate that these have been disproportionately deeper in those sectors, inter alia construction and manufacturing, employing the greatest weight of foreign labour. Although in the regions more prosperous economies the demand for foreign workers to perform household services and to fill other low status and disagreeable jobs had proved resilient, the overall tendency had been for registered unskilled foreign workers to bear the brunt of retrenchments. There is, by contrast, strong evidence that the employment of illegal immigrants, the overwhelming majority of whom also unskilled, has held up supported by an increasingly cut-throat environment
OECD 1999
Singapore The impact of the crisis on employment in Singapore has been slight. This must be attributed to a significant degree to the governments policy drive to reduce wage costs. The government has taken a lead in cutting the wages of its own employees and has reduced employers social security contributions. It has also sent out a clear message that retrenchment decisions should be based primarily on productivity rather than nationality. Against this background, although evidence from sending countries points to a decline in new hires at the lower end of the skills range, the number of foreigners working in Singapore is at the level predicted in 1996 on the basis of the medium term trend observed at that time. At the end of 1998, the more than 450 000 work permit holders, the bulk of whom unskilled, and the approximately 80 000 Employment Pass holders, possessing tertiary or professional qualifications and receiving a salary in excess of S$2 000 (US$1 175), accounted for close to one quarter of the total workforce. Hong Kong (China) Foreign workers comprise approximately 1% of the total labour force. Accounting for around half the total, domestic helpers have for some years constituted the largest category of foreign nationals admitted for employment; they numbered 171 000 in 1997. Approximately 85% are from the Philippines. Surprisingly, the onset of the recession has not had a negative impact on their inflow.
51
Indeed, the growth in the inflow over the first seven months of 1998 exceeded that for the whole of the preceding year. Although contract terminations have been rising, they represent less than 2% of the total stock, and, given that the stock has been rising more swiftly in 1998 than 1997, it would appear that those who have lost their post are facing little difficulty in finding a new one. The issue of their terms and conditions and the current policy towards established schemes to bring in construction workers, technicians, craftsmen and other experienced operatives are examined below (see the section on Recent migration policy developments). Japan The Japanese labour market began to slacken markedly from the beginning of 1997; recent data indicating that redundancies are increasingly being made amongst those in the 35-54 age group would indicate that the labour market has entered a new phase of deterioration. The decline in total employment notwithstanding, the estimated number of foreigners (not including permanent residents but including visa overstayers) working in Japan increased by 5% in 1997 to approximately 660 000. They account for less than 1% of the total labour force. Three quarters of the rise is attributable to the increase in the number of ethnic Japanese (who have no restriction placed on their employment), the inflow of whom grew by 11% in 1997 to now account for over one third of the total stock. Entries of individuals with restricted permission to work, all of whom are classified as skilled, totalled 94 000, an increase of almost 20% on the previous year. The increase was broadly spread across employment categories. Reflecting their rapid turnover, at the end of 1997 the total number of those with restricted permission to work was just over 107 000, an increase of slightly under 9% on 1996. Entries of trainees, who for administrative purposes are not considered as workers, numbered almost 50 000 in 1997, an increase of 9% on 1996. China accounted for 43%, only slightly less than the combined figure for the five next most important countries (Indonesia, Korea, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand). Since the start of the trainee programme slightly less than 60% of those accepted have come from China and just under 30% from Indonesia. Official stock data are unavailable. A recent estimate has put the figure at 115 000. Korea
52
(including the undocumented) fell by 30% over the period 1997-98. Disaggregated by employment status, the declines were negatively correlated with skill level and degree of employment protection. The number of skilled foreign workers, small prior to the crisis, fell by almost a quarter to just over 11 000. The number of trainees declined by just under 30% to 64 000. Malaysia In January 1998, the foreign labour force was estimated at two million, accounting for just under one quarter of the total labour force. Of the 1 240 000 registered workers almost 95% possessed temporary permits to be renewed annually, the remaining 70 000 were highly skilled, the majority from India (17.5%) followed by Japan (15%) and United States (10 per cent). With the exception of India, most of the origin countries for highly skilled workers are major investors in Malaysia. By the end of 1998, as a result of the various measures taken to reduce dependency on foreign labour (outlined below in the section on recent migration policy developments), the number of registered foreign workers had fallen by 30%. Of the approximately 860 000 remaining registered workers, the majority were employed in factories, plantations and construction sites. Almost two thirds were Indonesian. In spite of the rather high degree of dependency on foreign labour, a large number of Malaysians (mostly non-indigenous, in particular those of Chinese ancestry) were working abroad at the onset of the financial crises, most notably in Singapore. An up to date thorough estimate is not available: the most recent, that of 1992, put the figure at around 200 000; it is likely to have increased substantially through to 1997. Thailand In Thailand, where the total labour force was estimated to fluctuate seasonally prior to the crisis at between 30 and 32 million, reliable data on the total number of registered foreign workers are not available. It is known however that fewer than 90 000 of the 270 000 illegal migrant workers who were granted work permits under a 1996 scheme allowing those who had entered Thailand before 25 June of that year to apply for work permits valid for one year and renewable for a second chose to renew. The decision not to renew was presumably motivated by fear of repatriation should the labour market deteriorate further. The majority of those that did renew were
OECD 1999
Accounting for less than 1% of the total workforce prior to the crisis, the total stock of foreign workers
concentrated in agriculture, construction and marine fisheries. In 1997 an estimated 115 000 Thais left to take up documented employment elsewhere in Asia, with Chinese Taipei taking almost 90%. An estimate of their stock is not available. (The stock of undocumented Thais working in Asia was estimated at just over 110 000 at the beginning of 1997, with Japan and Malaysia each accounting for approximately 40 000 and Singapore 20 000.) For both documented and undocumented workers post-crisis figures are not available. Philippines Prior to the crisis there were an estimated 600-650 000 land-based Filipinos working abroad in Asia (along with an approximately equal number of illegal workers). In the first nine months of 1998 the outflow of newly hired Filipino workers declined by 10 per cent on the corresponding period in 1997 to 175 000. The falls to all Asian countries except Japan just offset the increases to America, Africa and Europe. The downturn has been most significant in Korea and Malaysia where fresh hires were down by over 50% and almost 95% respectively. In the crisis affected economies contract renewals have also fallen significantly, by 19%, which substantial increases in Brunei and Chinese Taipei narrowly failed to offset. Male workers, the market for whose services is largely in activities which have been badly hit by the financial crises such as production, construction and small-scale manufacturing, have been more greatly affected than female workers the demand for whom has remained buoyant in such areas as domestic assistance in Hong Kong (China), office cleaning and caretaking in Chinese Taipei, and entertainment work in Japan. Indonesia From the early 1990s onwards, stimulated by significant wage differentials against a background of religious, cultural, racial and geographical proximity, documented emigration flows to Malaysia and Singapore increased substantially. The flow to Malaysia, having averaged approximately 7 500 in the second half of the 1980s, was around 40 000 in 1995. The figures for Singapore were approximately 2 000 and 15 000 respectively. Behind Saudi Arabia, these two countries became the principal destinations for Indonesian labour migrants. (In the case of Malaysia certainly these documented flows were dwarfed by illegal flows: in 1996 the stock was estimated at between
OECD 1999
500 000 and one million. A considerable number were subsequently regularised such that at the end of 1998, a year during which, as was noted above, the number of registered foreign workers fell by 30%, documented Indonesian workers were estimated to number 560 000. The importance of past illegal flows to Malaysia is further evidenced by the fact that of the 190 000 who left the country voluntarily during the 1998 amnesty period almost 90% were Indonesian.) In common with the Philippines, the lingering effects of the droughts caused by the El Nio phenomenon have rendered the agricultural sector unable to absorb surplus labour as had initially been hoped. Given the lack of opportunities in Indonesia, other countries in the region, Malaysia and Thailand in particular, have increased their efforts to counter illegal immigration. Although the ethnic Chinese accounted at the onset of the economic crisis for only about 4% of Indonesias population, they controlled the majority of companies. Accused of attempting to profit from commodity shortages, their properties and persons were the subject of attack during the riots of May 1998 prompting an estimated 40 000 to flee. A significant part of the distribution system was thereby destroyed. Following other riots, as well as the continuous rumours of further large street movements, the ethnic Chinese have been reluctant to resume their activities. Indeed further large numbers are understood to have fled the country taking with them their commercial know-how and crucial networks of trading contacts. China Since 1992 the number of foreign skilled professionals working in China has been on the increase, reaching 82 000 in 1997. These inflows are strongly linked to those of foreign direct investment. These inflows of professionals are believed to be more than outweighed by undocumented inflows from neighbouring countries, comprised in the main of the unskilled. It is understood that they are largely based in the border provinces. A total of 334 000 Chinese were working abroad in 1997 under contracts overseen by the Chinese authorities, the sole legal form of labour export. Given that over recent years approximately 70% of Chinas labour export has gone to other Asian countries, frequently for large-scale construction projects, the figure can be expected to have fallen in 1998 and continue to do so this year also. That it did not
53
decline in 1997 reflects in all probability the honouring of previously arranged contracts. Unemployment and underemployment were already rising prior to the regional downturn. Continued insufficiency of demand coupled with labour shedding accompanying the continued reform of state owned enterprises (which Chinese experts estimate to increase by 40% over 1999 and 2000) are set to bring the effective unemployment rate (registered plus laid-off) up to 9% in 1999. Increased unemployment, in addition to representing a severe threat to social stability within China is also feared as a source of increased illegal migration flows to its neighbours. Japan, in particular, is reviewing its controls and legislation to take better account of this threat. Recent trends in undocumented migration
exists a floor on their number due to the existence of firmly embedded social networks. In both Singapore and Hong Kong (China), the number of undocumented foreigners caught in 1998 was sharply up on 1997. In both cases, it was considered difficult to discern whether this was due to increased illegal migration or was the fruit of the increased efforts to detect them. Malaysia, which over recent years has been the destination for considerable numbers of undocumented Indonesians, stepped up its border patrols (particularly sea) in February 1998. The exercise, which involved the use of the security forces, was judged a success and was therefore ended the following month. In spite of this success in preventing further clandestine inflows and the increased attention paid to those aiding and abetting illegal entry and employment, the estimated number of illegal workers is believed to have fallen by less than 10% in 1998, to approximately 700 000 (as compared with the 30% fall in the number of registered foreign workers to 860 000). This is despite the voluntary repatriation of 190 000, almost 90% of whom were Indonesian. It would appear that a sizeable proportion of the 380 000 temporary permit holders affected by the freeze on permit renewals between January and August 1998 opted to stay and work without papers; employers are doubtless keen to hire them in order to hold down costs in the face of increased competitive pressure. Confronted with this situation, measures to locate and expel those who remained have been intensified (see the section on Recent migration policy developments below). Thailands extensive land frontiers represent an important obstacle to effective border control. A survey conducted in October 1997 by the Department of Employment in co-operation with private agencies in each province found that the number of illegal workers had increased to approximately 935 000 from the estimated 480 000 at the end of the 1996 regularisation programme. The most recent survey conducted by the same agencies in June 1998 put the figure at just under 990 000, the overwhelming majority of whom are from the bordering countries of Burma, Laos, and Cambodia. The authorities repatriated just under 290 000 up to November 1998, and presume that there has been an additional net outflow of approximately 90 000, bringing the current estimate to 610 000. Given the porosity of Thailands borders there exists considerable doubt as to whether those who have left will not return.
OECD 1999
Although due to their geographical situation (and in the case of Korea, military situation) they are well placed to resist clandestine immigration, the problem of those who enter the country legally and overstay their visa is a significant problem for Korea, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Hong Kong (China) and Singapore. In Korea, the raising in 1998 of the penalties on the employers of illegal immigrants, on private recruitment agencies (these have long since been prohibited from dealing with migrant workers) and on illegal migrants, complemented by the implementation of an amnesty programme, have not led to as sharp a fall in the number of undocumented workers as had been expected (see the section on Recent migration policy developments below). Their number fell by one third during 1998 (only marginally greater than that of legally registered workers and of trainees) to slightly less than 100 000; they account for almost 60% of the foreign labour force. It would appear that in spite of the high level of official unemployment and the generally weak insurance coverage there remains unsatisfied demand for low-wage workers prepared to perform the more disagreeable jobs. In Japan, due in large part to the implementation during the mid-1990s of a range of measures to limit illegal labour migration, the number of undocumented foreign workers has been declining slowly since 1993. They number at present 277 000, accounting for just over 40% of the foreign labour force. Although the growth in the number of foreign trainees is satisfying the otherwise unmet demand for low cost labour it would appear that, as in Korea, there
54
Recent migration policy developments
Singapore In line with its position that retrenchment decisions should be based primarily on productivity rather than nationality, the Singapore government has announced that it has no plans to reduce the number of foreign workers. The view taken is that foreigners fill gaps at the higher end of the skills range as well as the unsatisfied demand left by the unwillingness of the local workforce to accept the more onerous and low status jobs and that companies need to dispose of the maximum possible flexibility in their hiring decisions in order to maintain their competitiveness. Within the framework of a package of short-term measures to lower the cost of doing business in Singapore, thereby preventing job losses through relocation to cheaper sites and shut-downs, the foreign worker levy, payable by employers for each foreign worker they hire, was reduced for certain workers and sectors with effect from 1 January 1999. The levy on foreign domestic maids remained unchanged, however, as it does not contribute to business costs. The levy for workers in the construction sector will also remain unchanged as the government would like this sector, which has been suffering low and declining productivity, to upgrade. Government support to attract and retain skilled foreign workers continues. To this end, companies can now claim twice the rate of corporation tax for their relocation and recruitment expenses. Further, a Singapore Talent and Recruitment (STAR) committee has been formed, headed by two government ministers. It has been tasked with making Singapore a hub for international talent whilst retaining its social cohesion, and has been mandated to study specific recommendations made by public and private groups regarding the recruitment of foreign talent and the nurturing of the local skills base. While Singapore continues to maintain an open policy towards foreign recruitment, the penalties for illegal immigration and employment were raised considerably in 1998. Moreover, company chiefs are now held personally liable for the employment of illegal immigrants. Hong Kong (China) Stimulated by the rising level of unemployment accompanying the economys restructuring (it should be borne in mind that in common with all the econoOECD 1999
mies of the region with the exceptions of Japan and Korea unemployment insurance does not exist) and the granting during the latter years of colonial government of an institutional status to organised labour and a public venue for the expression of their grievances, the issue of the employment of foreigners has become increasingly politicised. With the economys move into contraction in October 1997, the issue of foreigners access to the labour market, particularly the unskilled section which has been the most severely affected by the downturn, came to the fore. Attention has focussed on foreign domestic helpers and on the continued use of established schemes to bring in construction workers, technicians, craftsmen and other experienced operatives. Foreign domestic helpers have a minimum allowable wage which is adjusted from time to time. It has stood at HK$ 3 860 per month (about US$ 500) since 1996. A number of politicians proposed during 1998 that their pay be reduced by 20% to share the burden of the economic crisis. Their leader additionally proposed that employers be allowed to require maids to be on duty for 16 hours a day. Comparisons were made with the US$ 225 minimum in Singapore. In addition to encountering strong opposition from the Filipino workers it also provoked diplomatic intervention by the Philippine President. The Hong Kong government has since promised to complete a review of the minimum allowable wage by the end of 1999. In conducting the review, it will be constrained by its signature to the International Labour Convention requiring it to ensure that the conditions of employment offered to foreign workers are comparable to those of local employees. In September 1998, the authorities confirmed that despite rising unemployment the Special Labour Importation Scheme (which allows contractors involved in large scale infrastructure projects to bring in construction workers from overseas) would continue. The following month they announced that a review of the Supplementary Labour Scheme (which concerns the importation of those at technician, craftsman, supervisory and experienced operative levels) had concluded that it should continue to operate as is, pending an annual review. In view of the steadily rising unemployment rate, trade unions have been threatening to use their position on the body which vets requests to block applications to both schemes. The government points to the existence of labour shortages in some industries. The textile and garment industries in particular have lobbied for the expansion of labour importation in order that the sector remain competitive.
55
Japan Recent policy initiatives in Japan have sought, on the one hand, to facilitate inflows of highly skilled personnel and, on the other, to combat illegal labour immigration. Measures implemented in the mid1990s such as tightened visa control, improvements in co-operation between agencies, the imposition of severe penalties on those found to have organised or abetted the smuggling of aliens as well as a publicity campaign dissuading employers from hiring illegal workers have already had some success in dealing with those elements of the problem of illegal immigration susceptible to influence from the Japanese side. In January 1998, the maximum period of stay for intra-company transferees (hitherto 5 years) was abolished: transferees may now apply for an extension of their permit. During the 1998 fiscal year, the Ministry of Labour launched a drive to render potential migrants from Asia and South America more aware of the labour market situation in Japan and the manner in which they might legally obtain employment, for example, through Japans job placement system. It is hoped that this will both increase the proportion of technical and highly skilled workers in the inflows and discourage migration flows directed at illegal employment Although the overwhelming majority of illegal foreign workers enter the country legally, the problem of clandestine entry, particularly by boat, is arousing increasing concern. Almost 90% of those caught in attempting to enter in this manner in 1997 were from China. In view of the likelihood of further increases in unemployment in China as a result of the restructuring of State enterprises the Japanese authorities are considering introducing additional amendments to the Immigration Act in order to further counter the criminal organisations involved in clandestine immigration. Korea As the economy moved into deep recession towards the end of 1997 the social and political pressure to clamp down on the illegal employment of foreigners, the overwhelming majority of whom overstayers, increased. The Ministry of Justice, having taken the view that the success of any direct measures implemented would be limited by the disincentive presented by the immigration fines they would incur if caught attempting to leave the country, a considerable risk given the uncommonly tight border controls, announced in December 1997 that until
the end of March 1998 they would be allowed to leave the country without having to face this penalty. This amnesty period was subsequently extended through to the end of July. In August 1998 the number of overstayers had fallen to 92 000 from the estimated 148 000 present at the beginning of the year. The direct measures implemented aimed on the one hand to facilitate their substitution for legal workers and on the other to render their continued employment more costly. Financial support for the purchase of new machinery was made available to small and medium sized companies in the hope that increased capital investment would render employment in the companies less disagreeable to nationals. Thus far this policy has met with scant success. Few companies have taken up the funding, dissuaded, it would appear, by previous difficulties in retaining nationals. In those that have, the number of foreign workers replaced has been extremely modest. The penalties on the employers of illegal migrants, on private recruitment agencies (these have long since been prohibited from dealing with migrant workers) and on illegal migrants themselves were raised. The government also appointed labour officers to investigate migration-related issues. This too would appear to have had scant impact. By April 1999 the number of overstayers had risen to 111 000. In response to the new figures the government announced that a second amnesty would take place during May 1999. Aware of the importance, vis--vis attracting foreign direct investment, of providing easy access for foreign skilled workers and limiting the restrictions on the duration of their stay, the government simplified in 1997 the administrative procedures governing the issuing of their visas and revised the Immigration and Emigration Law to abolish the ceiling on their period of residence. Their inflows can therefore be expected to pick up quite rapidly. Malaysia Since the crisis Malaysia has made significant alterations in its policy towards both labour emigration and immigration; in the latter case these changes have been numerous. Prior to the onset of the financial crisis in mid 1997, the authorities took a tough stand against Malaysians apprehended for abroad for overstaying their visa. On their return their passports were impounded by the immigration authorities. Mirroring the scant co-operation it has received regarding the repatriation of undocumented foreign workers, this ruling has been withdrawn. In addition,
OECD 1999
56
Malaysians studying abroad on government scholarships are no longer compelled to come home to serve the government as required by their contracts. Developments in its policy towards to foreign workers and the measures implemented in their regard have focused on the semi-skilled or unskilled, the new recruitment of whom had been frozen (except for those in critical sectors, i.e. export related or likely stimulate economic growth) in the first half of 1997 with the aim of encouraging the economys move away from labour intensive production and towards high technology activities. The initial postcrisis line taken was simply to maintain this freeze. An extension to domestic helpers in August 1997 was lifted within a month following strong opposition from certain sections of the public. At the same time, the ban on use of foreign labour in island holiday resorts was relaxed. In an environment of increasing redundancies and mounting pressure from trade unions, renewals of temporary work passes in the service, manufacturing and construction sectors were frozen in January 1998. Those affected by the freeze had the choice of either returning to their country of origin or accepting redeployment in the agricultural sector. At the same time, the government announced an increase in the levies to be paid by foreign workers. Those for domestic helpers and agricultural workers rose by 20%; the much higher levies on those in construction, manufacturing and services rose by between 25 and 110%. Moreover, the household income requirement for prospective employers wishing to recruit foreign domestic helpers was almost doubled. (This income requirement is over three times higher for those seeking to hire a Filipina maid as opposed to one from Thailand, Indonesia or Kampuchea.) The freeze was directed at the 380 000 foreign workers who were due to have their temporary work permits renewed by 15 August 1998. At the end August, when the freeze was lifted (accompanied by the issue of a directive that if retrenchment is unavoidable, foreign workers should be laid-off first), the Ministry of Home Affairs announced that just over 115 000 had chosen to leave. Response to the redeployment offer, however, was dismal: only 115 took it up. The remainder were assumed to have remained in Malaysia working illegally. This prompted the government to launch an amnesty programme on 31 August. Illegal workers were to surrender to the authorities bringing with them a one way ticket to their home country before they were given the necessary papers
OECD 1999
to leave. They were spared the stiff fines and/or jail sentence usually imposed. Originally planned to last for two months from 1 September to 31 October 1998, the amnesty had to be extended by two weeks due to transport shortages, in particular of ships, to carry the returnees home. As previously noted, of the 190 000 repatriated almost 90% were Indonesian. At the end of the amnesty period measures to locate and expel those who remained were intensified. Those apprehended are to be sent to one of the eight immigration detention centres, kept there until they are identified by their respective countrys embassy or consulate and then deported. Thus far only the Philippine government, in early 1999, has agreed to a call by the Malaysian authorities to share the cost of repatriation. Although by the second half of 1998 recorded unemployment among nationals had almost doubled from the 2.6% level of 1997, there was a considerable mismatch between the aspirations of job seekers and the vacancies available. Throughout the period during which work permits were not renewed there remained unmet demand for workers to perform the more demanding and disagreeable jobs in the plantation, construction and services sectors. The need for foreign labour became increasingly pressing. This led the government to backtrack on its previous policy. In October 1998, the exemption on new recruitment was extended to the plantations and tourist related services. The ceiling on the proportion of foreign workers in any one factory was increased from 30% to 50. A total quota on these new workers was fixed at 120 000 with exceptions to be granted to employers who could provide proof that their attempts to recruit local workers had failed. These workers were to be recruited directly from their countries of origin and without recourse to the use of private sector recruitment agencies, the establishment of which had been encouraged in the early 1980s to total 160 by 1997, but are now banned except for the recruitment of domestic helpers. Nationals of Indonesia and Thailand were accorded preference in the Peninsula and nationals of Indonesia and the Philippines in Sarawak. The aforementioned measures were followed in January 1999 by a cut the in levies to be paid by workers in services, construction, and manufacturing to bring them to levels broadly corresponding to those before the increases of January 1998.
57
Thailand Faced with the apparent failure of its 1996 temporary regularisation programme, increasing inflows of illegal workers and declines in employment in both the industrial and agricultural sectors (the burden of which was falling almost entirely on women), the government embarked on a more restrictive policy towards migrant workers in 1998. It was decided, inter alia, that: no more work permits would be granted to illegal workers; those in possession of work permits would be monitored and would not be allowed to work in factories; border controls would be tightened and the Immigration Law would be strictly implemented; an advertisement campaign would be conducted in an attempt to dissuade employers from hiring illegal workers; and, all illegal workers apprehended would be repatriated (in those cases where this would not be possible they might be allowed to work in the provinces bordering Burma, Laos and Cambodia). Firms experiencing labour shortages would, however, be allowed to hire foreign labour but only directly from abroad and through official channels. Faced with strong pressure from influential employers and employers organisations, however, the government decided in May 1998 to grant work permits to employers reporting demand for illegal workers. Employers were given three weeks to submit their application forms indicating their desire to hire illegal workers. The Department of Employment would then try to find Thai workers to fill the vacancy. Permits would be granted for the positions that remained open on 6 October 1998. The response from employers was disappointing. They only requested permits for 10% of the estimated 900 000 illegal workers. Thailand too is encouraging its nationals to seek employment abroad. A government agency, in cooperation with commercial banks, is providing low interest loans to this end. This policy is quite different from the pre-crisis situation when the government did not interfere in the market. The Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare sought co-operation from several countries to send at least 215 000 Thai workers overseas by the end of 1998. In the first six months of 1998 just under 95 000 had been so placed. Philippines The recent declines in both the outflow of migrant workers and in the renewal of existing contracts as well as the increased feminisation of the
migrant workforce have brought up two key policy issues: the need to maximise and better channel remittances, and the need to further promote the use of Filipino labour by overseas companies whilst ensuring that they are not exploited. During the first ten months of 1998 the volume of remittances to the Philippines fell by over 12% on the corresponding period of 1997. In order to increase and better channel them the Philippine Central Bank announced at the end of 1998 the issue of US$1.3 billion of tax exempt bonds and treasury bills aimed at overseas workers the proceeds of which will be used for agricultural development projects. The government has implemented measures to facilitate the reintegration of displaced workers into the Philippine labour market. Recognising, however, that the economys capacity to absorb them is very limited it is taking steps to encourage job retention and is identifying market niches where the overseas Filipino workers have an edge. It is also facilitating the obtention of jobs with better working conditions. Foreign workers rights and social integration
Concern has been expressed by NGOs and origin countries regarding, inter alia: the lack of equal treatment accorded to foreigners in their conditions of employment; their lack of or limited entitlement to social security benefits, education and training and access to employment services; and, the restrictions placed on family reunion. Concern over such issues is not confined to the countries of East and South-east Asia. In this regard a clear distinction is to be drawn between de facto and de jure integration. In Malaysia for example, the government has, since 1992, adopted a policy of according legally recruited foreign workers rights to almost equal to those enjoyed by local workers, with the exception of the right to unionise. This policy has been less than fully implemented. In terms of pay, for example, a number of studies have revealed that legally recruited workers are paid at lower rates than nationals. Furthermore, there exists discrimination in this regard between different nationalities of foreign worker. For example, Indonesian and Cambodian domestic helpers are paid over 30% less than the minimum accorded to Filipinas. Foreign workers are supposed to be entitled to work-place accident insurance cover, housing and medical cover paid for by the employer. However, these benefits are either difficult to access or, if provided, tend to be
OECD 1999
58
grossly inadequate. In February 1998 it was estimated that the employers of almost 60% of registered workers had failed to take out insurance cover for them. Housing provided for manufacturing workers, for example, is often in the form of a crowded fourbedroom housing unit for occupation by between 20 and 30 workers. For the majority of foreign workers who are paid on a daily basis, sick leave is unpaid. In certain destination countries, significant progress has been made over recent years in strengthening foreign workers employment rights and in providing them with access to medical care, language and vocational training, and some social security benefits. Exemplars of current best practice include, most notably, Japan, Korea and Singapore. In Japan for example, a variety of social integration programs for foreign workers and their families have been reinforced and developed. These include the establishment of Employment Service Centres for foreign workers as well the provision of education for the children of foreign nationals on equal terms as native Japanese. In Korea, legally registered foreign workers are entitled to the same social protection rights as nationals. Trainees, though they do not benefit from the same degree of protection, are protected, however, by eight selected articles of the Labour Standard Law, the Industrial Safety Law and the Minimum Wage Law and are covered by state medical insurance. Since 1994, they have been eligible, moreover, as are illegal workers, to state-run industrial accident insurance coverage on equal terms with nationals. Singapores labour laws do not discriminate between local and foreign workers. Foreign workers are entitled to non-statutory non-wage related benefits such as annual leave and sick leave and are compensated in the same manner as local workers if they are injured at work. They are also allowed to join trade unions. They have access to all social amenities which are available to Singaporeans, including medical, transport and recreational facilities. In addition, employers generally provide medical benefits such as paid hospitalisation and paid medical leave. Even in the aforementioned countries, however, family reunion is generally only permitted to skilled or technical foreign workers receiving salaries above a certain minimum. Whilst the widespread phenomenon of clandestine employment does, of its nature, limit the success that efforts to improve social integration might have, there exists considerable scope for the use of instruments under governments direct control such
OECD 1999
as the nature of work and residence permits. In Singapore, for example, although skilled workers, professionals and entrepreneurs are encouraged to take up permanent residence and citizenship, unskilled foreign workers are permitted to work only for a maximum of two years after which time, unless they upgrade themselves and acquire new skills, they are expected to return home. In Malaysia, although no limit is placed on the duration of employment allowed for maids, unskilled foreign workers can not stay in Malaysia for longer than seven years and skilled workers receiving salaries above a certain minimum can work for a maximum of ten years. In certain countries there is an inconsistency of attitude with respect to the rights which are considered due to their nationals working abroad and those which are considered due to foreigners working in their country. In the specific case of Indonesia, which has expressed concern about the security of its overseas workers, in particular of females who are especially vulnerable to abuse by employers and brokers, the view that immigrant workers come of their own volition and are free to leave if unhappy with their conditions of employment and lack of social protection has been forcefully proclaimed. Shortly after the outbreak of the crises it had been predicted that demands by sending countries on receiving countries to enhance the rights accorded to their foreign workers would in all likelihood diminish. Moreover, tightened internal political constraints would render more difficult moves by host governments along this path. Subsequent events have borne these predictions out. Indeed, efforts to protect the position of national workers in the labour market during the financial crises have led in some countries to the violation of migrant workers basic rights, especially those of the undocumented. Given the increased need for remittances the situation remains ripe for exploitation and abuse. The welfare and protection issues are especially crucial for female workers, the demand for whom has remained buoyant in such vulnerable areas as domestic assistance and entertainment work in contrast to males, the market for whose services is largely in activities which have been badly hit by the financial crises such as production, construction and small-scale manufacturing. At present, of the crisis affected economies only Hong Kong (China) has signed the ILO Convention requiring it to ensure that the conditions of employment offered to foreign workers are comparable to those of local employees.
59
2.
Recent migration trends in Central and Eastern Europe
Recent migration developments in Central and Eastern Europe display two clear 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 flows, already quite sizeable in the case of Germany, grew during the 1980s. These movements largely involve ethnic Germans (in Poland, Hungary, Romania and the former Soviet Union), Hungarians (in Romania and the Slovak Republic), Poles (in Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Siberia), Russians (in the Baltic States), Finns (in Russia and Estonia), Greeks (in Albania and the Pontian region of the former Soviet Union), and finally, Turks (in Bulgaria). An other segment of the migration movements in the region derives from the ethnic conflicts and wars which have taken place in the former Yugoslavia and which have led to sizeable displacements of the resident populations, in particular in Bosnia Herzegovina and Kosovo. Another trend is that of transit migration towards western European countries. These flows are essentially comprised of migrants either from other CEECs or other eastern European, Asian or African countries who, in the majority of cases, enter one of the CEECs legally in the hope of rapidly (illegally) reaching a western European country. This phenomenon is increasingly obliging the CEECs to implement policies to control the flows, most often in the context of international co-operation at the regional level, which frequently involves OECD Member countries (see Section C below). Since 1989, Central and Eastern Europe has constituted a new migration area. Due to the importance of flows between neighbouring countries sharing common historical, cultural and economic traditions, reinforced by the sizeable population movements provoked by social and ethnic tensions, the regionalisation of movements now predominates. Contrary to certain alarmist forecasts, the opening of national borders in Central and Eastern Europe following the political changes of the late 1980s have, as yet, not resulted in massive population movements towards OECD countries. It is certainly the case that emigration towards these countries (in particular to Germany) is far from negligible, however, these flows have declined markedly since 1993 despite the fact that
migration flows of temporary labour have been increasing and that free circulation is being facilitated by the majority of the OECD Member countries which do not require entry visas for nationals of CEECs wishing to stay less than three months. a) Sizeable inflows and outflows since the opening of the borders
The changes which have taken place in Central and Eastern Europe have led to an increase in migration movements not only from East to West but also between the various countries of the region. Two other aspects of recent East-West migration flows merit highlighting: these new flows are occurring in the context of the migration trends already observed in the past (Polish emigrants, followed by those from Romania, constitute the largest groups in these flows); Germany remains the principal receiving country for migrants from Central and Eastern Europe. The traditions of westward emigration are not identical for all the CEECs. In the past, the Poles and the Romanians were the most numerous to emigrate to certain OECD countries. The location of the established expatriate communities explain, in part, the direction, nature and magnitude of the post-1989 East-West flows. Other East-West migration flows, notably those of seasonal and border workers, developed after 1989; they largely correspond to a process of regional integration limited to border regions within the framework of bilateral agreements (for example, those between Germany as a recipient of labour from Poland and the Czech Republic, and likewise those between Austria as a recipient of labour from Hungary and the Slovak Republic). In 1997 or for the most recent year for which data are available (see Table I.9), nearly all of the OECD countries counted immigrants from the CEECs in their populations. In Australia, Canada and the United States, available statistics refer to the foreignborn. Nationals of the former Yugoslavia, followed by the Poles, were the most numerous in Australia. In the United States, the Poles were again the second most numerous preceded by nationals of the former Soviet Union. In Canada, these latter outnumber the Poles by almost two to one. The majority of the European OECD countries count foreigners in their populations according to their nationality. In 1997, Germany was the principal receiving country for nationals of the CEECs and the former Soviet Union. Austria receives mainly Romanians and Poles, followed by nationals from the
OECD 1999
60
A.
Table I.9. Foreign residents who are nationals of central and eastern European countries in selected European OECD countries, latest available year
Thousands
Austria 1991 Belgium 1997 Czech Republic 1997 Denmark 1997 Finland 1997 France 1990
Bulgaria Former CSFR1 Hungary Poland Romania Former USSR Former Yugoslavia Total foreigners Countries mentioned above (as a % of total foreigners)
3.6 11.3 10.6 18.3 18.5 2.1 197.9 517.7
0.8 0.8 1.0 6.0 2.2 2.9 1.3 903.2
6.6 52.2 .. 25.0 2.4 .. .. 209.8
.. .. .. 5.5 1.1 3.0 33.9 249.6
.. .. 0.5 0.7 .. 19.0 4.2 80.6
0.8 2.0 2.9 46.3 5.7 4.3 52.5 3 596.6
50.7
Germany 1997
1.7
Hungary 1997
41.1
Italy 1997
17.4
Netherlands 1997
30.2
Sweden 1997
3.2
Switzerland 1997
Bulgaria Former CSFR1 Hungary Poland Romania Former USSR Former Yugoslavia Total foreigners Countries mentioned above (as a % of total foreigners)
34.5 27.0 52.0 283.3 95.2 50.4 1 209.0 7 365.8
1.7 3.7 4.5 57.4 17.0 16.0 143.8
.. .. .. 31.3 38.1 3.7 44.4 1 240.7
0.5 0.5 1.3 5.7 1.1 5.2 28.4 678.1
.. .. 2.9 15.8 3.2 .. 33.6 522.0
.. 4.6 3.5 4.1 .. .. 313.5 1 340.8
23.8
69.7
9.5
6.3
10.6
24.3
B.
Immigrants born in central and eastern European countries residing in selected OECD countries, latest available year
Thousands
Australia 1996 Canada 1996 Denmark 1996 Netherlands 1997 Sweden 1997 United States 1990
Former CSFR Hungary Poland Romania Former USSR2 Former Yugoslavia Total of foreign-born Countries mentioned above (as a % of total foreign-born)
.. .. 65.1 .. 49.8 118.5 3 908.3
41.2 54.2 193.4 .. 106.4 122.0 4 971.1
.. 1.4 9.8 1.4 3.6 27.6 259.2
3.9 4.9 13.6 3.1 8.4 46.7 1 549.0
.. 14.5 39.6 .. .. 119.2 954.2
87.0 110.3 388.3 91.1 389.9 141.5 19 767.3
6.0
10.4
16.9
5.2
18.2
6.1
1. This refers to the citizens of the Slovak Republic for the Czech Republic and Hungary. 2. Including Baltic States for Australia. Sources: Census for Austria, France, Australia, Canada and the United States, residence permits for Italy and population registers for the other countries.
former Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and then Hungarians. The recent inflows notwithstanding, in the case of Germany and likewise that of Austria, nationals of the former Yugoslavia outstrip nationals of the CEECs by a wide margin, both in terms as a proportion of the total population and of the labour force (see Table I.9). By far the greatest number of
former Yugoslavia nationals live in Germany, followed by Switzerland and Austria. In France, of the foreign residents originally from Eastern Europe those from the former Yugoslavia and Poland (respectively 53 000 and 47 000 according to the 1990 Census) are the most numerous. In Italy, Albanians predominate followed by nationals of the
61
OECD 1999
former Yugoslavia, Romanians and Poles. In Sweden and the Netherlands, after nationals of the former Yugoslavia it is the Poles. In Finland, where nationals of the former Soviet Union predominate, the numbers of those originating from the CEECs and the former Yugoslavia are very low. Excepting those in the United States, the largest Polish and Romanian expatriate communities are located in Germany (283 000 and 100 000 persons respectively). Of the European OECD countries, Germany receives the largest number of foreign workers from the CEECs. The work permits issued in 1997 were mainly to Poles (23 000 contract workers and more than 200 000 seasonal workers). In Austria, foreign workers from the former Yugoslavia predominate and represent over half of the total foreign labour force. In 1997 in Austria, Polish foreign workers (close to 9 000) only just outnumbered the Hungarians and Romanians (see Statistical Annex, Tables B2.2). b) From permanent to temporary migration
Whereas permanent emigration to OECD countries is declining, the temporary migration of workers is developing both from East to West and between the CEECs themselves. On the providers side, the Poles are the most involved, working principally in Germany and Austria, but also in France, the Czech Republic and Sweden. In Germany, in 1997, the majority of Poles in temporary employment did so under intergovernmental agreements for seasonal work and subcontracted employment. In Austria, in the same year, nationals of the former Czech and Slovak Federal Republic were the most numerous of the holders of short term or limited duration (two year) permits, followed by Poles, Romanians and Hungarians. CEEC nationals there account for approximately one in five of the foreign nationals in possession of a short-term work permit, but barely one in ten of those with a permanent permit. c) Central and Eastern Europe: a regional migration pole
After having developed rapidly from 1989, the emigration flows of CEEC nationals to western countries have slowed down. For example, as a proportion of total inflows, entries of Polish immigrants have decreased since 1991 in Denmark, France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Sweden. In Germany, since 1993 the net migration flow of Romanian nationals has been negative. The emigration flow of Bulgarians of Turkish origin to Turkey has also decreased since 1993. Nevertheless, the existence of a wide range of ethnic minorities in the CEECs presents the potential for significant migration inflows to certain of the OECD countries. The number of refugees and asylum seekers originating from the CEECs has also declined. Indeed, the OECD Member countries now consider all of the CEECs as safe countries, the citizens of which are not eligible, in principle, to lodge asylum requests. Moreover, the introduction in several European OECD countries from 1992 onwards of visa regimes for the citizens of the former Yugoslavia led to a reduction in the number of people obtaining refugee status originating from that region. It should be noted, however, that this reduction was offset to some extent by an increase in the number of those granted temporary resident status on humanitarian grounds, notably from Kosovo in 1997 and 1998.
The political changes which have taken place in Central and Eastern Europe since 1989 have led to the dismantling of controls on the movement of persons (abolishment of exit visas, removal of restrictions on the issuance of passports) in the majority of these countries. These countries have also modified 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 establishment of programmes to encourage temporary labour migration to Western countries with the object of developing the participants professional experience and language skills; the introduction of short and long-term residence permits for foreigners; the abolition of visa requirements for the nationals of most OECD countries; and, the ratification of the Geneva Convention on refugees. Immigration flows are increasing. Indeed, in some of the CEECs and likewise in the Russian Federation, immigration flows probably exceed those of emigration. Unfortunately, the official data available do not permit the accurate measurement of the magnitude of immigration flows.2 On the basis of partial information concerning the numbers of foreigners in the CEECs, it would appear that Hungary was host in 1997 to more than 13 000 foreigners. In the Czech Republic and in Poland, entries (including returning nationals) num-
62
2. The present state of the CEECs migration statistics is such that they adequately cover neither migration movements, the number of foreigners in the population nor the number of foreign workers. For a detailed discussion of the concepts used and the available data on migration in the CEECs, see the Statistical Annex to this publication.
OECD 1999
bered in 1997 approximately 12 900 and 8 400 respectively (see Tables II.17, II.10 and II.31). In Hungary and the Czech Republic, countries where detailed statistics on permanent and long-term foreign residents are available, the number of persons entering under these categories has increased over the last four years, rising from 138 000 in 1994 to 144 000 in Hungary in 1997 and from 104 000 to 210 000 in the Czech Republic over the same period. In addition, data on the initial registrations for short-term permits and the renewals thereof point to the sizeable volume of the temporary migration flows to these countries. In the Czech Republic in 1997, approximately 154 000 foreigners held a residence permit valid for a duration of less than one year. The majority were from the former Soviet Union (essentially Ukraine), the Slovak Republic, Vietnam and Poland. In the same year, Hungary issued over 32 000 short-term permits, mostly for long visits, asylum claims 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 in 1989 and 1990, became positive in 1991 and has since 1995 stabilised at approximately 12 000. The available statistics in the Czech Republic on foreign workers show that in addition to the Slovakian workers who benefit from free access to the labour market, a number of Ukrainians and Poles are also recorded. A total of 61 000 foreigners held work permits in 1997 and approximately 70 000 Slovaks were employed there. In Hungary, Romanian workers account for just under half of those in possession of a valid working permit (the total in 1997 was 20 400). The economic imbalances which exist at the heart of the CEECs and, in certain cases, the presence of ethnic minorities explain the migration movements between these countries and the predominance in the Czech Republics inflows of Slovak Republic nationals and similarly Romanian nationals in Hungarys inflows. In addition, the opening of national borders, the economic changes linked to the transition towards a market economy and the collapse of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia have also been important driving forces behind the growth in regional migration. Certain countries are now both sending and receiving countries. The main sending regions are the former Soviet Union (notably Ukraine and Belarus), Romania, Poland, and Bulgaria, to which should be added the former Yugoslavia and the Baltic States. Geopolitical factors, particularly wars or ethnic conflicts in areas such as the former Yugoslavia, also conOECD 1999
tribute to explaining migration flow patterns. The number of refugees from the former Yugoslavia in the CEECs, notably Bosnians and Kosovars, is relatively high. The CEECs also constitute a zone of temporary stop-over points for potential immigrants hoping to reach Western Europe or North America. The majority of these migrants possess documentation authorising their stay, having typically entered either as tourists, business persons, or students. Many others illegally prolong their stay having entered in the same manner. The countries most affected are Poland and the Czech Republic due to their common borders with Germany. Bulgaria and Hungary also receive transit migrants seeking to reach Greece and Austria, respectively. Regarding the latter, following the tightening of border controls at the Austro-Hungarian border, many transit migrants have elected to change itinerary attempting instead to reach Germany via the more permeable borders of the Slovak Republic. Transit migration also concerns the Baltic States: nationals of the former Soviet Union (Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarussians) and Middle Eastern countries use this route as a means of reaching the Nordic countries, principally Sweden. Transit migration has given rise to the development of illegal immigration and employment in several CEECs. The transit migrants come from neighbouring countries such as Turkey, Albania and the former Yugoslavia, as well as from Bangladesh, India and Iran. The more flourishing is a countrys informal economy, the greater the pace at which the employment of immigrants in an irregular situation develops. Far from all transit migrants succeed in emigrating to the West (mainly to Germany, Austria, the Scandinavian countries and, to a lesser extent, Switzerland and Italy): 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 stimulates commercial activity and intra-regional trade. The CEECs, confronted with immigration in all its forms, are increasingly examining with a view to implementation policies which might better control the flows. Various forms of co-operation have been established with OECD countries in order to develop such policies. At the same time, the CEECs have also begun to cooperate among themselves and co-ordinate their actions in order to better define the regulations governing the movement of persons within an enlarged European migration space.
63
Four conclusions emerge from this overview of recent migration trends in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. First, East-West migration flows are continuing and reveal the predominance of certain nationalities and the relative importance of certain host countries. One notices next that these flows are currently at levels lower than those registered between 1989 and 1992; this illustrates the desire on the part of OECD countries to control East-West flows without totally closing their borders to all immigration from the CEECs. Third, the changes which have occurred in Central and Eastern Europe have led to some degree of growth in regional migration movements between the CEECs and to much stronger growth between them and their neighbours to the East and South (the NIS and the former Yugoslavia). Finally, immigration flows to the CEECs, considered in their entirety, are growing. C. AN OVERVIEW OF MIGRATION POLICIES
governing the entry, residence and employment of foreigners. While some reforms have led to improvements in the status of those already settled in host countries, most have been aimed at tightening border controls and the conditions for entry, residence and employment. Tightening border checks and entry requirements The Australian government implemented a series of measures in 1997-98 aimed at tightening both policies and practices pertaining to the entry of foreigners and border controls. The number of personnel dealing with border control has been increased, particularly those dealing with foreigners from so-called high risk countries and at Australian airports, in order to improve the effectiveness of identity checks upon entry. Certain of the detention centres for foreigners awaiting expulsion have been developed and adapted. A draft bill (the Character Bill) aims to prevent the entry of undesirable foreigners, in other words criminals who may pose a threat to public safety. In order to prevent procedural abuses, which have enabled undesirable applicants to extend their stay in Australia, the right to appeal against a denial of a residence permit has been limited to applicants who can prove their good faith. In Italy, the issue of immigration was hotly debated in 1997 and 1998, because of both the periodic arrival of undocumented foreigners on Italian shores and the passage of a new law governing the conditions of foreigners entry and residence. The Immigration Act of March 1998 separated issues relating to immigration from those relating to asylum. Asylum was dealt with in an earlier law. The Immigration Act has three main objectives: to regulate the admission of foreigners via the setting of annual quotas; to deal more severely with illegal immigration and migrant trafficking; and, to improve the integration of foreigners residing legally in Italy. Albanians, Moroccans and Tunisians have priority in the obtention of residence permits. This is because of both the presence of large numbers of immigrants from those countries and the bilateral negotiations which are underway with their governments. The conditions require that immigrants prove that they were already residing in Italy before the law came into force and that they have employment. The law includes an expulsion measure which was the subject of some controversy during its debate in parliament. Foreign-
Migration policies in OECD countries can be grouped into three broad areas. The first consists of measures adopted at national and international level to strengthen the control of flows (including those of asylum-seekers) and to more effectively fight against irregular migration and illegal employment of foreigners. The second covers all measures that aim to ensure a better integration of migrants in the host country. The third concerns the links between migration and co-operation for regional economic development.3 1. a) Policies for regulating and controlling flows The regulation of flows and the implementation of new legislation
The concern of OECD Member countries with the control of flows manifests itself not only in national policies, including frequent changes to immigration laws and the enactment of new laws, but also in international co-operation between Member countries and between Member countries and non-member countries. International co-operation in the sphere of migration is not yet highly developed, but is, nevertheless, the focus of some interest. National policies Several Member countries modified their legislation in 1997-98 and implemented new provisions
64
3. Section C has been drafted by the Secretariat with the co-operation of Lucile Barros, Consultant to the OECD.
OECD 1999
ers may be expelled if they enter the country illegally, if a residence permit is denied, if there is a lack of social integration or if they threaten public order or national security. Individuals awaiting expulsion may be held in special detention centres for 20 to 30 days. In the Netherlands, amendments to the Act on Foreigners, planned for 1999, will make it possible to introduce restrictive measures relating to immigration. The new provisions of the Act will essentially apply to asylum seekers (see below), although a temporary residence authorisation was re-implemented in December 1998 which is required of foreigners from most non-OECD countries before they may apply for a residence permit. This authorisation has to be obtained in the country of origin, before the foreigner arrives in the Netherlands. This is the second time that this authorisation has been re-introduced by the authorities. Pursuant to the Immigration Act of 1997, the Polish government implemented a new approach to the control of its eastern border on 1 January 1998. This replaced the previous system for admitting foreigners which had been considered as too liberal. An entry visa is now required for citizens of all neighbouring countries that have not signed a readmission agreement with Poland. This measure specifically affects nationals of Belarus and Russia. Nationals of most other countries are now subject to new entry requirements, and border checks have been tightened. In addition to regulating the flow of foreigners, this policy has resulted in a slow decline in business at markets in border regions and in Warsaw, as well as in petty trade along the border. Switzerland has reviewed its admission policy, and replaced its three-circle model with a binary model. This model distinguishes between citizens of EU/EFTA countries and those of all other countries. Citizens of EU/EFTA countries will gradually be allowed to circulate more freely, whereas citizens of other countries will be subject to a strict quota system. In Belgium, the Vande Lanotte Act of July 1996 has tightened up the conditions for the entry and residence of foreigners and access to refugee status. In response to numerous criticisms of this law, the Senate Committee for the Interior adopted a series of recommendations in June 1998, aimed at making enforcement of the law more flexible. Of particular note, the Committee recommended that the waiting period for obtaining a visa be reduced to one month, that reasons be given for all denials, that the regulations governing the sponsoring of a visitor by private
OECD 1999
individuals and humanitarian organisations be relaxed, that the penalties for giving humanitarian aid to undocumented foreigners be rescinded and that the number of cases in which unaccompanied foreign minors can be detained be restricted. In July 1998, the United Kingdom Home Office published a White Paper on immigration and asylum (Fairer, Faster and Firmer a Modern Approach to Immigration and Asylum), which should result in proposals for legislation during the 1998-99 parliamentary session. While suggesting an integrated approach to the system controlling immigration and asylum, the White Paper does not deal with the economic dimension of immigration. It sets out a range of measures aimed at tightening and improving border checks. It recommends that the number of personnel handling checks, notably at airports, be increased, and that the immigration law be modernised in order to facilitate verification of legitimate travellers and better identify potential abuses. A system requiring that visitors wishing to enter the United Kingdom post a bond may also be considered. In March 1998, the authorities announced that pre-boarding control of foreigners arriving by boat was proving ineffective, and that it will be replaced by a system based on partnerships between the authorities, transport companies and port authorities. In addition, in April 1998, the application of carriers liability was extended to the Eurostar link between Brussels and London, following complaints about the arrival of foreigners without papers on that train. In Portugal, as in the more traditional immigration countries, one part of immigration policy aims to better control the entry of foreigners into the country through improved border surveillance, strengthening the police force and the systematic detection of forged documents. The Act of 8 August 1998 on the entry, residence, departure and expulsion of foreigners reforms the previous Act of March 1993. The new law not only aims to bring national legislation into line with the need to effectively control external borders as required by the Schengen Agreement (signed by Portugal on 25 June 1991) and other agreements it has signed, but also confirms its desire to integrate immigrant populations. For example, the Act of August 1998 confirms the right to family reunion, and evidences a commitment to adapting immigration to the needs of the labour market, while giving priority to foreign workers already residing legally in the country. Bulgaria passed three laws in 1997 and 1998 governing the status of foreigners, citizenship and the
65
rights of refugees. These provide a legal and institutional framework for its migration policy. The new law on foreigners replaces the Act of 1973. It governs the entry and residence of foreigners and stateless persons. The law provides for several types of visa and residence permit, including short-stay (up to 90 days) and long-stay (one year) visas. The law requires transport operators to check the identity documents of their passengers and increases the penalties on those who transport passengers lacking the necessary documentation. Short-stay visas may only rarely be extended, and in these cases only for family or health reasons. The long-stay visa is only granted in certain cases: to individuals holding a work permit or wanting to start a business, spouses of Bulgarian nationals, directors of foreign investment companies, family members of permanent residents with sufficient funds, and for health and educational reasons. The law sets out the criteria for denying an extension of a residence permit. It requires all foreigners entering Bulgaria to provide an address and a reason for their stay, and substantially increases penalties against foreigners who do not obey the law. To ensure that in terms of migration it is no longer considered by the European Union as a highrisk country and is removed from the list of countries whose citizens require a visa, Romania has implemented several measures aimed at tightening checks at its borders. Citizens of 85 countries now need a visa to enter Romania. The number of personnel working at eastern border posts has been increased, and the equipment used for checks has been improved. Fines levied against undocumented foreigners have been increased substantially and additional funds have been budgeted to facilitate expulsions. In addition, two draft bills on the status of foreigners and citizenship are currently being reviewed by the Romanian parliament. Selection based on qualifications For several years now, some countries have been applying a competency criterion in examining foreigners applications for entry and employment. This criterion has led countries to increasingly accept only highly skilled workers. In Australia, the 1997-98 Migration Programme focused on the migration of highly skilled individuals and the economic benefits that would accrue to the country through attracting such workers. A revision of the points system for independent migrants and qualified migrants with family members in Australia
(Skilled Australian-Linked, SAL) took effect in June 1998. Its aim is to determine whether the tests applied to these two categories of migrants are effective in selecting immigrants capable of finding work quickly and making a positive contribution to the Australian economy, both in the short and the long term. The Australian government has also implemented measures aimed at increasing the participation of the States and Regional Governments in the selection of qualified immigrants, and encouraging a more balanced distribution of these migrants throughout the country. The working party set up in October 1997 by the Canadian government is continuing its work on developing new selection criteria for immigrants entering the country for economic reasons. Since May 1997, Canada has allowed as part of a special programme the entry and temporary residence of foreigners with high level qualifications in the software field. Its main objective is to compensate for labour shortages in this field in the short term; the permanent residence of those foreigners recruited is not being specifically encouraged. To further facilitate the recruitment of highly qualified temporary workers, Canada has set up a pilot project which uses a simplified procedure for granting work permits to the spouses of these workers. In the United States, the question of whether it is necessary to recruit highly qualified immigrant workers in the advanced technology sectors has been the subject of much controversy. The maximum annual issue of H-1B temporary visas has been increased: the annual quota has been set at 115 000 for 1999 and 2000, with a decrease thereafter (107 500 for 2001 and 65 000 for 2002). Having recently discovered abuses in the granting of H-1B visas, the Labor Department proposed a number of reforms, which were implemented in 1998. This will make it possible to fulfil the needs of companies for temporary, specialised, qualified personnel, while requiring consideration of conditions on the domestic labour market (Labor Condition Application). These reforms are aimed at requiring that employers submitting applications involving this type of visa provide proof that they have not laid off any US workers from those jobs for which they are recruiting foreign staff. They also need to prove that they had first tried to hire US workers. In light of growing demand for unqualified foreign labour, Korea decided in 1997 to formalise the immigration of unqualified foreign workers by setting quotas for trainees from 14 countries. The programme enables trainees to receive training in Korea
OECD 1999
66
in exchange for a salary and minimal social security coverage. However, the financial crisis in Asia led the government to freeze their quota. In fact, this measure proved to be unnecessary: in 1998 the demand for trainees fell by 30% from the previous year and so for the first time the quota was not reached. The Korean government has decided to facilitate and promote the entry and employment of skilled foreigners. A recent overhaul of the Immigration and Emigration Act abolished the limit on the length of stay previously applicable to these workers and simplified the administrative procedures governing the issuance of their visas. In Norway, work permits are mainly issued to highly qualified workers, or those with specific skills. In addition, they may only be recruited if the job cannot be filled by a national or foreign resident, as provided for by the priority rule applied in most OECD Member countries. The Norwegian law provides for restrictive measures aimed at limiting the entry of unqualified workers. Nevertheless, a 15 June 1997 amendment introduces a more liberal approach to the citizens of certain non-EEA countries, particularly those of Central and Eastern Europe. Different policies concerning family reunion Two trends characterise the policies of OECD Member countries on family reunion. Some Member countries tend to have a liberal approach to the admission of the family members of foreign residents because they accept the principle of long-term immigration and consider that family reunion constitutes a right of long-term foreign residents. Other countries, on the other hand, make the process of family reunion of foreigners more difficult by means of restrictive criteria, notably financial, to ensure that the arrival and settlement of families do not constitute a burden on society. A new law in Austria on the residence and settlement of foreigners came into force in 1997. It aims to provide greater stability to long-term foreign residents. In particular, it aims to grant foreign residents family members who arrived in the country before 1992 the right to take up employment. An analysis of the regularisation programme implemented in Spain in 1996, and a review of the numbers of foreign residents at the end of 1997 showed the continued long-term presence of families living in precarious conditions. As a result, new bills presented in 1997-98 embodied the principle of the lasting settlement of foreigners and their famiOECD 1999
lies, and stressed the necessity of facilitating their integration. In France, the Act of 11 May 1998 introduced several significant changes in the family reunion process: the duration of legal residence required for applying for reunion was reduced from two years to one; the criteria for refusing family reunion were modified, notably the financial resources criteria; and, the procedure has been extended to minor children of a previous marriage of one of the spouses, provided that the parents can prove that they have been granted custody and that the childs other parent allows the child to live in France. In addition, the new law abolished the family member temporary residence card and introduced a new temporary residence card, namely the family and private life card. Obtention of this card secures the right to take up employment and makes it possible to obtain a residence card after five years uninterrupted legal residence. It may be issued to eleven categories of foreigner, including the spouses of French citizens immediately following their marriage, the spouses of foreigners holding a scientific temporary residence card, or foreigners who do not qualify for family reunion, but have personal and family ties in France that would make the refusal of a residence permit an unjustified infringement on their right to a normal life. In Belgium, a 1998 circular extended the notion of family and recognised the rights of residence of not only spouses, as previously provided for, but also of foreigners long-term cohabitants. The residence permit may be renewed and may become permanent after three and a half years of co-habitation in Belgium. In Greece, a January 1998 presidential decree allows workers who have held a residence permit for more than seven years or hold a permanent residence permit to be joined by their family members (spouse and children under the age of 18). This authorisation is, however, subject to four conditions: these individuals must have lived with the migrant worker before his arrival in Greece and have been dependent on him; all family members should produce a certificate proving their good health; adults must not have a criminal record; and, finally, the immigrant who sponsors them must prove that he has the means to support them. Pursuant to the Act of 6 March 1998, Italy authorises family reunion, but it is subject to a minimum monthly income criterion.
67
Australia enacted several new measures in April 1998 aimed mainly at ensuring that the sponsors of family members can meet their financial obligations and that they make the right choice between their desire to reunite their family and their financial means. Since November 1998, elderly parents still economically active have no longer been able to obtain for themselves visas for permanently resident parents, but have had to opt for another type of visa such as a short or long-stay visitors visa or a retired persons visa. The required amount of insurance to be taken out for the dependent parent has also been increased, and the policyholder must prove that he/ she has the financial means to continue to pay for it. In Canada, a new regulation pertaining to dependent families took effect in April 1997. Like the Australian regulation, it aims to ensure that sponsors have the necessary financial means and thereby reduce the impact on the government and Canadian taxpayers of sponsors defaulting on their obligations. International co-operation measures With the exception of European Union countries, international co-operation in the sphere of regulating and controlling flows is not highly developed between OECD Member countries. Certain types of bilateral and multi-lateral co-operation are, nevertheless, in place in the spheres of visas issuance, of border controls and the exchange of workers. OECD Member countries are gradually becoming aware of the benefits of a joint approach to the problem of controlling migration flows. In November 1997, Canada and the United States decided to set up a long-term bilateral system of co-operation aimed at better controlling their common border (Strategic Vision for Canada-US Border Co-operation). It is hoped that such co-operation will lead over the long-term to a level of control that would facilitate legitimate border movements while making it difficult for undesirable persons to circulate. Both countries recognise that attaining this objective depends mainly on effective co-operation and information exchange between their authorities. Under NAFTA, Mexico applies special conditions to the entry of businessmen from Canada and the United States (see the section on Mexico in Part II). Mexico is also involved in a bilateral Commission with the United States, focusing on migration between the two countries. Thus far, discussions have focused on law enforcement and defending the rights of migrants. However, Mexico would like to
extend its scope and open discussions on such issues as development, economic integration and the labour market processes in both countries. Mexico and the United States also recently set up a joint research and co-operation programme on the subject of migration. As part of the Tuxtlan Dialogue and the Discussion Mechanism, Mexico committed itself, in a joint Declaration of 17 July 1998, to promote the gradual simplification of procedures for migration in order to ensure the free movement of persons and to facilitate the entry of nationals of other Central and Latin American countries. In 1997, Japan entered into agreements on the issuance of visas with several countries, both to promote the movement of persons and to deal with problems relating to illegal immigration. The Czech Republic, like other Central and Eastern European countries, has entered into agreements with most member countries of the European Union to abolish visa requirements. The Czech Republic also allows Canadian and American nationals, as well as nationals of Israel, Malaysia and Japan to enter its territory without a visa. However, it initiated a visa system in October 1998 for all nationals of the ex-Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Several OECD Member countries have entered into bilateral agreements, amongst themselves or with non-member countries, regarding the employment and the exchange of foreign workers, with the aim of regulating the employment of foreigners on their territory. Thus, in 1998, the Czech Republic signed agreements with Germany, Poland, Russia, the Slovak Republic, Ukraine and Vietnam. It also signed a bilateral agreement to exchange trainees with Switzerland in 1997, and with Hungary and Lithuania in 1998. It is planning more such agreements with several Member countries of the European Union. It has also started negotiations with Mongolia, Belarus, Bulgaria and Austria that may lead to bilateral agreements for the implementation of a quota system for the employment of nationals of those countries. Since 1993, Lithuania has signed a number of bilateral agreements relating to the employment of foreigners and social security. The first such agreements were signed with Germany in 1993, Sweden in 1994, and then with Poland and Ukraine. Similar agreements are currently being negotiated with Belarus and Russia. The Minister of Social Affairs and Social Security aims to sign bilateral and multi-lateral agreements on employment and
OECD 1999
68
workers rights, particularly with European Union member countries and the other Baltic States. Since 1992, Bulgaria has signed bilateral agreements on the employment of its nationals abroad, notably with Germany and Switzerland. An agreement with Greece is currently under negotiation. Bulgaria has, however, found itself unable to conclude any new agreements and found that the scope of existing agreements is diminishing. In addition, these agreements do not appear to be having any marked effect on labour market conditions, since they deal with the exchange of workers in limited areas only, such as construction and services. Co-operation between European Union member countries in the sphere of regulating and controlling migration flows The countries of Western Europe have traditionally applied unilateral, sovereign policies in controlling immigration taking into account their own economic, cultural and historical interests, as well as ongoing links with certain countries and former colonies. Nevertheless, the diversification and continuation of immigration flows on the one hand, and the economic and political integration of Europe and its prospects for expansion, on the other, have led these countries to gradually accept the idea of co-operation in the sphere of regulating and controlling migration flows. This willingness to co-operate was initially manifested by five Member countries (Germany, Belgium, France, Luxembourg and the Netherlands), who signed the Schengen Agreement in June 1985, and the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement in June 1990. This body of provisions, commonly known as the Schengen Agreements is essentially aimed at ensuring the free movement of all persons inside the Schengen Area, while implementing compensatory measures needed to ensure the areas internal security. These compensatory measures consist notably in reinforcing controls at the outside borders of the Schengen Area, implementing co-operative measures in legal, police and customs matters and setting up a Schengen Information System accessible to the competent authorities of the Schengen States. These Agreements also provide for the drawing up of a joint list of third countries whose nationals are subject to visa requirements, as well as a joint procedure for determining which country is responsible for any given application for asylum.
OECD 1999
Italy signed the Agreements in November 1990, Spain and Portugal in June 1991, Greece in November 1992, Austria in April 1995 and Denmark, Sweden and Finland in December 1996. The founder countries, together with Spain and Portugal, began implementing the Agreements in March 1995. Italy joined this group in October 1997, and Austria and Greece in December 1997. Italy, Greece and Austria had to modify their legislation on immigration and asylum, or implement new regulations in areas which had not previously been addressed by domestic laws, as the other Schengen States had done before. An example of this is the issue of protecting personal information, previously absent from Italian legislation. The Maastricht Treaty of 7 February 1992, which modified the Treaty of Rome and established the European Union, provides a basis for co-operation between member countries in the spheres of law and internal affairs. In the Third Pillar of the Maastricht Treaty, Member countries recognised as matters of common interest asylum policy, rules governing the crossing by persons of the external borders of the Member States, immigration policy and policies regarding nationals of third countries (entry, movement and residence), judicial, customs and police co-operation". New decision-making procedures were implemented in this regard, such as joint actions and common positions. At the same time, the Maastricht Treaty gave the European Community jurisdiction over the matter of determining which third countries nationals would be subject to visa requirements. A Community regulation was thus issued in 1995, establishing a joint list of these countries. In fact, however, few legally binding decisions have been made under the Third Pillar of the Maastricht Treaty. The decision-making process, the complexity and sensitive nature of the issues involved and the simultaneous implementation of the Schengen Agreements have gradually brought the system to a halt. A number of conventions have been developed, however, such as the Eurodac Convention, setting up a joint fingerprint database of asylum seekers and the Europol Convention on European police co-operation, which took effect in October 1998. The Treaty of Amsterdam of 2 October 1997, which modified the Maastricht Treaty, came into force on 1 May 1999. It places issues relating to immigration and asylum under the jurisdiction of the European Community with the aim of creating an area of freedom, security and justice in the member countries. It also incorporates the Schengen Agreements into the
69
European Union Treaty. The United Kingdom, Ireland and Denmark received authorisation to not immediately accept these new measures relating to immigration, asylum and the movement of persons. Nevertheless, the United Kingdom and Ireland recently expressed their willingness to participate in existing Schengen measures relating to the enforcement of laws and legal co-operation in criminal matters, including the Schengen Information System. Those countries wishing to become members of the European Union are obliged to consider these measures as forming part of existing European regulations, and must therefore include them in their own domestic legislation. Several Central and Eastern European countries, such as the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland, which are in the pre-membership phase, have adopted the required measures. They have, in particular, signed a series of readmission agreements to combat illegal immigration. In Hungary, these changes fall into two main categories: guaranteeing that persons would enjoy free movement in the European Union and ensuring that exterior border controls are tightened. Specific measures are also being developed to adapt Hungarian legislation to the European partnership agreement concluded with the European Community. These measures notably include preferential treatment for European Union citizens. Other measures adopted more recently relate to the status of key corporate personnel. Norway and Iceland signed an agreement in 1999 which enables them to participate in the application and development of the current Schengen regulations. b) Procedures for admitting asylum seekers and refugees
on their territory. In addition, they have applied new principles to the processing of applications (the definition of "manifestly unfounded" applications, the principle of "safe countries"), and have limited the right of asylum applicants to take up employment. These measures are all aimed at, and have resulted in, limiting entries to these countries. Nevertheless, some OECD countries have granted territorial asylum to individuals affected by serious political crises in their countries of origin (mainly nationals of Algeria and the former Yugoslavia). This type of asylum accords a temporary right of residence, without granting refugee status. Other countries have expanded the rights of statutory refugees, and taken steps aimed at facilitating their integration (see below the section on the integration of foreigners). European Union countries, for their part, have set up co-operative measures in the sphere of asylum aimed, over the long term, at harmonising their asylum policies. Passing or modifying domestic laws relating to asylum In order to deal with new types of requests for asylum, several OECD Member countries have introduced measures into their legislation that enable them to provide new forms of protection. In a regulation issued in May 1997, Canada set up two new categories of refugees (Country of Asylum Class, Source Country Class), in order to assist individuals affected by various types of humanitarian crisis. The Source Country category is based on a list of countries, updated annually and expanded recently, which includes Bosnia-Herzegovina, Cambodia, Columbia, Croatia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Liberia and Sudan. The French law of 11 May 1998 made provision for two new forms of protection. Constitutional asylum makes it possible to grant refugee status to individuals persecuted because of their actions to promote freedom, as defined in the French Constitution. Territorial asylum may be granted to foreigners who can prove that their lives or freedom are being threatened in their country of origin, or that they face inhuman or degrading treatment. The territorial asylum procedure makes it possible to apply for temporary asylum, without permanently breaking off ties with ones country of origin. It confers only the right to reside in France, along with the right to social security services and social aid. This procedure is currently being used by many Algerian nationals because of the situation in their country.
OECD 1999
70
The status of refugees is regulated by the Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951 and the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967, which are applied by all OECD Member countries. The number of applications for asylum has increased considerably since the early 1990s. New types of requests for protection have developed, which are not in line with the definition of a refugee as set out in the Geneva Convention. Most OECD countries consider these new asylum seekers to be economic refugees fleeing poverty and economic depression in their countries of origin, and therefore as seeking to abuse the refugee status applications process. As a result, these countries have decided to tighten up their laws and accelerate the processing of applications and appeals in order to limit the stay of asylum seekers
In January 1998, the Norwegian government decided that victims of gender-based persecution or persecution by non-governmental groups may be eligible for refugee status. In Sweden, an amendment to the law on foreigners, which came into force in January 1997, broadens the definition of refugee status: refugees are foreigners outside their country of citizenship who risk persecution in that country because of their race, national origin, membership of a social or religious group, or their political opinions. This definition applies regardless of whether persecution is at the hands of the government or of a non-governmental group. In Hungary, a new law on refugees took effect in 1998. It constitutes the final piece of recent Hungarian legislation on migration, following laws regulating the entry and residence of foreigners and citizenship, which took effect in 1993/94. The most controversial aspect of previous legislation regarding refugees, namely the question of ruling out certain countries as sources of bona fide asylum seekers, was dropped from the new law. Over the past few years, several OECD Member countries have implemented various procedures for processing manifestly unfounded applications, sometimes including a definition of this concept. These new procedures enable authorities to accelerate the assessment of applications, and to grant fewer legal rights to asylum seekers. In 1998, Ireland and the United Kingdom clarified the procedures that should be used in dealing with manifestly unfounded applications. Ireland implemented new administrative procedures in early 1998 to deal with continued flows of asylum seekers. One of these measures makes it possible, whilst at the same time establishing an appeals system, to speed up the processing of manifestly unfounded applications. In the United Kingdom, the White Paper on immigration and asylum proposes that the existing distinction between countries of origin be dropped, but that the accelerated appeals procedure be maintained for manifestly unfounded applications, regardless of the country of origin. Prompted by the continuing increase in asylum applications, all OECD countries share a desire to accelerate the assessment of applications and the processing of appeals against negative decisions. In some cases, this has led to the creation of special assessment and appeals bodies, as is the case in Ireland. Norway and the Netherlands, for their part, have clearly defined and extended the powers of the assessment and appeals authorities.
OECD 1999
In Belgium, the National Commissioner for Refugees and Stateless Persons has accelerated the procedures for processing asylum applications. The conditions for granting asylum have been made stricter by the Vande Lanotte Act of July 1996 on the entry and residence of foreigners. Amongst other things, the law introduced the requirement that a place of residence be designated for asylum seekers where they must reside during the first phase of their applications assessment, or else forfeit social benefits. The Senate Committee for the Interior has made several recommendations to increase the flexibility of the manner in which the law is applied. In particular, it suggests that civil servants responsible for interviewing asylum applicants should receive better training, that a temporary asylum status be created in order to give applicants access to the job market and social benefits, and that the maximum duration of administrative custody for those whose applications have been denied be reduced from eight to five months. It is also recommended that emergency medical aid, food aid and, possibly, housing subsidies be granted to those whose applications have been denied. Applying the principles of safe country of origin and safe third country has also made it possible to simplify and accelerate procedures. Most OECD countries, particularly European countries, have legally recognised and implemented these principles. The Czech Republic, which is preparing a revision of its law on refugees, wants to introduce these principles in the new law. In France, the Act of 11 May 1998 denied the right of asylum applicants from safe third countries to enter French territory. Accelerating the assessment and appeals procedures not only enables countries to deal with the large number of applications for asylum, but also to limit applicants length of stay in the host country. As part of this approach, some OECD Member countries have improved the efficiency of their administrative procedures for the expulsion of asylum seekers whose applications have been denied, or have implemented policies aimed at returning them to their country of origin. The Netherlands, which have implemented such policies, have noted however that they are not very effective, particularly in dealing with Ethiopian, Angolan and Somali nationals. Other countries sometimes refuse asylum seekers the right to work while awaiting the outcome of their application, or, while giving them this right, subject it to such strict conditions that it can easily be forfeited. In Greece, a Presidential Decree of 25 June 1998 sets out the conditions for the employment of
71
statutory refugees, foreigners with humanitarian status and asylum applicants. New legislation to accelerate the recognition procedure, facilitate family reunion and improve social coverage for refugees and asylum applicants is currently under discussion. The implementation of this new law, in line with European Union and UNHCR regulations, should, it is hoped, improve the status of migrants, asylum applicants and refugees, especially if it is accompanied by renewed growth in the Greek economy. In an amendment enacted on 1 July 1997, Australia restricted the right of asylum applicants to take up employment and refused some of them this right, depending on the length of stay preceding their application. Canada accords asylum applicants the right to take up employment, provided that their asylum application is credible. In Ireland, the question of asylum seekers right to take up employment is controversial. Heretofore the government has taken the view that granting asylum applicants early access to employment would act as a pull factor, and would thereby encourage abuses of the system. Romania accords asylum seekers the right to take up employment, but work permits are very difficult to obtain. Measures for harmonising asylum policies in the European Union Since the early 1990s, European Union member countries have treated asylum policy and immigration policy as matters of common interest. Under the Schengen Agreements, member countries decided to implement a joint system for determining which member country is responsible for any given asylum application. The Dublin Convention, signed by all Member countries of the European Community on 15 June 1990, also deals with this issue. The provisions of these two conventions are quite similar. The entry into force of the Dublin Convention on 1 September 1997 replaced the equivalent provisions of the Schengen Agreements, as planned by the countries which signed both conventions. The Dublin Convention lays down the principle that any application for asylum submitted to a Member country should be assessed by one member country and one member country only, the attribution to which is determined according to jointly established criteria. It aims to prevent asylum seekers from submitting applications to several countries, but also to guarantee that all applications are considered. Title VI of the European Union Treaty considers asylum policy as a matter of joint interest. On this basis, the Council of the European Union passed sev-
eral resolutions and conclusions in 1992, particularly regarding the definition of a manifestly unfounded asylum application, a harmonised approach to questions regarding host third countries and identification of countries where there is no serious risk of persecution. These three principles have been included in Member countries legislation (see above). Greece, Ireland and Luxembourg effected this adaptation in 1998. Central and Eastern European countries wanting to join the European Union have also decided to apply these principles. Implementation of the PHARE Programme in the spheres of immigration and asylum has guided legislative reforms in this regard. Following Poland and Hungary, Bulgaria and the Czech Republic have recently implemented the necessary measures. Implementing these principles makes it possible for the competent authorities to determine that an application is manifestly unfounded if it is submitted by a person from a country where there is no serious risk of persecution (safe country of origin), or a person who transited through a third country where he/she may have obtained protection (safe third country). The Treaty of Amsterdam of 2 October 1997 places the matter of asylum and immigration policy under the jurisdiction of the European Community. A supplementary protocol provides that, under normal circumstances, no asylum application from a national of a Member country may be considered by another Member country. c) Combating illegal immigration
72
OECD Member countries, both traditional host countries and new immigration countries, are having to deal with a continuing rise in illegal immigration. They are also experiencing the need to combat the growth in trafficking of illegal migrants, which is now considered a form of organised crime similar to drug smuggling and prostitution rings. Several measures aimed at combating illegal immigration, organised or not, have been taken by Member countries. Tightening border controls plays an essential role. Member countries have also introduced or increased the severity of criminal and administrative sanctions against undocumented foreigners, smugglers and employers. Several Member countries have launched programmes to regularise undocumented foreigners, usually those already living in the country, with family ties and jobs. Combating illegal immigration is essentially a matter of unilateral domestic policy, although increasing bilateral co-operation between countries is taking place on the readmission of illegal immigrants.
OECD 1999
Domestic policies to tighten controls and increase sanctions Measures aimed at tightening border controls have a twin objective: regulating and controlling flows (see above) and combating illegal immigration. Most OECD Member countries have implemented such measures, although in different forms. Germany checks identity papers extremely carefully when a foreigner applies for a visa in his/her country of origin. Personnel dealing with these applications are trained to recognise forged documents. In 1997, 88 000 people were denied entry to Germany because they lacked the necessary documents. Australia and Lithuania have increased the number of personnel controlling their borders or, in the case of Australia, their overseas missions responsible for issuing visas. Lithuania made the decision to restructure its border police in January 1997, and to draw up plans to tighten border controls. Implementation of this plan should be completed by the end of 1999. The United Kingdom aims to increase the number of air liaison officers soon, in order to reduce the number of passengers without documents or with forged documents. It is also planning to extend the powers of immigration officers to enable more enforcement operations to be carried out without the need of a police presence. In May 1999, Japan introduced a new penalty against undocumented foreigners, and extended to five years the ban on re-entering the territory after being expelled. Lithuania, Italy, Portugal and Spain either set up or expanded detention centres at their borders. In Lithuania, a registration centre for foreigners was set up in Pabrad in January 1997. On the basis of the new Italian law, reception centres have been built to accommodate migrants for the period during which their cases are being assessed or the expulsion procedure is underway. The law provides that migrants may not be kept in these centres for longer than 30 days. The centres are aimed mainly at housing foreigners who arrive on Italian shores without proper documentation, and to prevent their dispersion throughout the country. In March and April 1997, almost 17 000 Albanians arrived in Italy. The authorities estimate that 20 000 people arrived between January and October 1998, mainly from Kosovo, Turkey, Iraq and North Africa. Spain has increased the number of personnel working in its detention centres in Melilla, as well as building a new one. Portugal is planning to set up temporary housing centres for foreigners who try to enter the territory without permission. Turkey is a transit country for many illegal immigrants, mainly those from Asia and northern Iraq, but
OECD 1999
has thus far refused to sign readmission agreements with European Union Member countries, citing constitutional considerations. Its position makes systematic border controls particularly difficult. Turkey has nevertheless recently introduced a new passport system conforming to the standards of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), and passport checks using an optical scanner. In order to prevent the growth of migrant trafficking, Member countries have increased the severity of sentences against smugglers. The Lithuanian parliament reviewed its penal Code and set the sentence for smugglers at 15 years imprisonment, with confiscation of their property. In May 1997, Japanese immigration law was amended to implement a new criminal sanction against those who organise or assist illegal immigration. Bilateral technical co-operation agreements have recently been signed by the Japanese maritime security agency and the Korean maritime police as well as between local police agencies in Japan and China in order to facilitate the exchange of information regarding migrant trafficking. In Norway, modifications to the immigration law, effective since 10 January 1997, increased from two to five years the maximum sentence for any organised activity aimed at facilitating the illegal entry of foreigners. Sweden has increased from two to four years the maximum sentence for organised illegal immigration. In France, the Act of 11 May 1998 on the entry and residence of foreigners and the right to asylum increased the severity of penalties facing intermediaries aiding illegal immigration and for violations committed in organised groups. Several OECD Member countries have improved the co-operation between various government agencies in order to combat illegal immigration. In Australia, the Department of Immigration (DIMA), the Social Security Department and the tax authorities compare and exchange data. In France, new bodies to combat illegal immigration and employment have recently been set up and their powers harmonised and extended. Checks of and sanctions against illegal foreign workers and their employers have also been strengthened in several OECD Member countries. In Austria, a draft bill on combating illegal employment is being debated in parliament. This draft bill is aimed mainly at increasing checks of employers and improving the effectiveness of the administrative authorities involved, specifically by promoting co-operation and the exchange of information.
73
In the United States, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) formulated in January 1999, with the aim of reducing the number of foreign residents in an irregular situation, a new strategy to combat their employment. The strategy is based on identifying and expelling foreigners who are in violation of the law, deterring and clamping down on migrant trafficking, reducing the benefits to be gained from fraud, and preventing employers from using illegal foreign labour. The Czech Republic aims to introduce more severe sanctions against those who employ undocumented foreigners. Random checks by the Ministry of Social Affairs and the Ministry of the Interior have shown that a growing number of foreigners are working without valid papers. Korea recently increased the severity of sentences against the employers of undocumented foreigners, private recruitment agencies and illegal workers themselves. Data available in Germany show that problems are still being experienced with the illegal provision of temporary labour, the employment of foreigners without checking their papers, and abuses concerning unemployment benefits. In 1998, Japan implemented an information dissemination programme aimed at ensuring that the proper employment channels are followed. This programme, initially implemented in Thailand, aims to prevent illegal labour migration and facilitate the entry of highly skilled foreigners into Japan. In Hungary, sanctions against employers have become stricter in recent years, even though the worker still faces greater risks than the employer. If a foreigner is caught working without a permit, a fine is levied on the employer totalling five times the minimum wage for the period worked. A worker without papers may be banned from re-entering Hungary for a period of between one and five years. As part of its complete overhaul of the federal law on the residence and settlement of foreigners, Switzerland plans to implement new measures aimed at preventing the employment of undocumented foreigners. The law will increase existing sanctions, punish smugglers and extend sanctions to direct employers and principal contractors, as well as holding employers responsible for the cost of supporting and returning illegal employees to their country of origin. Finally, the OECD Member countries have attempted to improve the mechanisms for the expulsion of illegal immigrants. Measures have been implemented at the national level, but also through international co-operation in this sphere. Most notably,
bilateral readmission agreements have been signed with origin countries or with host third countries. Since March 1997, the Canadian authorities have been implementing measures aimed at improving the handling of expulsions paid for by airline companies, particularly with regard to police escorts, stop-overs en route and standing orders. In 1997/98, Canada signed bilateral agreements with Poland, Portugal, Lebanon and Yugoslavia. These agreements, aimed at facilitating expulsions, complement those already signed with the United States, Vietnam, Jamaica, Hong Kong (China), the Czech Republic and Slovenia. Almost 8 000 people were expelled from Canada in 1997. During the first few months of 1998, Romania budgeted additional funds for the expulsion of three groups of foreigners to their countries of origin (Bangladesh, Somalia and Pakistan). The German government is negotiating readmission agreements with the countries of origin of asylum seekers and all neighbouring countries. These agreements oblige these countries to readmit their nationals who lack a valid passport, provided that their national origin has been or can be proved. The Czech Republic regards readmission agreements as one of the factors which have contributed to the fall in illegal immigration and thereby curbed its undesirable consequences. Since 1991, it has signed such agreements with its neighbours and several other countries, notably France in 1997, and Bulgaria and Slovenia in 1998. According to the Austrian Interior Minister, readmission agreements signed by Austria with the Czech Republic and Hungary appear to be proving effective. Implementation of the agreements signed with the Slovak Republic and Slovenia has met with some difficulties. Italy signed an agreement at the end of October 1998 with Albania which will facilitate the application of effective measures designed to prevent the illegal transport of migrants from that country. By means of a readmission agreement, the Spanish authorities have strengthened their collaboration with the Moroccan authorities to return foreigners intercepted at the border. In 1996, Spain also signed readmission agreements with Bulgaria and Romania. In the United Kingdom, the July 1998 White Paper on immigration and asylum suggests that a study be carried out to evaluate the potential for increasing the number of foreigners returned by the use of readmission agreements and voluntary return programmes.
OECD 1999
74
Lithuania wishes to sign readmission agreements with migrants countries of origin, since it believes this would be one way of preventing illegal immigration. It has already signed several agreements of this type, notably with Estonia, Latvia, Bulgaria, Finland, Italy, Poland and Ukraine. Such agreements are also under negotiation with Belarus and Russia. Provisions regarding the readmission of foreigners without proper documentation have been included in agreements to abolish visa requirements signed by Lithuania with Malta, Cyprus, Norway and Denmark. Between October 1997 and January 1998, Lithuania implemented a voluntary return programme in co-operation with the International Organisation for Migration and the United States. Charter flights were organised to India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Similar return programmes will be carried out in 1999. The programme exempts those foreigners lacking proper documentation able to pay the cost of their return from criminal and administrative sanctions. Following these return operations, only around 100 foreigners lacking proper documentation remained in the Pabrad detention centre, half of whom were asylum applicants. Regularisation of undocumented foreigners In 1997 and 1998, France and Greece implemented regularisation programmes for undocumented foreigners residing on their territories (see Table I.10). Italy (see the section on Italy in Part II), which had already implemented a regularisation programme in 1996, decided on a new programme to be implemented in 1998 and early 1999. Korea, for its part, granted an amnesty to foreigners illegally residing in the country to enable them to leave without risking sanctions. The amnesty operated from December 1997 to July 1998. By early April 1998, this procedure had involved almost 45 000 people. A second amnesty operation was implemented in May 1999, the result of the first having been judged insufficient. In 1997, Nicaraguan and Cuban nationals who had resided in the United States for more than two years were made eligible for regularisation (Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act). Nationals of El Salvador, Guatemala, the former USSR and a few Eastern European countries were able to apply for the suspension of expulsion orders made against them, in line with the more liberal law applicable before the Act of 1996 was passed (Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act). Haitian nationals did not qualify for these programmes. However, in 1998, almost 50 000 Haitians residing in the United States before
OECD 1999
December 1995, and who had submitted an asylum application or held a residence permit valid up to that date, were made eligible for regularisation (Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act). In 1997, Romania extended the temporary residence visas of more than 30 000 foreigners in an irregular situation who could justify their continued presence in the country. This extension included a token fine, however, the amount of which has since been increased by the government. France decided to implement a regularisation programme applicable to certain categories of foreigner in an irregular situation. The programme ended in May 1998. The regularisation programme was initially aimed at regularising the unlawful status (with regard to entry or residence) of individuals married to French citizens, foreigners who had entered France legally but without using the family reunion procedure, spouses of individuals with refugee status, and well-established foreign families. It also applied to certain categories of children who had entered France in some way other than through a family reunion procedure and, under certain circumstances, to other clearly specified categories of foreigners (foreigners with no dependants, foreigners who were seriously ill, students attending higher education institutions, and those denied asylum). Provisional records show that 143 000 applications were received and almost 80 000 residence permits granted. Most of these permits (85%) were granted for family-related reasons. In Greece, a regularisation programme was implemented on 1 January 1998. The programme was due to end in July 1998. However, the deadline was extended to April 1999, due to the large number of applications received and the insufficient time given to applicants to obtain the information requested. The programme comprised two phases. The first phase (up to May 1998) enabled workers without papers to submit an application for regularisation and obtain a temporary residence permit (white card) if their application was considered eligible. During the second phase, extended until April 1999, a green card was issued to workers holding a temporary permit who could prove that they had worked for at least 40 days between January and July 1998. The cards are valid initially for between 1 and 3 years. Subsequent renewals for two year periods will be possible. Special provisions exist for the granting of 5 year permits. By April 1999, 374 000 people had received the white card, of whom 220 000 had submitted the documentation necessary to apply for
75
Tunisia Morocco African countries Portugal Algeria Turkey Other Total
Angola Guinea-Bissau Cape Verde Brazil Sao Tome and Principe Senegal Other Total
1. 2. 3.
Excluding seasonal workers (6 681 persons) and around 1 200 small traders not broken down by nationality. A total of 374 000 people had been granted a white card (rst stage of the regularisation). The 51 000 people mentioned in the table is a sample out of the total of the requests in process. A total of 258 761 applications were received but the provisional results, broken down by nationality, cover only permits granted for reasons of work. If spouses and minor children were included, a total of 227 300 permits were granted. In 1998, another programme has been held. A total of 350 000 applications were received. Details by nationality are not available. Morocco, Albania, Philippines, Tunisia, former Yugoslavia are among the main nationalities. 4. Number of applications received. 5. Data refer to all persons granted a permanent residence permit (excluding their dependents) during the period 1989-1996 following the 1986 Immigration and Reform Control Act. Data are broken down by country of birth. 6. Foreigners who beneted from the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (November 1997) and from the Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act (October 1998). Data are estimates. Sources : France: Ofce des migrations internationales. Greece: National Employment Observatory. Italy, Portugal and Spain: Ministry of the Interior. United States: INS.
76
Table I.10. Main regularisation programmes of immigrants in an irregular situation in selected OECD countries, by nationality
Thousands
France (1981-1982)1 (1997-1998) Greece2 (1997-1998) (1987-1988) Italy (1990) (1996)3
17.3 16.7 15.0 12.7 11.7 8.6 39.1 121.1

Portugal
Algeria Morocco China Democratic Rep. of Congo Tunisia Other Total
12.5 9.2 7.6 6.3 4.1 38.1 77.8
Albania Egypt Bulgaria Pakistan Romania Poland Other Total
26.8 3.1 3.0 3.0 2.2 1.6 11.3 51.0
Morocco Sri Lanka Philippines Tunisia Senegal Former Yugoslavia Other Total
21.7 10.7 10.7 10.0 8.4 7.1 50.1 118.7
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
23.0 20.2 18.6 8.9 8.8 5.9 62.4 147.9
Spain (1996) (1985-1986)4 (1991) (1996) (1986)5
United States (1997-1998)6
(1992-1993)
12.5 6.9 6.8 5.3 1.4 1.4 4.8
Angola Cape Verde Guinea-Bissau Sao Tome and Principe Brazil Other
6.8 5.0 4.0 2.0 0.3
Morocco Portugal Senegal Argentina United Kingdom Philippines 3.7 Other
7.9 3.8 3.6 2.9 2.6 1.9 21.1
Morocco Argentina Peru Dominican Rep. China Poland Other
49.2 7.5 5.7 5.5 4.2 3.3 34.7
Morocco Peru China Argentina Poland Dominican Rep. Other
7.0 1.9 1.4 1.3 1.1 0.8 7.8
Mexico El Salvador Caribbean Guatemala Colombia Philippines Other
2 008.6 152.3 110.5 64.0 30.3 25.7 293.5
El Salvador/Guatemala Haiti Nicaragua Eastern Europe Cuba
300.0 50.0 40.0 10.0 5.0
39.2 Total
21.8 Total
43.8 Total
110.1 Total
21.3 Total
2 684.9 Total
405.0
OECD 1999
a green card. Since the government refused to extend the deadline of 30 April 1999 for green card applications, the remaining 43% of applicants who registered with the Employment and Manpower Organisation (OAED) but had been unable to fulfil the requirements for obtaining a green card, in particular, prove that they had stable employment, are now considered as illegal immigrants. In Italy, a fourth regularisation programme for undocumented foreigners is underway, following those of 1986, 1990 and 1996. The new regularisation programme was initially planned to involve no more than 38 000 people an arbitrary quota set by the Italian authorities. Applicants needed to provide proof that they had been residing in Italy before 28 March 1998 and had employment. Because of the large number of applicants fulfilling these criteria, the quota was increased to 300 000 by a Decree of 13 April 1999. A circular issued on 13 May 1999 by the Ministry of the Interior relaxed the regularisation criteria thereby enabling a larger group of individuals to qualify. The most important issue dealt with in the ministerial circular is the granting of an additional extension, until 20 October 1999, to those individuals who are unable to submit a complete application. In addition, in order to help the self-employed, the circular stipulates that individuals who are not able to prove that their annual income is at least equivalent to the minimum income requirement in Italy will be allowed to submit their application while undertaking to provide the necessary documents concerning their income at the time of their permits renewal in one years time. Finally, the circular includes a wider range of acceptable proofs that can be presented by immigrants to show that they were present in Italy before 28 March 1998. Albanians, Romanians, Moroccans and Tunisians were the first to benefit from this regularisation programme. 2. Policies aimed at integrating immigrants
the presence of foreigners in their countries. Integration involves complex social relationships; differences in the performance of nationals versus immigrants, based on a few indicators, do not therefore necessarily reflect inequalities between the two groups. Similarly, a convergence of behavioural patterns is not a sure indication of successful integration. Several Member countries have focused their efforts on naturalisation policy, integration by means of schooling children and training adults, and specific integration measures aimed at asylum seekers and refugees, as well as combating racism and discrimination, especially in the workplace. a) Changes in the conception of foreigners integration
For many years, changes in the nature of the migration process and in the societies of host countries have altered the conditions for the integration of foreign and immigrant populations. In some host countries, this has led to changes in the very conception of integration itself. Although traditional integration models have not been called into question, they have had to be adapted due to the effect of a number of factors: immigrants are extending their stays in host countries, and a second, and even a third generation of immigrants have settled in those countries; the geographic origin of migrants and the prevailing modes of entry have become more diverse; and, the economic recession and the persistence of high unemployment have exacerbated the problems encountered in integrating certain groups of foreigners and have rendered young peoples access to the labour market more difficult. The Danish parliament passed in June 1998 its first law dealing exclusively with the question of integrating foreigners. This new approach has incorporated the lessons learned from the weaknesses and shortcomings of previous integration measures. It is based on the fact that the unemployment rate is much higher amongst foreigners than amongst Danish nationals. The aim of the new law, which came into force in early 1999, is to promote the integration of refugees and immigrants so that they can become fully-fledged members of Danish society. It also aims to promote new arrivals (both refugees and immigrants) chances of finding work, either through direct access to the job market, or with the help of aid and training programmes. Italy and Spain, which only recently became immigration countries, have both recently found that the presence of foreigners in their countries is
While governments of OECD Member countries have focused on controlling migration flows, they have not neglected the issue of integrating foreigners who are already present as well as those who plan to reside in the host country for an extended period. However, assessing the level of integration achieved by foreign populations and immigrants remains problematic. The conception of foreigners integration is rapidly changing in several OECD Member countries: some want to further improve the integration policies already in place while others are only now beginning to recognise the permanent nature of
OECD 1999
77
becoming a structural phenomenon. In Italy, this trend manifests itself both in the entry of foreigners into the job market and in their social and cultural integration based on family formation and the expansion of social networks. The Act of 6 March 1998 aims to promote and improve the integration of foreigners living in Italy. A permanent residence card may be issued to those who have lived in the country legally for at least five years. Family reunion will be allowed on proof of having a minimum monthly income (480 000 lire for sponsoring one family member). Subject to annual quotas and based on waiting lists at consulates, foreigners will be able to go to Italy to look for work, without requiring an invitation from an employer. The law also provides for medical assistance to be granted to both minor and adult foreigners, regardless of their status, as well as social security coverage, mandatory education of minors and training courses for adults. The growing number of foreign minors, family reunions and the number of residence permits issued for family-related reasons, together with the increase in the naturalisation rate and the number of mixed marriages are other indicators of foreigners permanent settlement. Luxembourg re-examined its conception of integration in a policy paper on the schooling of foreign children, presented in 1998. It points out that Luxembourg has a particularly high immigration rate, a growing number of cross-border workers and a working population of which foreign nationals account for more than 50%. As a result, the Luxembourg government has felt the need to consider the future of Luxembourg society, its conception of integration, future ways of interacting, shared languages for communicating, as well as the purposes and management of child education. This on-going review encompasses a number of different aspects of the problem, including the cultural, economic and educational aspects. Two trends are confirmed by an analysis of the policies aimed at integrating foreigners which have been implemented in OECD Member countries. First, in some Member countries integration measures aimed at refugees are becoming an increasingly important part of overall integration policy. This is the case in Canada and Australia, whose refugee aid programmes are particularly well-developed, and in Germany which due to the political situation in Central and Eastern Europe has to deal with repeated waves of large numbers of refugees. It is also the case in those countries which recently became immigration countries and are accepting
increasing numbers of refugees, such as the Czech Republic, Greece, Italy, Mexico and Norway. Second, several OECD Member countries, such as Denmark, the Netherlands and Switzerland have delegated to local authorities certain tasks related to the implementation of integration policies. This trend, which is relatively new, demonstrates that these countries recognise the need to pay attention to the local level, both in terms of better targeting the efforts made and giving full consideration to the local situation. It may also be seen as a way of sharing the financial costs involved in implementing integration policies. In Belgium, new integration policies have been implemented in both the Brussels and Flemish regions. The Brussels regions new integration policy is a policy of social integration for the most depressed neighbourhoods. It is no longer a policy based on targeting specific national or ethnic categories but rather one framed within an overall policy of integration. The Flemish policy towards ethnic and cultural minorities was modified by a Decree of April 1998. It provides for the implementation of a single support structure and integrated action to assist immigrants, refugees and travelling people (mainly Gypsies). In Austria, an integration committee was set up in February 1998. Its main purpose is to advise the Minister of the Interior on how to promote the integration of foreigners and to make recommendations on the possibility of granting humanitarian status to foreigners in an irregular situation. b) Naturalisation and foreigners social integration
Acquiring the citizenship of a host country reflects a process of gradual economic and social integration, and indeed may facilitate it. The number of naturalisations depends essentially on the magnitude and time of migration waves, and how liberal the legislation concerning citizenship is. It is also linked to how much importance foreigners place upon acquiring the citizenship of the host country and the consequences of the possible loss of their original citizenship. The basis on which countries determine how citizenship can be acquired and granted, be it birthplace, duration of residence or kinship (for the first two the principle is jus soli, for the latter jus sanguini), plays a fundamental role in how the integration of foreigners into the host country is conceived and in the distinctions drawn between foreign and national populations. Changes in naturalisation procedures do
OECD 1999
78
occur, either to liberalise laws that have been too restrictive, or vice-versa (for a more detailed discussion, refer to the special chapter on the acquisition of citizenship in Trends in International Migration, OECD, 1995). These modifications may impact on the naturalisation rate and the extent of the foreign population in the host country, particularly when they aim to facilitate the naturalisation of immigrants descendants. In Germany, the new administration formed following the Bundestag elections of 27 September 1998 announced a reform of the law governing citizenship. This law had already been liberalised in 1993 with the introduction of measures facilitating the acquisition of German citizenship. Nevertheless, the principle of kinship (jus sanguini) was upheld. In May 1999, the draft bill reforming the Citizenship Code in force since 1913 was finally passed by parliament. The new reform provides under certain circumstances for the granting of citizenship based on the principle of jus soli. The period of residence that must precede naturalisation has been shortened. Adult foreigners qualify after eight years legal residence (instead of the 15 years under the previous law). More than 4 million foreigners (out of a total of 7.4 million) fulfil this requirement. Children born in Germany to foreign parents, at least one of whom was born in Germany or settled there before the age of 14, automatically qualify for citizenship. Other children born to foreign parents qualify for dual citizenship until the age of 23. They must decide between the ages of 18 and 23 which citizenship they wish to adopt. The new government therefore considers this law to favour the integration of those foreigners and their families who are long-term residents of Germany. In France, the Act of 16 March 1998 fully reinstated the principle of jus soli for the acquisition of citizenship, as it existed in the Citizenship Code between 1945 and 1993. Two requirements have to be met: foreigners must have established their residence in France, and have habitually resided in France for a period of at least five years. In addition, the law now fully applies the rule of dual jus soli to children born in France to at least one parent born in Algeria before independence (July 1962). No residence requirements need to be met by this parent. The law also reduces from two years to one year the time period required for a foreigner married to a French citizen to obtain French citizenship by formal declaration. Finally, it provides that any minor born in France of foreign parents holding residence papers will be granted a republican identity document "titre didentit rpublicain". This constitutes legal
OECD 1999
proof of identity and enables the child to be readmitted into France without a visa and to move freely in the Schengen Area. Several other countries have recently modified their laws on citizenship. In Greece, a new law which came into force on 30 May 1999 states that applications for naturalisation by the foreign spouses of Greek nationals must be processed immediately, provided that they reside in Greece and have given birth to a child (after the date on which the law was published). As well as facilitating access to Greek citizenship, these measures are also in line with the countrys demographic policy to compensate for the Greeks low birth-rate. Australia and the United Kingdom have not modified the conditions for granting citizenship, but have implemented or plan to implement measures to simplify procedures or better inform foreigners who qualify for citizenship. In Australia, a brochure setting out the rights and obligations of citizens and the procedure to be followed to obtain citizenship has been distributed to all those qualifying for naturalisation. In addition, an Internet web page has been set up to facilitate classroom discussion of the subject of Australian citizenship. The Council for Australian Citizenship, set up in August 1998, has been given the task of advising the government on all matters relating to citizenship and Australias policy and legislation in this regard. In the United Kingdom, the White Paper of July 1998 on immigration and asylum policies points to the need to implement effective ways to accelerate the processing of applications, and to develop a more flexible approach to the conditions for residence set out in the law. In addition, the government has already implemented measures requiring that in every case the reasons for any denial of a naturalisation application be explained in detail by the relevant authorities. In Latvia, following an initial round of modifications in 1995, measures easing the provisions of the Citizenship Act were implemented in 1998. These new measures remove the conditions of birthplace and age from the criteria to be fulfilled to obtain Latvian citizenship. In addition, all children born in Latvia after 1991 automatically acquire citizenship. Up to 1998, around 18 000 children had not been able to obtain citizenship. This will result in an increase in the number of Latvian citizens in the months to come. In Bulgaria, a law setting out the conditions for acquiring citizenship and allowing the possibility of
79
dual citizenship for Bulgarian nationals was recently passed. The law introduced for the first time specific criteria for naturalisation, including a period of residence of at least five years, having an income and employment, and mastering the language. Marriage to a Bulgarian national automatically qualifies foreigners for Bulgarian citizenship. In the granting of citizenship, administrative priority is given to refugees, foreigners born in Bulgaria, and the spouses and children of Bulgarian nationals. The naturalisation rate, in other words the percentage of the total foreign population that acquires the citizenship of the host country in a given year, and the number of naturalisations are good indicators of foreigners integration. In 1997, both these indicators remained relatively stable in most OECD Member countries. In others, variations in these indicators were brought about by recent legislative changes (see Statistical Annex, Table A.1.7). For example, in Belgium, the number of naturalisations rose sharply in 1997, following modification of the citizenship law in 1995, which introduced more liberal measures. A slight decrease was, however, recorded in 1996. In the United States, the implementation in 1996 of a new programme to replace residence cards, discontinue certain social services for immigrants and simplify the means of acquiring citizenship, motivated foreigners to become US citizens. This resulted in an exceptional increase in the number of naturalisations. In 1997, the number of naturalisations (600 000) was almost 50% down on the preceding year. In the Netherlands, a significant fall was noted in 1997, resulting from the more restrictive measures passed by parliament to compensate for the sharp increase recorded after changes in the law in 1992. In Germany, the reforms of 1993 had resulted in a large increase in the number of naturalisations in 1994 and 1995. From 1996, however, the number fell back. The new law passed in March 1999 will probably result in new fluctuations in the number of naturalisations. In other OECD countries, changes in the number of naturalisations in 1997 and 1998 have not been significant. They have been characterised either by a slight decline, as in the case of Australia, or by a slight increase, such as in Italy and Japan. France, Spain and Finland have experienced slightly larger increases in the number of naturalisations. In France the number has been increasing since 1995, and can be expected to persist as a result of the new law of March 1998. Spain, for its part, saw a 22% increase in
the number of naturalisations in 1997. In Sweden, after having fallen steadily from 1993 to 1996, the number of naturalisations rose in 1997. The highest rate of naturalisation in average during the last decade (see Chart I.12) was registered in the Netherlands followed by Sweden, Norway and Germany, due essentially to the high number of naturalisations registered since 1993. In the UK and in Finland the highest naturalisation rates were recorded during the previous period (1988-92). In several OECD countries, marrying a citizen is still the most common way for foreigners to acquire citizenship. In the United Kingdom, mixed marriages account for 28% of all naturalisations; their number declined by 4 000 in 1997 from 14 300 in 1996. In France, the number of mixed marriages has been increasing since 1994, with almost 24 000 mixed marriages in 1996. In Belgium, the number of mixed marriages has stabilised since 1992, accounting for 12% of all marriages in 1996. This percentage exceeds 27% in Switzerland (see Chart I.13) whereas the share of foreigners in the total population is below 20%. In some countries such as Norway, Hungary, Japan and Sweden, the number of mixed marriages as a percentage of total marriages is on average three time higher than the share of foreigners in the total population. The number of mixed marriages as a percentage of total marriages may be seen as an indicator of the level of integration of immigrant groups into society, in the sense that these marriages are an expression of and create permanent ties to the host country. However, an analysis of the demographic structure of the foreign or foreign-born population is necessary to explain the relative importance of mixed marriages in OECD countries and their links with the integration of immigrants in the host country. c) The schooling of immigrant children and integration
80
Education is of vital importance for the integration of immigrants children. Both the level of education attained and the qualifications obtained are determining factors of their success in the labour market and their integration into the host countrys society. In 1998, the Luxembourg Ministry of Education drafted a document entitled Towards an Integrated School Integration Findings, Questions and Perspectives (Pour une cole dintgration constats, questions, perspectives) (see above). This policy paper concerns the schooling of foreign children, and sees the schools mission as offering an equal standard of
OECD 1999
Chart I.12.
Naturalisation rate in some OECD countries 10-year average (1988-1997)1 Per 100 foreigners at the beginning of the year
3 4 5 6
0 Netherlands Sweden Norway Finland Germany United Kingdom Belgium2 Denmark France United States Austria Spain Switzerland Korea3 Japan Italy Luxembourg 0
Note: The naturalisation rate indicates 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. 1. For France and the United States, calculations were possible only for 1991 (on the basis of 1990 Census population data). For the United States, the number of naturalisations in 1991 has been divided by the number of foreign-born residents who did not obtain American citizenship in 1990. 2. 1991-1997 average. 3. 1988-1996 average. Sources: Austria: Osterreichisches Statistisches Zentralamt; Belgium: National Statistical Office and Ministry of Justice; Denmark: Danmarks Statistiks; Finland: Central Statistical Office; France: Ministre de l'Emploi et de la Solidarit; Allemagne: Statistisches Bundesamt; Italy: Ministry of the Interior; Japan: Ministry of Justice, Civil Affairs Bureau; Korea: Ministry of Justice; Luxembourg: Ministry of Justice; Netherlands: Central Statistical Office; Norway: Statistics Norway; Spain: Ministry of Justice and Ministry of the Interior; Sweden: Statistics Sweden; Switzerland: Office fdral des trangers; United Kingdom: Home Office; United States: US Department of Justice.
education to pupils characterised by both common points and differences in their history, socio-cultural origin, behaviour and motivation. The issue of providing instruction conducted in the parents mother tongue is sometimes raised in the context of education and integration into the school system. In some countries, such as Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal and Norway, foreign children have the option of attending classes in their familys mother tongue, either at school or in classes given outside of school. In Luxembourg, classes in Portuguese and in Italian were introduced in 1993 into the curricula of schools in the largest towns, and are still continuing. More than 1 000 pupils, divided into 200 classes, attended these courses during 1993/1994. Attendance levels at such classes continue to grow. All governments insist on the need to learn the language of the host country. What is more, a good knowledge of the language of the host country is one of the criteria for obtaining citizenship in most OECD Member countries. Whatever the conceptions of integration and the role of the school, assistance and support structures aimed at foreign pupils have been implemented, particularly for new arrivals who canOECD 1999
not immediately attend ordinary classes. This type of education and assistance takes the form of introductory classes, extra lessons and informal coaching, usually offered by institutional bodies or related structures. Because of the fact that very few immigrant children attend day care centres and preschools because of their cost and limited availability, the Norwegian government has implemented a three-year programme to enable foreign children from underprivileged areas in Oslo to attend daycare centres free of charge. This measure and the granting of subsidies for employing bilingual assistants at day-care centres are aimed at making it easier for children to learn Norwegian during their preschool years. The Greek government recently announced the setting up of six new inter-cultural schools for the education of the children of migrants of Greek and foreign origin. More than 1 700 pupils of diverse origins are attending the first 13 schools of this type. Most of them (three quarters) are of Greek origin, be they born of immigrants who have returned to Greece, of parents of Greek origin from Albania or the CIS countries, or of parents who are members of the Muslim minority in Athens. Most children of foreign migrants have their origins in Albania, the CIS coun-
81
Chart I.13.
Share of mixed marriages1 in total marriages in some OECD countries, last available year2
Share of foreigners in total population3 (%) 19.0 21.1 6.0 3.6 9.0 9.0 6.3 1.4 1.2 1.6 1.8 A mixed marriage is one between a foreigner and a national of the country in which he/she is residing (in the case of Australia, between a person born abroad and a person born in the country). 2. 1997 except for Australia, Belgium, France, Hungary, Sweden (1996) and Italy (1994). 3. 1997 except for Australia, Belgium, Hungary, Sweden (1996), France (1990) and Italy (1994). For Australia, proportion of the foreign-born in total population. Sources: Australia : ABS; Belgium: National Statistical Office; France: INSEE; Germany: Statistisches Bundesamt; Hungary: Civil registers; Italy: ISTAT; Japan: Ministry of Health; Norway: Statistics Norway; Portugal: National Statistical Office; Sweden: Statistics Sweden; Switzerland: Office fdral des trangers. 1.
0 Switzerland Australia Sweden Norway Germany Belgium France Hungary Japan Italy Portugal 0
10
15
20
25
30
10
15
20
25
30
tries, the Philippines, and other Asian as well as African countries. In Luxembourg, the Ministry of Education put forward in May 1998 an early learning project which would become mandatory in all towns as from 2001. The project is aimed at familiarising foreign children with Luxembourg language and culture. Implementation of this project in 1998/1999 was optional; it was run as a pilot study in certain towns under the supervision of the Ministry of Education. In Belgium, the Centre for Equal Opportunities and the Fight Against Racism found that education remains a problem area due to the institutionalised discrimination pupils and students are subjected to, even though it is one of the main determinants of the integration of immigrant populations. Its seems clear that the type of education chosen for young immigrants and the often improper channelling of these children into special education at primary level and vocational education at secondary level are quite likely to be due to institutionalised discrimination. Measures have been implemented to facilitate the enrolment of children of undocumented foreigners, to improve their support, both educational and financial, and to designate language adaptation
teachers to assist first-time arrivals in integrating into the school system. Two decrees, relating to the mission of the school and the implementation of a positive discrimination policy have been issued to guarantee that all pupils are treated fairly, and to coordinate schools access to available resources. d) Integration policies and foreigners social integration
82
Integration policies vary according to the country depending on the nature of the integration problems encountered and the integration models used. Integration policies may thus either be designed for all immigrants, or targeted at particular groups. They may be aimed at new arrivals, or at foreigners already settled in the host country. Of foremost concern to the governments of all host countries is that immigrants quickly master the language. This is viewed as a precondition for integration. Many language training programmes have been implemented by OECD Member countries, aimed both at children, via the school system, or at adults, by means of specific training. In several traditional host countries, changes were recently made in the modalities of financing measures aimed at the integration of foreigners. The German,
OECD 1999
Australian and United States governments, for example, as well as those of Denmark and Switzerland, have decided to let private organisations, local associations, local authorities or the federated states finance and implement integration policies and manage public financing earmarked for this purpose, as opposed to having national or federal bodies bear full financial responsibility for these policies. Assistance to new arrivals In Canada and Australia, support to immigrants is provided immediately upon their arrival in the country. Such support takes the form of assistance with administrative procedures and formalities and financial and language assistance. In Australia, several government programmes are aimed directly at new immigrants, particularly those teaching English to children (Youth ESL) and adults. In the case of adults, the government implemented in 1997-98 an educational system based on teaching in the home or in small groups (ESL Home Tutor Scheme). The 1997-98 programme to assist ethnic communities (Community Programs) gave preference to foreigners with humanitarian status, new arrivals, women and senior citizens, and those living in isolated rural areas. The National Integrated Settlement Strategy is a more general government programme to facilitate the integration of all foreigners and to co-ordinate the programmes of several ministries. The Canadian government has implemented several programmes aimed at facilitating the integration of immigrants. The most important of these are: the Language Program for New Immigrants to Canada; the Resettlement Assistance Program which provides assistance, notably in the form of temporary accommodation and interpretation services, to individuals admitted to Canada as part of the annual refugee plan; the Introduction Program; and, the Program for the Settlement and Integration of Immigrants which provides funds to community-based organisations involved in the integration of new arrivals (offering interpretation and employment-related services, and cultural awareness programmes). In Europe, integration policies focus on the schooling of children, vocational training, learning the language of the host country, and assistance in obtaining accommodation and access to health care. One of the priorities of the Norwegian government is to give new arrivals the means to become independent as soon as possible, and thus reduce unemployment amongst them. In Germany, projects aimed
OECD 1999
at the integration of foreigners implemented by the Labour and Social Affairs Ministry focus on language teaching, the social and professional integration of young people and women, and on improving everyday relations between Germans and foreigners. In Denmark, the new Integration Act of 26 June 1998, which became effective in January 1999, requires local authorities to implement an introduction programme aimed at new foreign arrivals over the age of 18. This three-year programme includes courses in Danish language and culture, as well as training on how to obtain employment. During the introduction period, a special allowance is granted to refugees and immigrants in need of financial assistance. The Integration Act also provides for the setting up of Integration Councils in towns where more than 50 people request it. These Councils may issue public assessments of integration initiatives undertaken by the municipality and of introduction programmes implemented by local authorities. Several OECD Member countries, such as Greece and the Czech Republic, have recently implemented specific programmes aimed at facilitating the return and reintegration of their nationals. Since April 1998, the Greek authorities have issued a special identity card to Albanians of Greek extraction giving them the right to accommodation and the guarantee of equal treatment in the labour market. The spouses, children and grandchildren of card-holders qualify for the same card, provided that official documents proving their kinship are submitted; this card is valid for three years and may be renewed. Since 1994, the Ministry of the Interior of the Czech Republic has run an assistance programme aimed at helping Czech nationals returning from abroad settle in isolated or unstable regions. This programme provides accommodation and employment to Czech nationals and their families who wish to settle in the Czech Republic on a permanent basis. Special assistance for refugees and asylum seekers Several OECD Member countries have been faced with significantly growing numbers of asylum seekers and refugees over the past few years, and have adapted their integration policies and/or implemented special programmes to assist these two categories of foreigner. In Canada, several programmes aim to facilitate the introduction and integration of refugees and individuals with humanitarian status, such as the Private Sponsorship of Refugees Program, the Refugee Resettlement Model imple-
83
mented in 1998 and the Resettlement Assistance Program which replaced the Adaptation Assistance Program in April 1998. Most of these programmes are run jointly by Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) and private organisations. They aim to provide financial and material assistance to refugees and individuals admitted for humanitarian reasons, as well as to help them gain access to basic services. The Ministry of the Interior of the Czech Republic signed agreements with several mayors in 1997 on the basis of the Integration of Refugees Assistance Programme, implemented in 1994. Mayors who agree to accommodate around 60 refugees in their town receive a subsidy from the State. They must also undertake to provide refugees with assistance in finding work, schooling their children and obtaining social security coverage. In Mexico, the category assimilated immigrant (asimilado) has been created, enabling Guatemalans to settle and work in Mexico. In August 1996, a programme designed to promote the settlement of migrants was implemented to facilitate the integration of Guatemalan refugees in the states of Campeche, Quintana Roo and Chiapas. This programme made it possible to issue official documents to all refugees, allowing them to travel freely within Mexico, take up employment or engage in business and, possibly, settle in another state. The programme also allows them to apply for Mexican nationality. The new Danish law on integration, passed in June 1998, transfers the responsibilities of the National Council for Refugees regarding integration to local authorities. An accommodation programme in towns, based on a quota system, requires that local authorities assist refugees in finding accommodation suited to their personal circumstances. Foreigners integration into the labour market Vocational training and facilitating young people and the unemployeds access to the labour market are other fundamental elements of OECD Member countries integration policies. In many OECD countries, foreigners have higher unemployment rates than nationals, and it has proved difficult to integrate them into the labour market. Numerous programmes have been implemented at both the national and local level. Generally aimed at those groups with the highest unemployment (the long-term unemployed and older unemployed people, women with few qualifications and young people leaving the educa-
tional system without qualifications), they provide either training or vocational experience contracts or jobs sponsored by the State, both in the public and private sectors. New initiatives aimed at combating racism and discrimination in the workplace attempt to address the problems associated with the integration of the recent waves of immigrants, particularly in those countries that had not previously experienced a foreign population influx. In Belgium, agreements signed on 8 June 1998 on the Commitments of the Flemish government and the Flemish social partners concerning the employment of immigrants has the objective of obtaining a balanced presence of immigrants at all levels of both the public and private sectors. The 1997-98 affirmative action plan for immigrants aims to improve access to the labour market and increase the vertical mobility of certain target groups in seventy-five companies and government institutions, without lowering qualification criteria. It does not, however, provide for positive discrimination or mandatory quotas. The plan also provides for an analysis of selection and recruitment procedures, and checks for the existence of discrimination in hiring. In Denmark, the new Integration Act of June 1998 provides for assistance and financial support measures to aid new arrivals in their search for work, so that they can be integrated into the labour market as soon as possible. In France, attempts to facilitate immigrants integration into the labour market form part of wider efforts concerning the provision of vocational training and promoting young people and the unemployeds access to the labour market. In the Netherlands, in 1997 the unemployment rate amongst minority populations was five times higher than among nationals. Both general and specific measures are in place to facilitate the integration of foreigners into the labour market. The general law on recruiting job-seekers came into force on 1 January 1998. It requires that municipalities implement measures to facilitate the integration of foreigners into the labour market, specifically by means of linguistic and vocational training. Young job-seekers and the long-term unemployed who find it hard to find work may be placed by municipalities in subsidised positions in public or private companies. In the spring of 1998, a working party on minorities and the labour market was set up by the Ministries of the Interior and Social Affairs. Composed of representatives of the social partners, private organisations and minority groups, it has been given the task of improvOECD 1999
84
ing the balance between the supply of and demand for jobs for minority groups. In Norway, the public employment service has implemented a system of personalised action plans to assist foreigners in finding work. In order to reduce unemployment, the government has set up various types of training programmes on how to find work and courses leading to qualifications, which are attended by many foreigners. Without going as far as to establish quotas it also encourages the recruitment of qualified foreigners in the public sector. Measures implemented to facilitate the integration of foreigners into the labour market are aimed not only at providing access to employment, but also at combating racism and discrimination in the workplace. Several OECD Member countries have passed legislation or implemented programmes of this type. In Norway, the Minister for Local Authorities and Regional Development, in co-operation with other ministers, reviewed the action plan against racism and ethnic discrimination in June 1998. One of the aims of this plan is to expand the legal assistance afforded to the victims of racial discrimination, and to raise awareness of the problem. It also aims to improve the training of civil servants who deal with a multi-cultural population. In October 1997, the Czech government published a report on the gypsy community, which pointed to the need for urgent measures, particularly with regard to employment and education. In Germany, a project on developing strategies aimed at dealing with xenophobia amongst Germans and foreigners was implemented in the Ruhr region in early 1998. This programme aims to resolve inter-cultural conflicts which may arise in the workplace or in everyday relations, and to develop strategies to prevent the isolation of immigrants. In Belgium, a new mandatory collective bargaining agreement, signed in July 1998, requires that employers may not when recruiting discriminate between candidates on the basis of their age, sex, marital status, medical history, race, skin colour, national or ethnic origin, political or religious beliefs, or membership in a union or any other organisation. This agreement enables any victim of discrimination to bring the matter before the Labour Court. In France, a round-table discussion on racial discrimination in the workplace was held between the government and the other social partners in May 1999. Several approaches were proposed and discussed. These included how to: broaden knowledge
OECD 1999
and understanding of discriminatory practices; improve the training of all those in the public and private spheres involved in combating discrimination; develop sponsorship of young job-seekers; and, include clauses on combating racism in contracts signed with municipalities. Proposals to modify legislation in order to increase the effectiveness of measures against racial discrimination were also discussed. A working group on discrimination (Groupe dtude des discriminations, GED), which will act as monitoring body, was set up on 15 April 1999. It will present papers and run awareness-raising campaigns aimed at broadening knowledge and understanding of racial discrimination. Its scope will encompass all aspects of society, notably employment, accommodation, contact with public services, culture and education. 3. Migration and international co-operation to promote economic development
Thus far, international co-operation to control flows has proved to be only a partial response to the increasing range and volume of migration movements. It is for this reason that the idea of sustainable development as a means of eventually reducing the incentives to emigrate in those countries with high emigration potential is gaining ground among OECD countries. The originality of this approach lies not in the association of migration with development but rather in suggesting to policy makers that they need to take greater account of the impact on migration of measures adopted in the context of international economic relations. Among the more important of these measures are those relating to trade liberalisation and the acceleration of regional integration. They are accompanying, notably, increased foreign direct investment by OECD countries not only in the labour-intensive sectors of developing-country economies but also in their social infrastructure (particularly health care and education) and technologically advanced sectors. The OECD, following on from 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 (Migration and Development: New Partnerships for Co-operation, OECD, 1994), organised from 1996 to 1998 three regional seminars on migration, free trade and regional integration, in respectively Central and Eastern Europe (Vienna, March 1996, with the support of the Austrian Federal Chancellery and the WIFO), in the Mediterranean Basin (Athens,
85
October 1996, in co-operation with the Greek authorities) and in North America (Mexico, January 1998, with the support of the Mexican, Canadian and United States authorities). With the Japanese authorities and in collaboration with the ILO, the Secretariat has also organised since 1995 annual workshops on migration and the labour market in the context of regional economic integration in Asia. The principal conclusions of these regional seminars and workshops were presented in the two previous editions of Trends in International Migration (OECD, 1997 and 1998).4 In order to draw the political lessons from these regional analyses and to debate them with policy makers and experts, the OECD organised with the support of the Portuguese authorities an international conference on "Globalisation, Migration and Development" in Lisbon on 2 and 3 November 1998. The principal conclusions of this Conference are summarised below. They are followed by a review of the association agreements recently signed by the European Community with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, with Turkey and with the countries of the Maghreb. a) Migration and development: the principal conclusions of the Lisbon Conference
migration policies should take in order to attain this objective. The regional seminars and the international conference in Lisbon have highlighted the factors likely to play a key role in a successful strategy. Proposals were formulated to accelerate economic convergence and over the longer term reduce incentives to emigrate in those countries of high migration potential. The key factors for successful economic integration The integration of the developing countries into industrialised regional groupings can have beneficial effects for the former only if integration is accompanied by sufficient funding to build up their human and physical capital. Along with market size and the internal dynamic of the investments, these are two key factors in attracting foreign direct investment. The experience of countries like Ireland and Portugal over the past twenty years shows that trade liberalisation and regional integration can produce dynamic effects of convergence towards mean European per capita income only if structural and institutional reforms accompany the process. These include credible macroeconomic policies, a fairer distribution of the fruits of growth and greater enhancement and use of human resources. Among the other frequently stressed key factors are political stability, the quality of investment (including the best way to use structural funds and remittances), and the existence of basic infrastructure. Concern for protecting the human and social dimension, in a context of liberalisation, also plays an essential part in ensuring that the inevitable adjustments are better accepted at the political level, both domestically and internationally. States have here an important regulatory role to play as regards both social and labour standards. The different forms of regional integration involve a wide variety of participants: governments, national and multinational enterprises and the labour force in general. Co-ordinated assistance and multinational action are needed to alleviate the effects on the economy, in particular on employment, of the structural adjustments necessitated by trade liberalisation and integration in the world economy. Dissemination of innovation and technological progress, the implemen-
The Lisbon Conference comprised three sessions. The first session presented, with the aid of economic indicators, the relative state of advancement of the processes of regionalisation and globalisation in the four large regions considered. The second session analysed the different policies for regional economic integration and their impact on direct investment, employment and migration. This analysis was completed by an assessment of the attempts using different economic models to take into account the impact of free-trade and economic integration on direct investment, employment and migration flows. The third session consisted of two round tables. The first round table highlighted the economic measures and trade strategies which would help remove the remaining obstacles to an acceleration of the regional integration processes presently underway. The second round table aimed to further clarify the role that migration flows could play in strengthening regional integration and to define the new directions which employment and
86
4. The proceedings of these regional seminars and workshops were published under the following titles: Migrations, libre-change et intgration rgionale dans le Bassin mditerranen, OCDE, 1998 Migration, Free Trade and Regional Integration in North America, OECD, 1998 Migration and Regional Economic Integration in Asia, OECD, 1998 Migration, Free Trade and Regional Integration in Central and Eastern Europe, OECD-WIFO, 1997 Migration and the Labour Market in Asia. Prospects to the Year 2000, OECD, 1996.
OECD 1999
tation of policies for modernising business management methods, and the promotion of employment, stability and social equity are what determine the degree of success of the trade liberalisation process and the integration of the newly developing countries into international trade. The place of international migration in the globalisation process was the subject of much discussion during the Conference. Liberalisation of goods and capital flows has advanced considerably compared with the liberalisation of labour migration, especially in the case of North-South relations. It is therefore impossible to talk of a globalisation of migration. Yet the increasing diversity of migrants nationalities and the migration channels used as well as the growing proportion of movements of temporary and skilled workers in total migration flows, does show that migration is an important element in the globalisation process. The growing interdependence of origin and host countries was frequently stressed. In the source countries, the debate on migration has become inseparable from those on human rights, political organisation and economic development issues. In host countries, the integration of immigrants is one of the key priorities of migration policy. These countries are faced with the problem of ageing populations; in the medium term it is quite possible that migration might form part of or influence the solutions currently being sought for maintaining or reforming the welfare state. Over the past ten years, we have witnessed an increase in the energies devoted to regional integration strategies. The acceleration of economic convergence depends on the level of integration chosen. The prospect of certain Central and Eastern European countries joining the European Union has been of crucial importance in attracting foreign capital and favouring these countries transition towards a market economy. In the case of Ireland and Portugal, often mentioned during the Conference, the judicious use of the European Communitys structural funds which they received on joining made it possible for them to modernise their infrastructure and increase investment in human capital. Together, these two factors enabled them to attract foreign capital. Their economic and technological catch-up has been accompanied by a reversal in migration flows. Proposals to accelerate economic convergence Among the measures proposed at the Conference to accelerate economic convergence, participants stressed the need for efficient public and
OECD 1999
financial institutions, the implementation of vocational training programmes and measures to attract foreign capital (including investments by emigrants in their home countries) that would ensure sustainable development. In a context of increasing economic convergence, migration policy could play a fundamental role. One objective of migration policy is to combat illegal immigration by better controlling flows within the regionally integrated area and granting legal immigrants and their families the same status as nationals. Another objective is to encourage the exchange of skilled labour and facilitate the free movement of persons (business executives and employees). The current discussions in the WTO on the GATS, dealing with the international movement of persons in connection with the provision of services, are deadlocked; the developing countries are the more heavily penalised in this regard. Bilateral or multilateral agreements in this sphere are possible, however, as is an increased use of service contracts permitting labour movements and the adoption of measures facilitating the establishment of selfemployed workers. Finally, the enhancement of human resources should form an important element of migration policy. The present context of increasing globalisation and accelerating regional integration would seem to favour migrants productive return home. Where regional integration is successful, brain drain should taper off and the emigration countries will benefit more fully from the skills acquired by those who return. During the Lisbon Conference, as during the previous regional seminars, policymakers were invited to integrate migration into the broader context of international economic and political relations. The effort to place this subject in its geopolitical setting shows that the issue of the relationship between globalisation, migration and development deserves to be further investigated and revisited when current experiences of regional integration have reached more advanced stages. b) European Community association and co-operation agreements
Association Agreements between the European Community and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe From 1991 to 1996, the European Community concluded with the Central and Eastern European
87
countries (CEECs) a series of association agreements of a new kind known as Europe Agreements. These agreements replaced existing co-operation agreements. The first countries to sign these agreements were the four Visegrad countries (Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and the Slovak Republic), followed by Romania, Bulgaria, the Baltic States, and Slovenia. In the cases of Poland and Hungary these agreements came into force on 1 February 1994, in the cases of Romania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic on 1 February 1995 and in the case of Slovenia 1 February 1999; the agreement with the three Baltic States has yet to come into force. The Europe Agreements established a bilateral association between the European Community and each CEEC, covering both intergovernmental and purely Community spheres: political dialogue, movement of goods and workers, establishment and provision of services, payments and capital, competition and government subsidies, harmonisation of laws, and economic, financial, and cultural co-operation. While free movement is enjoyed by nationals of the European Economic Area, the Europe Agreements remain cautious in their approach to this issue. The provisions relevant to movement are even less generous than those made for nationals of Turkey and the countries of the Maghreb as part of their Association Agreements signed with the European Community. The Europe Agreements are part of an overall pre-accession strategy, which was adopted in principle at the Copenhagen meeting of the European Council in June 1993. The Commission opened accession talks in March 1998 with five CEECs (Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Estonia, and Slovenia), as well as with Cyprus. At the same time, it decided to annually assess the preparedness of each of the five countries that were not included within this first group of prospective members (the Slovak Republic, Bulgaria, Romania, Latvia, and Lithuania). The CEECs are currently in an intermediary and uncertain phase, between a closer association with the European Union and a differentiated accession process that will probably entail a long transition period. In this context, the movement of persons is an important and sensitive issue. The European Community has also concluded a series of partnership and co-operation agreements with member countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), notably with the Russian Federation (which came into force on 1 December 1997), Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, Kazakhstan,
Kirghistan and Belarus, as well as with Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. A similar agreement has been negotiated with Tajikistan. These agreements aim essentially to facilitate trade between the European Community and the co-signatories. They do not contain provisions relating to the co-signatories nationals access to employment or residence. Rather, they set out simple objectives the attainment of which is left to appraisal to each individual State itself. Rules on movement and employment in the European Union at present applicable to CEEC nationals Right of entry and right to a short visit In principle, nationals of Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia are not required to obtain a visa to enter the European Union and/or the Schengen Area for a short visit (less than three months) or for transit. Nevertheless, it remains possible according Community Law for an EU member state to maintain or re-establish the visa requirement. Recently, the United Kingdom reestablished the requirement of a visa for Slovak nationals, and may do so with regard to Czech nationals. Once the three-month period has elapsed, however, CEEC nationals who have not obtained a longstay visa are considered as illegal immigrants and are subject to expulsion. To make it easier to expel illegal immigrants, the countries of the Schengen area may sign bilateral re-entry agreements with third countries. Poland, for example, has committed to readmitting foreigners who used Poland as a transit country when illegally crossing into the Schengen area. While most CEEC nationals are not required to hold a visa for a short visit to the European Union, long-term visas remain a matter for each Member State to administer, under both Community law and the Schengen Agreements. The right to take up paid employment is also governed by each Member States own legislation; the Europe Agreements do not alter that. Provisions of the Europe Agreements regarding the movement of workers, the right of establishment and the provision of services The provisions on workers and the self-employed that are contained in each of the Europe Agreements concern the movements of workers, the establishment
OECD 1999
88
of businesses, and the provision of services. However, these agreements make no reference to the Treaty of Romes provisions on the free movement of persons and do not recognise an automatic right of access to the labour market or freedom to reside in EU Member States. The measures on the establishment of businesses and the provision of services are a little more liberal. During the ten-year transition period, which is divided into two five-year stages, CEEC nationals in an EU Member State remain subject to the countrys legislation on entry and residence. The Agreements contain an article encouraging Member States to preserve and improve existing possibilities of access to employment accorded under bilateral agreements, and to conclude similar agreements. The Community/CEEC Association Council will, during the second stage of the transition period, examine further ways of facilitating the movement of workers, taking into consideration the economic circumstances of the CEECs and the employment situation in the Community, and proceed to make recommendations to Member States. These are policy provisions only, and are not legally binding or in any way automatic. As in the association agreements with the countries of the Maghreb, Article 37 of the Europe Agreements provides for equality of treatment in working conditions, remuneration, and dismissal for workers legally employed in an EU Member State. It also lays down that the legally residing spouse and children of a worker legally employed in a Member State have access to the labour market of that State during the workers authorised period of residence. However, unlike the Maghreb Agreements, it does not grant equality of treatment with respect to social protection. The Europe Agreement with Poland contains a special provision that does not appear in the other Europe Agreements: Article 41 paragraph 3 provides that the Member States will examine the possibility of granting work permits to Polish nationals already having a residence permit in the Member State concerned with the exception of those Polish nationals who have been admitted as tourists or visitors. Depending on a countrys legislation, this provision might be applied to students and au pairs, among others. This paragraph is, however, in no way binding on Member States. As regards establishment, Article 44 of the Europe Agreements lays down that each Member State must grant CEEC companies and nationals treatment no less favourable than that accorded its
OECD 1999
own companies and nationals. Some activities, in particular financial services, real estate agencies, and participation in privatisation operations, will not be liberalised until 2004. Others, including farming and the legal profession, are altogether excluded. A request to have Article 44 of the Europe Agreement concluded with Poland interpreted was recently made to the European Community Court of Justice. In particular, the submission requested whether or not this article is directly applicable in the judicial orders of the Member States. An affirmative response would confer certain rights to Polish nationals regarding their right to settle in member countries of the European Union. Under Article 52, CEEC enterprises that freely establish themselves in a Community Member State are entitled to employ or have employed by one of their subsidiaries both Community nationals and nationals of their own State, provided that these employees are key personnel and are employed exclusively by the companies that enjoy the right of free establishment. This measure grants an indirect right of movement to CEEC workers and constitutes an exception to the chapter on workers of the Europe Agreements. Under Article 55 of the Agreements, the free provision of services only concerns CEEC nationals established in their State of origin who wish to provide a service in a Member State of the Community. It does not apply to a CEEC national established in a Member State who wishes to provide a service in another Member State. Recent developments in the co-operation between the European Union and the CEECs in the sphere of migration The Amsterdam Treaty brings into the purview of the Union certain areas relevant to co-operation in matters of justice and internal affairs. Moreover, it integrates the Schengen Agreements into the European Union Treaty. Henceforth, all countries that are candidates for accession must adhere to Community decisions and respect the Schengen Agreements. They are therefore required to secure their external borders and respect international norms for asylum, the issuance of visas, and immigration. Certain candidate countries have already undertaken substantial reforms: new legislation concerning the right to asylum and foreigners rights, institutional reform, improvement of administrative co-operation and the strengthening of external border control. They are
89
supported in these measures by technical assistance provided by the European Union within the framework of the PHARE programme. This programme emphasises inter-regional co-operation and multicountry activities, notably in matters relating to training and exchange programmes in the areas of border control, asylum and immigration, police co-operation and the law. In the same vein, a programme to modernise customs control has been in operation since 1995 and a programme to better manage the eastern borders of the Baltic States was initiated in 1997. The question of refugees and of the right to asylum raises particular challenges: candidate countries which were once merely transit countries for asylum seekers wishing to enter the European Union are now becoming destination countries. They have, for the most part, ratified the Geneva Convention of 1951 on refugee status as well as the international treaties concerning Human Rights. They must also adopt any measures bringing the asylum procedures of Member countries in closer alignment. This will involve endorsing the Dublin Convention of 1990 on the determination of the state responsible for examining asylum requests, which is now in force among Member countries of the European Union. Furthermore, the absence of visa requirements within an expanded European Union, which will mean new responsibilities for future Member countries with regard to managing external border controls, will require them to direct particular attention to these matters and to allocate substantial resources to them. The agreements with Turkey and the countries of the Maghreb The association agreement with Turkey In virtue of the association Agreement concluded in 1963 between the European Community and Turkey, the signatories have agreed to draw on the provisions of the Treaty of Rome in order to gradually effect the free movement of workers, the freedom of establishment and the free provision of services, as well as the adoption of the measures necessary in the areas of social protection for Turkish workers taking up employment within the Community. Three decisions of the EC-Turkey Association Council have related to the conditions for renewing Turkish nationals work and residence permits and the co-ordination of social security regimes for Turkish workers and their families. Although complete freedom of movement for Turkish workers within the European Community has not yet been granted, numerous rulings of the European Union Court of Justice have specified the legal scope
of the provisions of the Association Agreement and the decisions of the Association Council. Progressively, the Court has recognised a direct effect of many of these provisions, thereby conferring rights and guarantees to Turkish workers and their families residing in Member States of the Community. Very recently, in the Surul decision of 4 May 1999, the Court recognised the direct effect of an article of decision 3/80 of the Association Council of 19 September 1980 which set down the principle of equality of treatment with respect to social security. Co-operation Agreements with Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria The agreements signed by the Community, Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco in 1976 simply provide for the non-discriminatory treatment of workers from these countries with respect to working conditions, wages and social benefits. Recent judgements of the European Community Court of Justice confirm the desire to provide enhanced protection at the Community level for immigrant workers from countries of the Maghreb. The El Yassini decision of 2 March 1999 recognises notably the direct effect of paragraph 1 of article 40 of the EC-Morocco agreement, which set down the principle of equality of treatment for Moroccan workers and their families regarding their pay and conditions of employment. Moroccan workers can now take direct advantage of this principle. Nevertheless, the Court has refused to allow, by analogy with the principles of jurisprudence drawn from the EC-Turkey Agreement, that Moroccan workers have the right to reside in a Member State of the Community once they have been granted the right to work in that same State. The Court has in fact taken the view that the free movement of workers is not the objective of EC-Morocco Agreement. Three new Association Agreements based on a uniform model have been established in place of the co-operation agreements of 1976. The Agreement signed with Tunisia on 17 April 1995 came into force on 1 March 1998. That signed with Morocco at the same time came into force on 10 November 1995. Negotiations on an Agreement with Algeria continue. The measures for workers remain largely similar to those of the earlier agreements, with the addition of the principle of non-discrimination for dismissal from employment. The agreements specify in a common statement that the granting, renewal, and refusal of residence permits is regulated solely by the legislation of member States and the bilateral agreements between these States and each country. The initiaOECD 1999
90
tion of a social dialogue is planned, addressing notably all the problems relating to the quality of life and work of migrant communities, migration movements, illegal immigration, and policies and programmes favouring the equal treatment between the
nationals of third Mediterranean countries and EU countries. In addition, the re-integration of nationals found to be in an irregular situation who have been repatriated to their country of origin is considered a priority issue.
91
OECD 1999
Part II
RECENT CHANGES IN MIGRATION MOVEMENTS AND POLICIES

(COUNTRY NOTES)
AUSTRALIA
Introduction Numerous changes in Australias migration policy have recently been implemented. The points test system, valid for certain economic categories of immigrant, has been revised so that the selection criteria for immigrant workers more closely match the requirements of the Australian labour market. Other initiatives are aimed at promoting the countrys economic development. In this connection, measures having been taken, inter alia, to facilitate the procedures for recruiting immigrant personnel and to ease the formalities that immigrants have to go through when starting a business. A series of measures have been taken to reduce the volume of new immigrants in certain categories or exert greater control over their access to the labour market. Thus, the financial conditions to be met by residents wishing to bring members of their family into the country have been made more stringent, while students now have to have begun their studies before they can take up an occupation. As had been planned, fewer visas were granted in the 1997/98 fiscal year and a larger proportion were set aside for skilled immigrants. Efforts were also made to counter forged visas. The Australian economy grew at a rate of 4% in 1997/98, fuelled mainly by strong domestic demand. Unemployment was down and should remain at 8% in 1998/99 (compared with 8.7% in 1996/97). Employment should continue to rise briskly during the period. Australia has had to contend with a number of specific difficulties that have affected the region, such as the impact of the Asian financial crisis and the El Nio phenomenon. In 1997/98 it provided assistance for Papua New Guinea and Indonesia in particular, which were the countries most seriously affected, while at the same time keeping up its traditional aid to other Asian and African countries. Migration and settlement The number of permanent entries was down to 77 300 in 1997/98, a fall of almost 10% on the previous year, which was largely attributable to government decisions concerning the reduction in the number of visas that could be granted. Definitive departures numbered around 32 000 in 1997/98, a rise of 7% on the previous year. Net permanent movements remained positive at more than 45 300 entries, although this did represent a 19% decline on the previous year. In 1997/98, net long-term movements (12 months or more) totalled 33 800 (see Chart II.1). The increase in the entries of this kind was due mainly to the efforts to promote foreign students enrolment in Australias higher education system. Next come those in search of employment, business people and tourists. In 1997/98, some 74 900 long-stay foreign residents left Australia; these numbers have been increasing steadily for over twenty years.
OECD 1999
93
Chart II.1. Flows of permanent and long-term residents,1 Australia Fiscal years 1982/83-1997/98 Thousands
A. Net migration gain B. Inflows of permanent residents by entry class
Family Humanitarian2 Skill2 Total3 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1983 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 1983 85 87 89 91 93 95 97
Permanent and long-term flows Long-term flows Permanent flows 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
C. Inflows of permanent residents by main country or region of origin

New Zealand Asia4 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1983 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. 2. Including accompanying dependents. 3. Including non-visaed entry class (mainly New Zealand citizens). 4. China, Chinese Taipei, Hong Kong (China), India, Philippines, Malaysia and Sri Lanka. Source: Department of Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs. United Kingdom
Short-stay entries (including tourists) were put at 4.2 million in 1997/98 (this compares with 3 million departures). The main countries of origin are Japan, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, the United States and Singapore. In this category, the main reasons for entry are tourism and private visits, followed by business trips and studies. In 1997/98, almost 112 400 people acquired Australian nationality, an increase of 4 000 on the previous year. In August 1998, the government set up the Australian Nationality Council which is responsible in particular for questions relating to nationality law and the formulation of policy proposals in this area. Refugees and asylum seekers In 1997/98, more than 12 000 visas were granted under the Humanitarian Programme, of which some 10 500 were granted off-shore and the remainder on-shore. Most of the candidates were nationals of the former Yugoslavia, followed by the Middle East and Africa. Women, the majority of whom come from the above three regions, account for 13.5% of people granted visas off-shore. A programme of similar scope is planned for 1998/99 and the same priority will be given to the above three countries or regions.
OECD 1999
94
Australia
Table II.1. Permanent and temporary migration programme outcomes, 1995-19981 and 1999 planning levels for permanent settlers, by category, Australia
Thousands
Actual 1995 1996 1997 1998 Planned 1999
Migration Programme2 (excluding the Humanitarian Programme) Family Preferential family Concessional family Skill Employer nomination/labour agreements Business skills Special talents Independents Other Special eligibility Humanitarian Refugees and special humanitarian Special assistance Other Temporary Resident Programme3 (excluding students) Skilled temporary resident programme4 Independent executive Executive Specialist University teacher Medical practitioner Social/cultural programme International relations programme of which: Working Holiday Maker (WHM) Other Student Programme
1. Data refer to scal years (July to June of the given year). 2. Figures include persons who change status (temporary to permanent). 3. Including Long Stay Temporary Business Programme from 1995/1996. 4. Accompanying dependents are included. Source: Department of Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs.
76.5 44.5 36.8 7.7 30.4 3.3 2.4 0.1 15.0 9.6 1.6 13.3 7.7 5.6 77.4 14.3 0.2 3.7 8.5 1.1 0.8 18.3 44.6 35.4 0.2 51.4
82.5 56.7 48.7 8.0 24.1 4.6 4.9 0.2 10.6 3.8 1.7 15.1 8.2 6.9 83.0 15.4 0.4 4.3 8.5 1.1 1.1 16.9 50.7 40.3 63.1
73.9 44.6 37.2 7.3 27.5 5.6 5.8 0.2 15.0 1.0 1.7 12.0 5.9 3.7 2.4 90.6 12.5 .. .. .. 1.8 1.8 15.3 62.8 50.0 68.6
67.1 40.8 31.3 9.5 25.1 6.0 5.4 0.2 13.3 0.4 1.1 12.0 8.6 1.8 1.5 98.0 14.8 .. .. .. 1.9 1.9 15.1 68.2 55.6 63.6
68.0 38.7 30.5 8.2 26.8 5.6 5.0 0.1 14.7 1.3 2.5 12.0 8.3 1.8 2.0
Programme2
The number of asylum applications came to some 8 000 in 1997/98, which was down on 1996/97. Applications from Indonesia, the Philippines and China accounted for 40% of the total. Administrative changes introduced in 1997/98 were aimed at making procedures shorter and discouraging spurious applications. Nearly 1 600 protection visas were granted to asylum seekers in 1997/98. Following changes in the legislation, asylum seekers entitlement to work has been made conditional on their having been in Australia for a certain period of time. Temporary migration Since 1992/93, Australias temporary entry residence programme (which excludes students) has issued an increasing number of temporary visas; 98 000 were issued in 1997/98 (see Table II.1). This increase is accounted for by the rise in the number of skilled temporary workers and in entries under the Working Holiday Maker (WHM) Programme, under which 55 600 visas were granted. There has, however, been a cap on the number of WHM visas since 1994/95; that for 1997/98 was set at 57 000 (including 1 500 granted in Australia).
OECD 1999
95
The programme for skilled workers covers entries of business people (holders of Temporary Business Entry Long-Stay visas or visitors on business), people in the medical profession and academics. The number of Temporary Business Entry Long-Stay visas granted rose by 32% in 1997/98 (33 600 visas) as a result, in the main, of the increased mobility of skilled temporary workers and the need for Australian companies to adapt and become more competitive. One third of these visas are accorded to managers and administrators. Business Visitor visas (218 000 in 1997/98) were, however, down on 1996/97 as a result of new criteria for their issue being introduced in 1997 and also because of the Asian crisis. Also granted were 5 400 Business Skills visas on the basis of the Business Skills Migration programme, the aim of which is to attract managers, entrepreneurs and investors and to provide assistance for business people who have started up companies in Australia. Such entrepreneurs typically make large investments during the first three years following their arrival. A revision of the conditions under which visas are issued to business people began in 1998 and is set to be completed in 1999, the object being to adjust policies in such a way as to improve results. A little over 63 500 student visas were granted, which was 7% down on 1996/97. The main countries of origin are Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia and Singapore. The new legislation covering the entry of immigrant students has been in force since 1 December 1998, the aim being to exercise greater control over the growth in the number of visas awarded every year. Illegal immigration The bulk of illegal immigration is made up of visitors, temporary residents and students who entered the country legally and then remained after the date allowed by their visa (overstayers). Their number was estimated at 51 000 at the end of December 1997 (i.e. 6 000 more than in June 1996). The rise could be due, first, to the increase in the number of temporary visas granted and, second, to the adoption of a better way of calculating the number of foreigners staying in the country illegally. Detailed information is available concerning immigrants who have unduly extended their stay. Nearly 60% of them are believed to have been in the country for over four years. Because of the universal visa system and the fact that Australia has no land borders, in theory very few people can enter Australia without identity papers. Nevertheless, the number of people refused entry for that very reason has continued to increase from 485 in 1994/95 to over 1 500 three years later. The results from inspections indicate that 16% of immigrants were working without a valid residence permit (compared with 21% in 1996/97). A campaign was launched to inform employers and encourage them to check the validity of their employees residence permits. In 1997/98, the authorities identified 12 700 foreigners in an irregular situation. The government has introduced additional measures to tighten up border controls, these include increases in the number of staff in international airports and in sensitive countries. Employment of foreigners In August 1998, overseas-born workers accounted for a quarter of the total labour force; almost 60% came from non-English-speaking countries (see Table II.2). The participation rate of those born outside Australia is 58% (54% for nationals of non-English speaking countries and 65% for nationals of English-speaking countries), compared to 66% for persons born in Australia. For a wide variety of reasons, such as knowledge of English, age, skills, the type of migration and the length of residence in Australia, unemployment among foreigners tends to be higher than among Australian nationals. In August 1998, the overall unemployment rate was 8%: 8.4% for those born abroad and 7.7% for those born in Australia. Unemployment is lower among nationals of English-speaking countries (6.9%) than among those of other countries (9.6%). Policy developments
96
There have been a number of changes to Australias migration policy. In order to better meet Australias economic requirements, the Migration Programme is now more focused on attracting skilled migrants with
OECD 1999
Austria
Table II.2. Australias labour force by birthplace, August 1998

All gures in thousands, unless otherwise indicated
Total Employed Unemployed Unemployment rates (%)
Labour force, total Australian-born Overseas-born of which: Main English Speaking Countries Non English Speaking Countries
Source:
Federal Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs.
9 263.8 6 969.9 2 293.9 988.9 1 305.4
8 535.9 6 435.3 2 100.6 920.4 1 180.1
728.0 534.7 193.3 68.1 125.3
8.0 7.7 8.4 6.9 9.6
experience. All told, 67 100 people obtained visas under the Migration Programme in 1997/98, which was 6 800 fewer than the previous year. Skilled labour accounted for 52% of the Programme (as against 47% in 1996/97), and family members for 47% (instead of 50% in 1996/97). In 1998/99, 68 000 visas are scheduled to be issued under the Programme, of which 30 500 for family members (Preferential family migration), 35 000 for skilled migrants and 2 500 for special cases (see Table II.1). A number of measures have been taken with the object of strengthening entry and border control policies and practices. In particular, new requirements have been introduced regarding entry into Australia. Efforts are also being made to curtail fraud connected with visa applications and to reduce the number of disputes relating to humanitarian decisions and the granting of refugee status. At the same time, entry has been made simpler for business people and tourists, while additional funds have been made available to help migrants settle in the country, in particular under the Humanitarian Programme. A change in the points test system for independent migrants and skilled migrants with family ties in Australia (SAL or Skilled Australian-Linked) came into force in June 1998. The key objective is to render the tests used for these two categories of migrant more suited to the purpose of selecting migrants capable of finding employment quickly and contributing positively to the Australian economy in the short and long term. In April 1998 the government announced a series of reforms concerning the entry and support for parents and elderly people who have family ties with a person resident in Australia. With effect from 1 November 1998, elderly parents still economically active could no longer obtain for themselves visas for permanently resident parents, but had to opt for another type of visa such as a short or long-stay visitors visa or a retired persons visa. The financial cost to the person assuming responsibility for a dependent parent will increase (Assurance of Support Bond) and the person will have to prove that he/she has the means to provide adequately for the dependent parent. Lastly, the government has introduced measures designed to enable territorial states and governments to play a fuller part in selecting skilled migrants and to foster a more balanced distribution of such migrants across the country.
AUSTRIA
Introduction In 1998 economic growth reached 3.1%, as compared with 2.5% in 1997 and 1.6% in 1996. This growth, resulting mainly from strong export performance, had a favourable effect on the labour market. Nevertheless, there was a decrease in the number of foreign workers from non-European Union countries. The decline was due in part to an increase in the number of naturalisations of non-EU nationals, but is also attributable to restrictions
OECD 1999
97
Components of population 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
Asylum seekers and refugees Asylum seekers Outows of refugees
98
Table II.3. Current gures on the components of total population change, on migratory ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Austria
All gures in thousands unless otherwise indicated
1994 1995 1996 1997 1994 1995 1996 1997
change1
8 029.7 24.8 11.7 13.1 7 316.2 10.3 1.0 6.0 15.3 713.5 14.6 10.7 19.1 15.3 5.1 1.8
8 046.5 14.9 7.5 7.4 7 323.1 9.5 2.8 2.0 14.4 723.5 5.4 10.3 9.4 14.4 5.9 1.2
8 059.4 13.0 8.0 5.0 7 331.2 8.4 2.2 5.0 15.6 728.2 4.6 10.2 10.0 15.6 7.0 1.3
8 072.2 7.6 4.6 3.0 7 339.5 4.1 4.7 7.0 15.8 732.7 3.5 9.3 10.0 15.8 6.7 1.3
Stocks of foreign workers, by Former Yugoslavia (%) Turkey (%) EU (%) Other (%) Share of foreign employment in total employment (%) Total of employed workers, by category of permit3 Short-term work permits Work entitlements Permanent permits Work permits issued to foreigners, by category Initial permits issued Extensions issued Permanent licences issued Unemployment rate, total4 Unemployment rate, foreigners Employment of Austrians abroad5 Austrian employees in Federal Republic of Germany Austrian employees in Switzerland Legal measures taken against foreigners Total rejections at border Removals to home country Refusals of residence Expulsions from Austria Total
nationality2
291.0 48.9 18.6 6.3 26.2 9.5 268.8 78.4 97.9 92.6 143.8 75.9 58.2 9.7
300.3 49.2 18.2 7.0 25.6 9.8 269.7 58.8 109.1 101.9 131.7 56.1 48.6 27.0
300.4 49.3 17.8 7.8 25.0 9.9 257.2 43.7 92.3 121.2 127.5 51.9 35.8 39.8
298.8 49.3 17.7 8.3 24.6 9.8 247.3 36.6 67.3 143.4 119.5 52.7 24.3 42.5
6.5 8.0
88.7 14.9 142.4 4.1 11.2 15.5 173.2
6.6 7.7
83.6 14.4 134.7 3.9 12.7 17.9 169.2
7.0 8.4
79.4 13.7 134.0 3.5 12.9 22.0 172.4
7.1 8.4
74.8 12.8 80.7 4.8 13.3 18.9 117.7
1. 2. 3.
Calculations are based on the 1991 census. The naturalisations refer to persons residing in Austria. Annual average. Employment of foreigners based on social security data records. Data given as an annual average. The data exclude the unemployed and self-employed and 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). 4. Data are based on the unemployment register. 5. Data as of June for Germany, August for Switzerland. Sources: Central Alien Register; Central Statistical Ofce; Ministry of the Interior; Federal Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs; Social Security database on labour force.
OECD 1999
Austria
Chart II.2. Components of population change,1 1983-1997, Austria Thousands

A. Net migration and total change in population
Total change (foreigners) Net migration (foreigners) Total change (Austrians) Net migration (Austrians) 100 100
on labour market access for this category of worker. With an unemployment rate of 8.4% (against the national average of 7.1%), these workers have proved to be more vulnerable to unemployment than nationals. Population and migration flows In 1997, Austrias population numbered nearly 8.1 million, of whom 733 000 were foreigners (9.1%). Net migration of foreigners remained stable at 10 000, whereas net migration of Austrians rose to 7 000, up from 5 000 in 1996 (see Table II.3 and Chart II.2). The total number of births declined by 5.4% in 1997, reflecting decreases of 4.8% for Austrian mothers and 8.9% for foreign mothers. In the same year, approximately 16 300 people received Austrian citizenship. One-third of those naturalised were of Turkish origin, approximately one quarter from the former Yugoslavia and 18% from Central and Eastern Europe. The naturalisation rate was 2.2%. Between 1991 and 1997, Austrian citizenship was granted to a total of almost 110 000 persons. A new Citizenship Law which came into force on 1 January 1999 provides for the granting of Austrian citizenship to foreign nationals once they have legally resided in the country for over ten years. The right to citizenship is automatic for those foreigners who have held both a work permit and a long-term residence permit for over 15 years. Immigration In Austria, detailed analyses of migration flows, be they of workers, family members, asylum seekers and refugees are possible only for certain groups of migrants, mainly non-EU nationals. The governors of the federal states, the Minister of Domestic Affairs and the Minister of Labour jointly establish an annual quota for residence permits for non-EU nationals. Several types of work permits can be issued to citizens of non-EU countries who wish to work in Austria (see Chart II.3). European Economic Area or EU nationals have not required work permits since 1994, but may obtain a renewable five-year residence permit if they furnish proof of employment. Initial first entry (Erstantrag) and re-entry (Neuantrag) permits, which are issued to employers, provide useful information on the flow of foreign workers and trends in the employment of foreign
80
80
60
60
40
40
20
20
-20 1983 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97
-20
B. Natural increase and naturalisations

Natural increase (Austrians) Natural increase (foreigners) Acquisition of Austrian nationality 20 20
15
15
10
10
-5
-5
-10 1983 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97
-10
1.
Components of national and foreign population change are: natural increase, net migration and naturalisations. Source: Austrian Central Statistical Office.
99
OECD 1999
Chart II.3. Stocks of foreigners holding a work permit1 in Austria, 1980-1997 Thousands
Permanent licences Total foreign employment2 300 Work entitlements
Initial permits issued
Extensions issued
300
250
250
200
200
150
150
100
100
50
50
0 1980 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 1980 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97
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 self-employed and from 1994 on, citizens of the European Economic Area. 2. Figures are given as an annual average and are based on Social Security records. Sources: Ministry of Labour; Social Security Department; Labour Market Service.
1.
labour. In 1997 a total of 52 700 initial permits were issued, an increase of 1.7% on 1996 (see Table II.3). More than 62% of these permits were granted to men. Compared to 1996, the number of first entries to the labour market was down, at 15 200 permits, while re-entry after loss of employment rose by 5.4% to reach approximately 37 600 permits in 1997. Nevertheless, compared to the overall growth in employment this increase is slight, which seems mostly attributable to the priority given to unemployed Austrian workers in the labour market. Since 1990 there has been a strong correlation between the issue of first entry permits and the evolution of foreign labour employment. The issuance of first entry permits increases only when there exists strong demand for foreign workers. The extension of work permits (Beschftigungsbewilligung) reveals the cyclical and structural nature of foreign labour demand over the medium and long term. In 1997, 24 300 extensions were granted, amounting to a decrease of nearly one third compared to 1996. The extension or conversion of foreigners work permits is designed to facilitate the integration of certain categories of foreign nationals, particularly those who have worked in Austria for more than two and a half years, who are married to an Austrian national or who are related to a foreigner already settled in Austria. When a permanent work permit (Befreiungsschein, issued after five years of employment) is granted to a foreigner, he may work anywhere in Austria and not simply within the borders of the Land in which he was first employed. In 1997, the total number of short-term work permits issued declined by 16% on 1996, to 36 600. This is the result of a restrictive policy regarding foreign workers, limiting newcomers access to the labour market. Of the non-EU nationals who requested a work permit, almost 20% were from Central and Eastern Europe, in particular the Slovak Republic, Hungary, Poland and Romania. The remainder were mostly from Turkey, the former Yugoslavia and Bosnia. In 1997, 143 400 permanent work permits were issued to foreign workers a fall of 18% on 1996. The proportion of Central and Eastern European nationals, including those from the former Yugoslavia and Turkey, has been growing steadily (from 5.4% in 1995 to 9.4% in 1996 and 13.2% in 1997). The issue of one-year work entitleOECD 1999
100
Austria
ments (Arbeitserlaubnis), which are also granted to foreign workers rather than employers, was down 27% on the 1996 figure, to 67 300. The majority of these entitlements were granted to citizens of the former Yugoslavia and Bosnia, as well as to Croatians and Turks. In all, the number of short- and long-term permits granted in 1997 was 251 700, a decline of 2.5% on the 1996 figure. Refugees and asylum seekers Having been in decline since 1991, the number of requests for asylum rose sharply in 1998: 13 800 applications were received, as compared to 6 700 the previous year. In 1997, one quarter of the applications were from nationals of Central and Eastern European countries. The others were from Iraq (22%), the former Yugoslavia (16%), Afghanistan (11%) and Iran (7%). The recognition rate in 1997 was low (10%), below the average for the period 1992-97 (13%). In addition to asylum seekers, Austria has also allowed a substantial number of de facto refugees, who were fleeing the war zones in Bosnia-Herzegovina, to enter its territory. Of the 100 000 refugees who arrived between 1992 and 1995, approximately 5 800 remained financially dependant on the federal government and the federated states in December 1997. The growing extent of Bosnians integration and financial independence is evidenced by their increasing activity in the Austrian labour market, as measured by the number of who have obtained a work permit (38 000 as of June 1998 twice the 1994 figure, see Table II.4). The majority of Bosnians have long-term work entitlements, 35% of which are permanent work entitlements. By July 1998 nearly 69 000 Bosnians had received residence permits, of whom 25% were granted the right to stay in Austria for more than two years and a further 21% were granted permanent residence. Family reunion The register of foreigners kept by the Ministry of Domestic Affairs counts only non-EU nationals who require residence permits. From mid-1997 to mid-1998, 242 000 residence permits were issued: 32% to people under the age of 20 and nearly 50% to persons aged 20 to 40. Half of them are quota admissions, and most of these are family members of foreigners already settled in Austria (around two-thirds of all quota admissions). Nevertheless, the maximum number of persons authorised entry to Austria on family reunion grounds is relatively small compared to the number of requests. The status of the family members changes as their stay in Austria continues. A growing number of people who arrived under the family reunion clause, without the right to work, have now obtained that right. In July 1998, of a total of 437 900 non-EU nationals, only 50 000 were explicitly denied the right to work.
Table II.4. Bosnians in employment in Austria by type of permits,1 1995-1998

All gures in thousands
1995 1996 1997 1998
Employment of Bosnians, total2 of which: Short term work permit holders Work entitlement holders Permanent licence holders Other work permit holders
1. For details on denition of permits, please refer to note 3 in Table II.3. 2. End of June. Source: Federal Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs.
25.5 11.7 12.1 1.5 0.1
29.2 9.4 15.8 4.0 0.1
35.8 7.5 19.8 8.4 0.1
38.0 5.6 19.1 13.3
101
OECD 1999
Emigration At the end of 1997, the number of Austrians working in Switzerland was down 4.6% from 1996, at approximately 27 100. The figure has been in steady decline since 1991, largely accounted for by falls in the numbers of seasonal and border workers. The majority of Austrians working in Switzerland have permanent resident status. Nearly 75 000 Austrians were working in Germany in 1997, a decrease of 5.7% on 1996. The decline can be explained by the fact that Germany has a surplus of labour, especially highly skilled labour from the new German Lnder. Furthermore, because of the structural problems that have affected the labour market since reunification, government measures systematically favour the integration of unemployed Germans. Position of foreign workers in the labour market According to social security data, 298 800 foreign workers took up new employment in Austria in 1997 (a figure which includes parents finishing their parental leave). This was a decrease of 0.5% on 1996. In 1997, the average share of foreigners (including EU/EFTA nationals) in total employment was 9.8%. In 1998, this proportion declined further. Information from the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare indicate a significant fall in the employment of non-EU nationals in 1997. This reduction can be explained both by naturalisations during the year and by the limited access that new entrants have to the labour market. Based on this information, citizens from non-EU countries account for 8% of the total employed. The structure of the foreign workforce by nationality is slowly changing. The percentage of EU nationals has risen from 6.3% in 1994 to 8.3% in 1997. The share of nationals of the former Yugoslavia and Turkey is falling off, whilst the proportion of those of Croatia, Slovenia and Bosnia is growing. It should be noted that each year a considerable number of Turks and Serbs obtain Austrian citizenship. Women account for almost 38% of non-EU foreign nationals working in Austria. The highest participation rates are for women from Serbia, followed by those from Bosnia and Croatia. It seems that Austrias application of the EC-Turkey Association Agreement did not particularly promote the participation of Turkish women in 1997. The concentration of foreign workers in particular sectors of the economy began to ease in the mid-1990s. But some sectors drew on foreign labour to remain competitive in 1997-98. This was notably the case in the food production and tobacco and beverage sectors, and in the textile, clothing and leather industries. By contrast, there were fewer foreign workers in tourism, where Austrians are preferred, and in the construction industry. The relatively large percentage of foreign workers in the business services sector is a result of the rather specialised structure of foreign labour, who offer services ranging from cleaning to highly skilled consulting and computer expertise. In 1997, the number of unemployed workers continued to grow, reaching its highest level since the second world war: 233 300 registered jobless. Unemployment can be expected to continue to rise in 1998. Foreign workers accounted for 11.8% of all unemployed in 1997 roughly the same as the 1996 figure. Contrary to expectations, the July 1996 decision of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, which obliged the Austrian authorities to restore the right to unemployment benefit to foreigners unemployed for over a year, did not result in an increase in the number of unemployed foreign nationals on the register. The unemployment rate for foreign nationals was 8.4% in 1997, compared to an aggregate unemployment rate of 7.1%. The share of women in total unemployment figures increased in 1997 to 32%. The unemployment rate for foreign women in 1997 was 7.3%, as compared with 9% for men. Turkish nationals are the most vulnerable to unemployment, with an unemployment rate of 11%. Policy developments In August 1997, new legislation regarding the residence, settlement and employment of non-EU foreign nationals was implemented (Fremdengesetz, 1997). The goal of this legislation is to provide more guarantees to foreigners who have lived in Austria for a long time. In particular, family members of persons who have lived in
OECD 1999
102
The Baltic States
Austria for at least four years can now take up employment. The effects of this measure have been negligible, owing mostly to the fact that the quota governing labour market access to foreign workers has stayed the same. The labour administration has also looked at various forms of illegal labour. At present, a company seeking to obtain a work permit for a foreigner entering the labour market for the first time must demonstrate that it could not hire an unemployed worker or a foreigner with job placement priority. This measure is undoubtedly a relatively effective barrier to the recruitment of foreigners seeking to enter the labour market for the first time. Policy pertaining to the inflow of foreign workers is still very restrictive and is likely to contribute to a decrease in the number of foreign workers in Austria in 1999. Border controls have taken on a new dimension now that Austria is implementing the Schengen Agreement (since December 1997). Refusal of entry because of a lack of passport or visa, as well as forced departure and denial of residence because of illegal work, engagement in immigrant smuggling or the lack of financial means, have become frequent. In 1997, approximately 12 000 people were forced to leave Austria (as compared with 14 700 in 1996) and there were 5 600 arrests related to immigrant smuggling.
THE BALTIC STATES

Introduction The available migration statistics presented and analysed below are of recorded migration flows. These relate solely to long term (or permanent) movements. It is understood that unreported exits, clandestine entries and the overstaying of visas are very high. However, judicious estimates of their extent are not available. The influence of migration on population changes in the Baltic States has declined significantly. Immigration flows, having begun to decline in the late 1980s fell sharply in the early 1990s since which time they have stabilised at a low level. In 1997, almost 3 000 immigrants registered in Latvia, just over 2 500 in Lithuania, and almost 1 600 in Estonia. Emigration flows peaked in 1992. Data for 1997 indicate the continuation of the downward trend. Just under 9 700 left Latvia, just over 4 000 Estonia and just under 2 500 Lithuania. Net migration, after more than 30 years of being positive became negative for all three countries the first time in 1990 (see Chart II.4). It was increasingly so in Latvia and Lithuania until 1993 and in Estonia until 1994. The migration balance remains negative in Latvia (6 800) and in Estonia (2 800). In 1997, Lithuanias migration balance became positive once more (+79). Immigration and return migration Immigration policy, which to a considerable extend promotes or blocks the arrival of certain categories of migrants has the effect of shaping the ethnic structure of migration flows. Immigration to all three Baltic States is essentially limited to three categories of person: returning nationals (i.e. those of Estonian, Latvian or Lithuanian ethnic affiliation the inflows of whom are not subject to any limitation), family reunion (limited, but has priority) and business-linked migration (which is still not numerous). Immigration flows are therefore dominated by people of titular nationalities and/or relatives of past-migrants, who had already settled in the Baltic States, most notably Russians, Belarussians and Ukrainians. Although they have not increased in absolute numbers, immigration flows of ethnic Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians to their corresponding countries have increased in proportion over the 1990s. Migrants from Western countries are still few in number. The majority of these come from Germany, the United States and, in the case of Estonia, Finland. Return migration can be divided into two categories: the return of voluntary emigrants and/or their descendants and the return from exile or deportation of individuals and/or their descendants. Repatriation of the latter group, which is mainly formed of people deported during Soviet period, is supported by the Governments of Baltic States. To this end, special programmes were elaborated to promote their return which have since been complemented with special integration programmes. In Lithuania the support programme provides, inter alia,
OECD 1999
103
Chart II.4.
Migratory flows1 in the Baltic States, 1989-1997 Thousands and per 1 000 inhabitants
Inflows Net migration
Estonia
Thousands 50 40 30 20 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 1989 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97
Latvia
Lithuania
Thousands 50 40 30 20 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50
1989 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97
1989 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97
Per 1 000 inhabitants 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 -20 -25 -30 1989 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 1989 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97
Per 1 000 inhabitants 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 -20 -25 -30 1989 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97
1.
Data on immigration refer to the flows of migrants who hold a residence permit and who had been registered during the year. Emigrants are counted if they declare their departure to a country where they wish to settle. Sources: Demographic Yearbooks of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, 1998.
assistance to cover travel expenses for returning deportees, special language training courses (many descendants of Lithuanian deportees do not speak Lithuanian), financial assistance to start small businesses and financial support for the creation of jobs for returnees. In addition, a special housing fund has been established under the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labour, from which returning deportees and their families can be offered free accommodation. Assistance to other categories of immigrants (with the exception of refugees) is not provided. On the contrary, they must provide proof of their ability to support themselves. Emigration and return migration The return migration of the so called Russian speaking population Russians, Belarussians, Ukrainians though diminishing, remains the dominant component of emigration flows from the Baltic States. They accounted for almost 80% from Estonia in 1996 and Latvia in 1997 and for almost 60% from Lithuania in 1997. Emigration flows to the West, although they are not increasing in absolute terms are increasing in proportion. In 1990 they accounted for 11% of the total from Estonia, 14% from Latvia and 12% from Lithuania. By 1997 their share had increased to 22%, 21% and 32% respectively. With the exception of Poland, which used to be a
OECD 1999
104
The Baltic States
Table II.5.
National composition of population in the Baltic States based on the declared ethnic origin
Census results of 19451, 1959, 1970, 1979, 1989, 1997 Percentages
Estonia 1945 1959 1970 1979 1989 1997
Estonians Russians Ukrainians Belarussians Finish Jews Others
97.3 2.7
74.6 20.1 1.3 0.9 1.4 0.5 1.2
68.2 24.7 2.1 1.4 1.4 0.4 1.8

Latvia
64.7 27.9 2.5 1.6 1.2 0.3 1.8
61.5 30.3 3.1 1.8 1.1 0.3 1.9
65.0 28.2 2.5 1.5 0.9 0.2 1.7
1935
1959
1970
1979
1989
1997
Latvians Russians Belarussians Ukrainians Polish Jews Germans Others
77.0 8.8 1.4 0.1 2.5 4.9 3.3 2.0
62.0 26.6 2.9 1.4 2.9 1.7 0.1 2.4
56.8 29.8 4.0 2.3 2.7 1.6 0.1 2.7

Lithuania
53.7 32.8 4.5 2.7 2.5 1.1 0.1 2.6
52.0 34.0 4.5 3.5 2.3 0.9 0.1 2.7
55.3 32.5 4.0 2.9 2.2 0.4 2.7
1923
1959
1970
1979
1989
1997
Lithuanians Russians Polish Belarussians Ukrainians Jews Germans Others
69.2 2.5 15.3 0.4 8.3 3.4 0.9
79.3 8.5 8.5 1.1 0.7 0.9 0.4 0.6
80.1 8.6 7.7 1.5 0.8 0.8 0.1 0.4
80.0 8.9 7.3 1.7 0.9 0.4 0.1 0.7
79.6 9.4 7.0 1.7 1.2 0.3 0.1 0.7
81.6 8.2 6.9 1.5 1.0 0.1 0.7
1. 1923 for Lithuania and 1935 for Latvia. Sources: Census data.
major destination for emigrants from Lithuania, the main destination countries remain unchanged: Germany, the United States and Finland for Estonia; Germany, the United States and Israel for Latvia and Lithuania. Changing population structure The changing structure of emigration/immigration flows is modifying the ethnic structure of the resident population. During the Soviet period, the proportion of Russians, Belarussians and Ukrainians steadily increased in all three Baltic States; following the reversal in migration flows in early 1990s it has been diminishing (see Table II.5). Foreigners (including stateless persons) account for less than 2% of Lithuanias total adult population. By contrast, in Latvia and Estonia up to 30% of permanent residents are foreigners or stateless persons. This difference will in all likelihood persist in the future since, according to various sociological surveys, over 50% of Russians non-citizens do not intend to apply for local citizenship. Quantitative differences in the sizes of the foreign populations have led to certain qualitative differences in the manner in which their residence status has been resolved. Whilst Lithuania could afford to use traditional methods (i.e. the way those problems are solved in most European countries), Estonia and Latvia had to seek a new solution. Therefore, special laws specifically governing the rights, obligations and legal status of aliens (former USSR citizens) were adopted.
OECD 1999
105
Illegal migration and migrant trafficking The emergence of illegal (transit) migration and migrant trafficking in the Baltic States and its gradual increase can be understood only in the context of its development in a broader area, mainly the former Soviet Union. During the Soviet period any kind of illegal foreign migration (immigration, emigration, transit migration) within and without the Baltic States as well as all over the former Soviet Union was practically impossible. With soldiers as border guards, and pursuing a closed door immigration/emigration policy, the Soviet Union (and the Baltic States as part of it) was not an easily accessible (and attractive) country for migrants. Such a migration policy had a lot of negative consequences, but it also resulted in practically non-existent illegal migration. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union the situation changed. The phenomenon of illegal migration and illegal transit migration in the Baltic States first manifested itself in Estonia and then in Latvia. Since the mid-1990s it has mainly concerned Lithuania; in Latvia illegal migration flows are much lower and in Estonia it is already almost non-existent. The main routes for illegal transit migrants pass via Lithuania. In Lithuania, the majority of illegal transit migrants come from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, i.e. rather distant countries, with which Lithuania has never had any close economic or cultural relations. This implies that no specific environment (e.g. the presence of compatriots, some common interests between the countries, a well developed transportation system, etc.) is required for this business. The only important conditions seem to be weak border control and the possibility of obtaining the necessary trafficking services (which almost 80% are understood to use according to an IOM investigation carried out in Lithuania in 1997). According to the same source, the majority of transit migrants are aiming for Western Europe and North America. Over 60% of those surveyed were seeking to reach Germany, over 15% the United States and just over 5% Scandinavia. One in eight declared themselves to be indifferent as to their final destination so long as they could apply for asylum and obtain good living conditions. Lithuania has signed readmission agreements with Estonia, Latvia, Bulgaria, Croatia, Finland, Iceland, Italy (though not yet in force), Poland, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland and Ukraine. Readmission clauses were included in the visa-free agreements with Cyprus, Denmark, Malta and Norway. Refugees and asylum seekers By the middle of 1997 all three Baltic States had passed special laws on refugees and asylum seekers and had ratified the relevant Geneva Convention and Protocol. Nevertheless, real implementation of these laws, i.e. consideration of claims for refugee status could start no earlier than the establishment of refugee reception centres and the introduction of a computerised system for data collection, processing and transmission. Therefore, until mid-1998 only that part of these laws which is related to the creation of the infrastructure for accepting refugees was in force. With very limited support from the governments of the three Baltic States, this work is mainly dependent on outside financial contributions (from the UNHCR, the IOM and the Nordic countries). By the end of 1998 Lithuania (which was the first of three to pass a law on refugees and to open a refugee reception centre) had granted asylum to 30 people and had granted temporary protection to a further 200. In Latvia only 1 person had been granted asylum by the end of 1998. The majority of claimants are from Asia Afghanistan, Iraq and Sri Lanka and Somalia. According to experts evaluations, most of them (probably around 90%) will not be granted asylum: their claims are groundless. Nevertheless, the number of applicants in Lithuania is increasing, most of them have no means of subsistence and are also in need of social assistance. Policy developments In all three Baltic States, the general approach towards migration related policy was established in the early 1990s. The various changes in migration policy introduced since then have for the most part been made in conformity with the established approach or with the object of adjusting local laws to European Union standards. EU requirements are now becoming the main factor influencing migration policy modification, this is notably the case of the actions undertaken in 1997 and 1998.
OECD 1999
106
The Baltic States
As the main migration issues are becoming less homogenous across the Baltic States, the principal current developments in migration policy are also becoming increasingly different. The main concerns of Latvia and Estonia have been to frame laws regulating the legal status of foreigners and resolving citizenship problems. In Lithuania the fight against illegal migration is the principal concern. The legal framework for immigration policy started to be formed in the early 1990s. The main attitude, which has hitherto remained the same, is restrictive towards arrivals (for permanent settlement). Currently, according to the laws passed in all three states, immigration is limited to essentially three categories: family reunion, business migration and repatriation of ethnic Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians to their homeland. It is expected that the volume of immigration flows from the East will remain rather low. The limitation on immigration is institutionalised in the form of a quota, which has been set at less than 0.1% of the resident population in Lithuania and Estonia. In practice, following debates in the parliaments, which set annual immigration quotas, the target level of immigration is always adjusted downwards: 1 500 persons in Lithuania (1998), and only 500 in Estonia (1997). In Latvia no immigration quota is envisioned and only people who are deemed to merit entry or are needed to fill skills shortages will be allowed to enter. Obtaining authorisation for permanent residency is particularly difficult. In contrast to the present situation whereby the possibility of entering from one of the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States has become much more limited than it was during the Soviet period, the visa requirements on nationals of other foreign countries have become less strict. Nationals of an increasing number of countries can enter visa free or are exempt from the necessity of having an official invitation. In the case of Lithuania, citizens of 42 countries do not need a visa and the citizens of a further 43 countries can obtain a visa without first obtaining an official invitation. Citizenship policy and naturalisation rules Policies towards recent immigrants already residing in the Baltic States (e.g. regulations governing the acquisition of citizenship, the law on the legal status of foreigners) are heavily influenced by the outcome of past migration patterns; not all past migrants are supposed to become citizens automatically, especially in Latvia and Estonia. Although citizenship laws and naturalisation procedures differ from country to country, some similarities can be identified, notably as regards the former citizens or former permanent residents of a Baltic country. According to the citizenship laws adopted in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, the right to retain citizenship or the right to obtain it automatically is granted to: Persons who held the citizenship of one of these countries up to 1940 (Estonia 16 June 1940; Latvia 17 June 1940; Lithuania 15 June 1940). Descendants of the above if they did not obtain another citizenship. Persons who held permanent residence in these countries during 1918-1940 and who now live there and are not citizens of any other country. Persons of Estonian, Lithuanian or Latvian origin (for the corresponding country). In Lithuania automatic citizenship is also possible for a much larger group of recent immigrants. It has the most liberal citizenship law (adopted in December 1991), the so-called zero option. According to this law, citizenship can be granted to any person who was a legally registered resident (this includes recent immigrants from the republics of the former Soviet Union) and who had lived in Lithuania before 3 November 1989 (date of the first citizenship law) and who opted for Lithuanian citizenship. These rules do not apply to military personnel of the Soviet Union, interior troops, security or other repressive structures unlawfully located in Lithuania after 15 June 1940 because they cannot be considered as foreigners legally resident or employed in Lithuania. With these exceptions, all permanent residents of Lithuania were granted identical and equal rights to apply for citizenship regardless of their nationalities, regardless whether they are native-born or immigrants. At present, 99.1% of the Lithuanian population aged 16 years and over are Lithuanian citizens. The proportion of foreigners and stateless persons continues to decline. Although foreigners from other countries are increasing in number, citizens of the Commonwealth of Independent States still comprise the majority of the foreign population.
OECD 1999
107
In Estonia, the regulations are almost the same for long-time residents as for newcomers. According to the Law on Citizenship, which came into force in 1995, Estonian citizenship is acquired by birth or received through naturalisation. A foreigner who wishes to receive Estonian citizenship must, inter alia, have lived in Estonia on the basis of a permanent residence permit for no less than five years prior to the date on which an application for citizenship is submitted (uninterrupted stay counting from 30 March 1990) and for one year from the date following the registration of the application. (The requirement for residence on the basis of a permanent residence permit is not applied to people who have been living in Estonia since 1990 if they continue to stay in Estonia permanently under the conditions established in the Law on Aliens.) Thus, nearly all foreigners who migrated to Estonia after 1940 remain foreigners until they apply and fulfil the naturalisation requirements. By the end of 1997 residence permit holders numbered 353 000 (about 25%) of the Estonian population. Similar, stricter, rules are provided for in the Latvian citizenship law mainly because of the extraordinary decline in the proportion of Latvian nationals during the Soviet period. At the beginning of the 1990s it approached 50%. Moreover, quite a large proportion of earlier immigration was of foreign military personnel. Therefore, in order to guarantee Latvias independent statehood and to provide clear perspectives for the noncitizen component of the Latvian population, some novel solutions had to be sought. Two laws, the Law on Citizenship and the Law on the Status of Former USSR Citizens who are not Citizens of Latvia or any other State were framed on this basis. The Law on Citizenship was liberalised through amendments adopted by Parliament on in May 1995. These amendments enabled certain categories of persons to acquire citizenship automatically. Still further liberalisation was undertaken in 1998 (in response to the requirements of the OSCE, the European Union and Russia) through amendments to the Law (in June) and through a referendum (in October). According to these amendments, all people, irrespective of their place of birth and age can apply for Latvian citizenship. These amendments also provide for the automatic granting of citizenship for all children born in Latvia after 1991. Until 1998 about 18 000 children had not been able to take Latvian citizenship. Therefore the number of citizens will soon increase. In 1998 about a quarter of Latvian residents were foreign.
BELGIUM
Introduction In 1998, GDP continued to increase at an annual rate of approximately 3%. After peaking at over 13% in 1994, unemployment has since gradually fallen and was less than 12% in 1998. Migration flows and foreign population Net migration (of foreigners and of Belgian nationals combined) was positive in 1997, having risen over the previous year to 26 000. The increase was due to the change in net flows of foreigners (see Chart II.5), stemming more from a decline in outflows than from a rise in inflows. In 1997 outflows fell to fewer than 24 000, having remained relatively stable since the 1980s and having stood at 32 000 in 1996. Inflows of foreigners, after having increased significantly at the end of the 1980s, have been stable since the beginning of the 1990s and stood at some 49 000 in 1997. Since 1992 the rise in the emigration of Belgian nationals has been accompanied by a decline in the number of returns. Net migration of Belgian nationals, which has been negative for over 20 years, became more so through to 1995 and seems to have stabilised since then at approximately 6 500 per year (see Table II.6). As of 1 January 1998, slightly over 903 000 foreigners were on the national population register, accounting for some 9% of the total population (see Chart II.5). The foreign population has been diminishing since 1995, because of naturalisations and despite the positive net migration. European Union nationals accounted for more than 60% of the foreign population. Among non-EU nationals, Moroccans made up the largest group, folOECD 1999
108
Belgium
lowed by Turks, but their numbers are falling, mainly due to naturalisations; in recent years some 60% of those naturalised were of Moroccan or Turkish origin. 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% in 1996) has been increasing since 1989 (see Table II.6). 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. Even though this gap seems considerable, the fertility rate of foreigners is only just enough for replacement, which is no longer the case for Belgian women. What is more, the gap is narrowing every year. In the Walloon region, which has a long history of immigration, the fertility rate for foreign women is very close to that of Belgian women. In Flanders, on the other hand, where immigration is more recent, the fertility differential is still substantially higher. Naturalisations In 1997, some 32 000 people acquired Belgian nationality (7 000 more than during the previous year). Since the beginning of the 1980s, a number of legislative changes have caused the number of nationalisations to fluctuate sharply. In 1985, for example, the implementation of legislation allowing the second- and third-generation descendants of immigrants to acquire Belgian nationality brought about a significant increase in the number of naturalisations. The following year, the average number of naturalisations had returned to its usual level of around 8 500. Measures taken in 1992 liberalising the conditions for acquiring Belgian nationality, followed by a law simplifying the naturalisation procedure in 1995, explain the increases in naturalisations during the 1990s. The most recent modification to the Nationality Law, passed by Parliament at the end of 1998, simplifies once more the acquisition of citizenship. It does so without in any way altering the constitutional conditions which the applicants must fulfil. This modification pursues three objectives: to clarify the criteria permitting the request for citizenship, to render uniform the manner in which tribunals treat these requests and to increase the transparency of the procedures. A mechanism styled one stop has been introduced for all citizenship applications.
OECD 1999
Chart II.5. Components of foreign and Belgian populations change, 1983-1997, Belgium
A. Naturalisations and total change in population
Belgians and foreigners Acquisitions of Belgian nationality1 Total change2 (Belgians) Total change (foreigners) Thousands 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 1983 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 Thousands 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60
B. Natural increase and net migration

Belgians and foreigners Natural increase (Belgians) Natural increase (foreigners) Net migration (Belgians) Net migration3 (foreigners) Thousands 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 1983 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 Thousands 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15
Note: Data are from population registers. 1. Peaks in 1985 and 1992 can be explain by changes in nationality laws. 2. Peak in 1988 can be explained by changes in calculation methods. 3. Figures include some asylum seekers up to 1995. Source: Population registers, Institut national de la statistique.
109
Components of population change Total population Population (on 31 December) Population increase from beginning to end of year of which: Natural increase Net migration Statistical adjustment
Inows of foreigners by group of nationality EU Other European countries Africa America Asia Oceania Region not specied Asylum seekers Mixed marriages % of total marriages Marriages with an EU foreigner (thousands)
Note: Figures on European Union include the 15 member countries of the Union. 1. The decrease in 1995 can be explained by 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. Data refer to the number of recipients of unemployment benets on the 30 June of the years indicated. Sources: Institut national de la statistique and Registre national de la population; Ministry of Employment and Labour; Ofce des etrangers; Census (March 1991).
110
Table II.6. Current gures on the components of total population change, on migratory ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Belgium
1994 1995 1996 1997 1994 1995 1996 1997
10 130.6 29.9 11.8 17.6 0.5 9 208.2 28.2 6.8 4.2 25.8 0.1 922.3 1.7 5.0 21.9 25.8 0.6 56.0 27.0 4.1 10.9 4.8 8.4 0.1 0.7 14.3 6.3 12.0 3.5
10 143.0 12.5 9.6 13.4 10.5 9 233.3 25.0 5.4 6.6 26.1 0.1 909.8 12.6 4.2 20.0 26.1 10.7 53.1 26.6 6.9 7.4 4.9 6.6 0.2 0.6 11.4 6.3 12.2 3.4
10 170.2 27.2 11.1 12.7 3.4 9 258.3 25.0 7.2 6.7 24.6 911.9 2.2 3.9 19.5 24.6 3.4 51.9 28.7 3.4 7.7 4.9 6.7 0.2 0.3 12.4 6.2 12.3 3.3
10 192.3 22.1 12.1 6.0 4.0 9 289.1 30.8 8.2 8.6 31.6 0.2 903.2 8.8 3.9 14.7 31.6 4.1 49.2 27.6 5.2 7.1 5.0 4.0 0.3 0.1 11.7 .. .. ..
Nationals Population (on 31 December) Population increase from beginning to end of year of which: Natural increase Net migration Acquisitions of nationality Statistical adjustment Foreigners Population (on 31 December)1 Population increase from beginning to end of year of which: Natural increase Net migration Acquisitions of nationality Statistical adjustment
Initial work permits by kind of permits and by group of nationality2 Permits with immigration Europe America Asia Africa Oceania Region not specied Permits without immigration Africa Europe Asia America 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 Recipients of unemployment benets by nationality3 Belgium Other EU countries of which: Italy Morocco Turkey Other
13.2 4.1 0.7 0.7 1.4 1.2 9.1 4.5 0.4 3.1 0.2 0.9 15.7 11.0 4.3 44.9 16.2 14.0 6.4 496.5 419.1 44.9 25.3 15.3 10.7 6.6
8.5 3.0 0.5 0.6 0.9 0.9 5.5 2.5 0.3 1.6 0.1 0.9 15.7 11.0 4.2 44.7 17.2 13.3 5.8 490.3 413.1 44.5 25.1 15.5 10.7 6.6
4.6 2.2 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.1 2.5 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.9 17.3 12.0 4.8 45.9 18.3 13.5 5.9 465.0 390.2 42.0 23.8 15.4 10.8 6.6
5.2 2.5 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.1 2.7 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
OECD 1999
Belgium
Table II.7.
Employment and unemployment in Belgium by nationality and sex, 1995-1997

In thousands unless otherwise indicated
Men 1995 1996 1997 1995 Women 1996 1997 1995 Total 1996 1997
Total employment Belgians Foreigners EU Non-EU Total unemployment Belgians Foreigners EU Non-EU Participation rates (%) Belgians Foreigners EU Non-EU
Note: Population aged 15 to 64. Source: Labour Force Survey.
2 260 2 079 180 132 49 179 135 45 22 23
2 253 2 064 189 143 46 181 140 41 24 17
2 264 2 084 179 140 40 174 133 41 20 21
1 510 1 440 70 54 16 211 179 32 17 15
1 514 1 436 78 64 14 215 183 32 23 10
1 555 1 472 83 69 14 204 175 28 20 9
3 769 3 519 250 186 65 390 313 77 39 38
3 767 3 500 267 207 60 396 323 73 47 27
3 819 3 556 262 209 54 377 308 69 40 29
72.3 72.6 68.7 75.9 57.0
72.2 72.6 68.8 73.3 59.1
72.2 72.5 69.0 73.7 59.0
51.7 53.0 38.0 45.6 27.4
52.0 53.2 39.3 47.7 24.0
52.9 54.1 39.3 48.6 22.5
62.1 62.8 54.8 62.7 43.0
62.2 62.9 55.4 62.0 42.2
62.6 63.4 55.0 62.2 40.8
The labour force and work permits The data available on the foreign workforce come, essentially, from two sources: the national census and the annual Labour Force Survey. At the last census (March 1991), the foreign labour force numbered 327 000, of whom 80 000 were unemployed. The Labour Force Survey indicates that although the number of economically active foreigners has risen considerably from the beginning of the 1990s, the rate of increase has been declining since 1993. The foreign labour force stood at just under 263 000 in 1997, including 209 000 EU nationals (see Table II.7). Although it has been rising since 1992, the activity rate of non-EU nationals remains lower than that of EU nationals. The marked increase in unemployment from the beginning of the 1990s has affected all nationalities but especially those from outside the EU. According to the National Employment Office (Onem), at 31 December 1998 the number of insured full-time workers who were unemployed was 412 000. This figure excludes those seeking part-time work, those aged over 55 and those engaged in reinsertion programmes. With the exception of nationals of the European Economic Area, all foreigners wishing to work in Belgium require a work permit. Two types of permits are issued: one to new immigrants entering the labour market (permit with immigration); the other to foreigners already living in Belgium who are entering the labour market for the first time (permit without immigration). The number of both types of permits has been falling sharply during the 1990s, although there was a slight increase between 1996 and 1997. A total of some 5 200 permits were issued in 1997. In 1997, the annual number of permits issued to new immigrants stood at 2 500, compared with 4 600 in 1991. The largest number of permits for new immigrants was issued to nationals of the United States, followed by Japanese nationals and Moroccans. The decline in the number of permits issued to new immigrants between 1995 and 1996 affected all the main nationalities represented in Belgium, except citizens of the United States. The work permits issued to new immigrants from the United States and Japan were essentially temporary, while those issued to Moroccans were generally permanent. The number of work permits issued to resident immigrants (permits without immigration) has fallen considerably since 1993, when there were around 9 000, to some 2 700 in 1997. In 1996, the main recipients of these permits were refugees and stateless persons, followed by Moroccans, Turks and nationals of the Democratic
OECD 1999
111
Republic of Congo (former Zaire). Most of the permits issued to resident nationals of these three countries were of a permanent nature. Belgium does not count cross-border workers by nationality, but by country of residence or country of employment, since not all cross-border workers are necessarily nationals of the country in which they live. Nonresidents who cross the border to work in Belgium are counted by their country of residence, while Belgian residents who work abroad are counted by their country of employment. Since 1970 the net flow of cross-border workers has always been negative and was estimated at 28 600 for 1996. Cross-border workers come mainly from France. Luxembourg is now the main country of destination for workers living in Belgium and working in a neighbouring country; in the past the main destinations were France (until the mid-1980s) and the Netherlands (until 1990). Refugees and asylum seekers Having averaged 12 000 between 1995 and 1997, asylum requests numbered 22 000 in 1998. This increased was due largely to the deterioration in the political situation in Kosovo, from where over a quarter of the 1998 applicants came. In 1998, European nationals accounted for 60% of the applications. The recognition rate (the ratio of successful applications for asylum to the total number of decisions made each year), having been nearly 40% in 1988 and 1989 fell to under 10% during the period 1993 to 1995. This decline was largely due to legislative amendments made in 1993 that tightened the conditions governing foreigners rights of entry, residence and settlement in Belgium, in particular those of asylum seekers. Any candidate for refugee status who wishes to settle in Belgium must find a place to live and apply to the Office for Foreign Nationals. A refugee whose application is judged by the Office to be ineligible is entitled to appeal to the General Board for Refugees and Stateless Persons (CGRA), which also decides whether or not eligible applicants are granted refugee status. If the CGRA rejects the appeal, a further appeal may be made to the Standing Refugee Appeals Commission, or even to the Conseil dtat. Anyone refused asylum is ordered to leave Belgium. It appears, however, that a considerable number of such people try to avoid deportation by staying on clandestinely. Since 1 March 1999, an accelerated procedure for processing applications by nationals of certain Central and Eastern European countries has been in operation. Under this procedure, applications filed by nationals of the Czech Republic, Romania, Bulgaria and the Slovak Republic must be processed in less than one month, including any appeal procedure. In addition, the authorities will investigate to ensure that persons who have been refused asylum have actually left Belgium. In 1998, asylum applications filed by the nationals of these four countries totalled 3 300, of which half were by Romanians. Policy developments The Centre for Equal Opportunities and the Fight Against Racism has put forward since 1993 a series of recommendations regarding foreigners residence and settlement and their protection against forced departure, some of which have been taken up and applied. The Centre has proposed, most notably, that the procedures for issuing visas and provisional residence permits be rendered more transparent and the decisions made more swift and more clearly justified. It has also proposed that the right to reside be granted to certain categories of foreigner currently residing illegally (notably asylum applicants who have been waiting for a decision for over three years, those born in Belgium to parents who have lived in the country for over 10 years, rejected asylum applicants the decision on whom included a clause that they should not be escorted to the border and the parents of children who have been accorded Belgian citizenship during their minority). Regarding development cooperation and assistance for returnees, the Centre has proposed that the residence permits of graduates be prolonged should they wish to engage in the elaboration of a development-linked project. Having thereby been allowed to complete the design element of their project and undertake the initial feasibility studies in Belgium, the graduates could be expected both to extract greater benefit from their training upon their return to their origin country than would otherwise have been the case and to further economic development in their home region.
OECD 1999
112
Belgium
In parallel with the tightening of eligibility criteria for asylum applications, the CGRA has accelerated their processing. Under the July 1996 Act governing the entry, residence, settlement and forced departure of foreigners (known as the Vande Lanotte Act), asylum seekers are assigned to specific areas where they must remain during the initial stage of their application. If they fail to comply with this, they are not entitled to receive social benefits. On 23 June 1998, in response to criticism of the Act, the Senates Committee for the Interior adopted the following recommendations: That the time necessary to issue an entry visa be reduced to approximately one month and that a reason be given for any refusal to grant a visa. That the legislation be amended so as to enable private persons and humanitarian organisations to assist visitors more freely. That the legislation concerning the persons subject to sanctions for helping undocumented immigrants be clarified in such a manner to clearly exclude persons providing humanitarian aid. That a special division in the Office of Foreign Nationals be created and made responsible for making decisions on regularisation applications on the basis of clear criteria. That the civil servants responsible for interviewing asylum seekers be better trained. That a temporary asylum status be created with a view to enabling temporary asylum seekers to enter the labour market and receive social benefits. That emergency medical assistance, food and if necessary housing aid be made available to asylum seekers whose application has been denied in order to ensure that their human dignity is respected. That the maximum time allowable for the administrative detention of undocumented immigrants and asylum seekers whose application has been refused be reduced (five months instead of eight). That special provisions be introduced concerning the guardianship of unaccompanied foreign minors, who should be detained only in exceptional circumstances and then for the shortest time possible. In principle, since 1 January 1999 Croatian nationals coming to Belgium (as to the Netherlands and Luxembourg) no longer require a visa. An administrative circular issued in 1998 enlarged the concept of family and recognised the right of all long-term cohabitants of foreigners (rather than only their spouses) to reside. Residence permits can be renewed and become definitive after three and a half years of cohabitation. An Act passed on 30 April 1999 regarding the occupations of foreign workers simplified the work permit system, providing now for only two types of permit (categories A and B), according to whether the foreign worker has one or has many employers. This Act also harmonised the issuance of residence and work permits and removed from refugees wishing to work the obligation to obtain a permit. Integration policies The Brussels regions new integration policy is a policy of social integration for the most depressed neighbourhoods. It is no longer a policy based on targeting specific national or ethnic categories but rather one framed within an overall policy of integration. The view has been taken that the effectiveness of a regional strategy in the fight against social exclusion is dependent on close collaboration between the region and the local authorities, including the cofinancing of the actions undertaken. The Walloon regions development of a reception and integration policy is jointly organised by the local public authorities and local associations. The Flemish policy towards ethnic and cultural minorities was modified by a Decree of April 1998. It provides for the implementation of a single support structure and integrated action to assist immigrants, refugees and travelling people (mainly gypsies). The aim is facilitate the taking by individuals of a full place in society and their association as much as possible in the policies adopted. The agreement concluded on 8 June 1998 in Flanders on the Commitments of the Flemish government and the Flemish social partners concerning the employment of immigrants has the objective of obtaining a balanced presence of immigrants at all levels of both the public and private sectors.
OECD 1999
113
The three areas of intervention selected to augment the integration possibilities of the targeted populations were: The extension of employment possibilities for immigrants by pro-active measures in companies and public authorities. The elimination of discrimination through training and education (such as non-discrimination training for mediators). The improvement in immigrants employability through training and work experience (such as workplace training undertaken in Dutch). The 1997-98 action plan for immigrants had the objective of launching in 75 companies and public bodies measures to improve employment access and to promote the vertical mobility of certain target groups, without in any way lowering the required standards. Equally, this plan has not used positive discrimination or obligatory quotas. The plan has also provided for an analysis of recruitment procedures and the verification that there does not exist discrimination in this regard.
BULGARIA
Introduction In 1997 and early 1998, migration movements were largely influenced by internal factors. After the economic and political crisis experienced by Bulgaria in 1996 and early 1997, there has been relative political stability in the country since the elections of May 1997. Nevertheless, economic growth has remained negative with a high rate of unemployment (some 13%). Because of their low level, migration flows, which have stabilised, do not present any major political difficulty. But the government, wishing to bring Bulgarian legislation into line with European Union law, has revised the legislative framework for migration policy. Emigration The National Statistical Institute estimates that emigration has stabilised at around 35 000 to 40 000 persons a year in recent years. Bulgaria has not experienced any new wave of emigration since the massive outflow of the years 1989-90. Since 1996, and more particularly in 1997 and early 1998, emigration has been mainly towards central European countries, notably the Czech Republic and Hungary. Emigration to Turkey has become somewhat dependent on Turkish migration policy. Recently, the Turkish Parliament decided to prolong the validity of temporary passports for foreign citizens of Turkish origin; this could improve the status of a large number of migrants from Bulgaria. The existence of free-trade areas has an important effect on emigration. The data available show a slight increase in labour migration due to implementation in the Member States of the Central European Free Trade Area (CEFTA), since economic co-operation between countries in transition favours such migration. As a result, outflows of Bulgarian nationals have increased by 40% to Hungary, 20% to Romania and have tripled to the Czech Republic. At the same time, flows to Greece fell by 15% due to the introduction of the Schengen visa. Emigration of Bulgarian nationals to the countries of Western Europe continues to fall, with the exception of flows to Austria which remains one of Bulgarias most important economic and commercial partners. Outflows to the countries of the European Union, the United States and Canada are essentially for tourism, family or educational reasons. According to National Statistical Institute data, only some 630 Bulgarians obtained a work permit in the countries of the European Union, the United States and Canada in 1997, while just under 20 500 Bulgarians made short business trips to these countries. The nature of emigration seems to be changing, most of it now being for short and frequent trips.
OECD 1999
114
Bulgaria
Immigration Apart from the five-year censuses, the National Statistical Institute does not collect data on foreigners living in Bulgaria. Inflows are therefore estimated on the basis of the number of visits, work permits granted and refugees and asylum-seekers. There were some 7.5 million visits in 1997, a 10% increase on 1996. This was due in part to visits from European Union nationals on tourist or business trips. This applies, for example, to 90% of the United Kingdom nationals and more than 80% of the Germans who came to Bulgaria in 1997. Flows from Russia and the Ukraine, essentially for business purposes, increased slightly. It seems that in 1997, a total of some 189 000 foreigners entered Bulgaria for these reasons. Inflows from Turkey were twice as high in 1997 as in 1996, this mainly for family reasons and the return of Bulgarian nationals. In principle, immigrants wishing to stay in Bulgaria for more than three months must apply for a permit. In 1997, a little over 14 100 persons were granted a long term residence permit (between three months and one year) and nearly 39 000 persons were granted a permanent residence permit. Bulgarias central geographic location makes it an important staging post for immigrants to the West. Two main flows can be identified: one from the Middle East towards Germany and Austria via Romania and Hungary, another from the CIS and Romania towards Greece. According to Interior Ministry estimates for 1997, the number of undocumented immigrants was down by over 20% on 1996 at just over 22 000. This could be due to the strengthening of border controls and stricter rules for granting visas. Following the imposition in 1993 of restrictions on the entry of citizens from 79 countries from Asia, Africa and the former Soviet Union (with the exception of the Baltic States), new restrictions on the entry of citizens from CIS countries were adopted in October 1997. While in 1990-92, illegal immigration was essentially due to unlawful entries into Bulgaria, in 1997 and 1998 it consisted rather of foreigners remaining in the country after the expiry of their visa or who considered Bulgaria as a transit country. Refugees and asylum seekers Inflows of asylum seekers fluctuate, depending largely on regional conflicts. Applicants came from 56 countries, but most of them are from Asia and the Middle East. The regulations require that those seeking asylum submit their application within 48 hours of their entry into the country. It is also possible to apply for asylum at Bulgarian diplomatic and consular missions abroad. In most cases, asylum seekers approach the authorities after their entry visa has expired or a request for renewal has been rejected. The procedure generally takes from three months to one year although provisions exist for the implementation of an accelerated procedure for manifestly unfounded applications. The recent progress in establishing a system of procedures for the granting of refugee status and the implementation of social integration programmes for recognised refugees have led to an increase in applications which, nevertheless, remain few in number. At 31 October 1998, some 640 applications had been submitted, 20% up on the same period in 1997. This increase was due essentially to applications from Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq. In 1998, the total number of those with refugee status amounted to a little under 2 350, of whom 600 were of Afghan origin. Refugee status was granted to 435 persons in 1998, while 145 applications were refused. While the number of applications is low, the percentage in which refugee status is granted is very high compared to other OECD countries. Approximately half of the refugees from the former Yugoslavia have left the country, but no measures have been taken to ensure the return of those remaining. Persons granted refugee status have the same rights as Bulgarian citizens except the right to vote, to be appointed to certain civil service posts, to join the Bulgarian army and to acquire ownership of land and forest. Refugees are entitled to travel documents and may be joined in Bulgaria by their immediate families. Family members are accorded the same rights and obligations as the refugee. Upon completion of three years of refugee status, individuals may apply for Bulgarian citizenship. Training refugees is an important part of integration policies, and the government has also introduced apprenticeship and loan programmes enabling refugees to create enterprises. The financial burden of helping refugees is shared between the Bulgarian Government and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.
OECD 1999
115
In 1998, two transit centres for asylum seekers were to be created with the help of the European PHARE Programme. Naturalisations Bulgarian nationality was granted to a little over 2 300 foreigners in 1997, and has been granted to 12 500 persons since 1989. The number of naturalisation applications increased at the beginning of the transition period, reflecting the growth in the number of applications made by ethnic Bulgarians returning from Ukraine, Greece, Turkey and Moldova. In recent years, applications have been mostly from the foreign spouses of Bulgarian nationals. Employment of foreigners Very few foreigners are employed in Bulgaria, and they account for less than 1% of the active population. Most of them work in multinational enterprises or SMEs, or else are self-employed, mainly in the service and trade sectors. All foreigners wishing to work in Bulgaria must obtain a work permit, the procedures for which are very restrictive. There are two categories of permit: one for newly-arrived foreign workers and the other for foreigners already residing in Bulgaria. Since 1996, the number of permits granted to new immigrants has been falling, whereas that of extended permits has been rising. Between 1994 and 1997, the greatest number of work permits were granted to nationals of the United States (270) followed by the Ukraine (125), Macedonia (90), the United Kingdom (75), Russia (65), Greece (55) and Germany (50). Most permits granted to OECD nationals are for jobs in management, consultancy and teaching. Foreigners from the countries in transition of Central Europe tend rather to be engineers and technicians, or in some cases, sportsmen. Between September 1994 and November 1997, a little over 1 100 work permits were granted. In 1997, some 215 work permits were issued to foreigners, of which 115 were new; the remainder corresponded to the extension of an existing permit. Bilateral labour agreements In 1991 and 1992, Bulgaria concluded with Germany several bilateral agreements relating to the employment of Bulgarian nationals (essentially workers seconded from Bulgarian enterprises or workers in the hotel and catering sector), and to their vocational and linguistic training. Fewer than 2 000 Bulgarian workers benefited from these agreements in 1997 and 1998, and the number of those taking advantage of them is constantly falling. In 1995, Bulgaria concluded with Switzerland a bilateral agreement relating to the exchange of apprentices, but only 11 Bulgarian apprentices have so far benefited. Bilateral agreements on the exchange of experts have been under negotiation for several years with France, Greece and Italy, in particular. The ratification and entry into force of the bilateral agreement recently signed with Greece to facilitate the seasonal employment of Bulgarian workers should lead to a normalisation of emigration flows towards Greece. Work has been going on since 1994 on drafting a treaty between Bulgaria and the Czech Republic for the exchange of workers. It deals in particular with social benefits, travel expenses and the legal and professional conditions which candidates have to meet. The conclusion of such an agreement would help regulate migration flows and reduce illegal migration. Policy developments Three new laws on immigration, asylum and nationality, respectively, were adopted in 1997 and 1998, not only in order to repeal regulations dating from the previous regime but also to establish a legislative system fully compatible with European Union norms with a view to Bulgarias accession to the Union. The Refugee Act lays down a coherent series of measures covering the whole process of granting refugee status and strengthening the conditions for the entry, residence and settlement of asylum seekers. This Act has three main objectives: to create a Refugee Agency, establish procedures for granting refugee status, and accelerate the examination of applications.
116
The Act on Bulgarian Nationality replaces the 1968 Act. For the first time, it establishes comprehensive and simple criteria for naturalisation, including length of residence (over five years), income and employment, and
OECD 1999
Canada
commmand of the Bulgarian language. The Act authorises for the first time Bulgarian citizens to possess more than one nationality and lays down the principles of an integration policy for Bulgarians living abroad aimed at facilitating their economic and social links with Bulgaria. Like that of 1968, the new Act automatically grants Bulgarian nationality to the foreign spouse of a Bulgarian national, but introduces restrictive measures designed to combat marriages for fraudulent purposes. Preferential treatment is given to refugees, to foreigners born in Bulgaria and to the spouses and children of Bulgarian citizens. The Act lays down simple and transparent procedures for granting nationality, the purpose of which is to prevent fraud. Lastly, the Act abolished the principle under which Bulgarian emigrants lost their nationality when leaving the country, and made it possible for Bulgaria to sign, in January 1998, the European Convention on Nationality. The Foreigners Act replaced the 1973 Act on the Residence of Foreigners. It regulates the entry and residence of foreigners and stateless persons, and provides for several types of permit or visa: transit visa (restricted to an airport, for example), short term residence permits (up to 90 days) and long term permits (12 months). These latter are granted on very specific grounds such as the possession of a work permit, management of an enterprise, the pursuit of studies, marriage to a Bulgarian national, relationship with a foreign permanent resident, or reasons of health. The Act obliges carriers to check the travel documents of their passengers and penalises them if they carry foreigners not in possession of the proper papers. Lastly, the Act lays down precise criteria for refusing to extend a residence permit, and stiffens the sanctions applicable to foreigners not in possession of the proper papers. In 1997, a specialised border control service (frontier police) was created within the Interior Ministry. Since March 1997, visas have no longer been required for nationals of European Union countries, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland, who are granted a thirty-day right of stay.
CANADA
Introduction The generally downward trend in permanent immigration to Canada continued in 1997. The current immigration system is a highly developed one in which applications for landed immigrant status (see box below) are judged on the basis of skills or family ties or on humanitarian grounds. Recent policy developments include the tightening of family sponsorship regulations and the introduction of special provisions for undocumented refugees. Inflows from Asia are tending to diminish, in particular from Hong Kong, China, which is the first-ranking sending country, while inflows from China are on the rise. Permanent immigration The total number granted permanent resident status in 1997 was 216 000 (see Chart II.6 and Table II.8), indicating a continuation of the broadly downward trend in immigration in recent years. There is a continuing shift in the composition of permanent immigration, most notably a shift away from entries under family reunion towards economic categories. One of the effects of this shift has been the increase in the proportion of immigrants with degree-level qualifications, which rose from 25 to 29% between 1995 and 1997. In 1997 the composition of the new immigrant population was as follows: skilled workers (and dependants), approximately 50%; business persons (and dependants), 9%; family members, 28%; and refugees, 11% (see Table II.8). However, the family class does not cover all dependants, since they are registered in the same class as the principal applicant. Principal applicants admitted in economic categories in 1997 accounted for only 23% of total entries. But 78% of refugees above the age of 15 and 53% of family members intended to work. As for the dependants of principal applicants admitted in economic categories (skilled workers and business persons), 43 and 18% respectively also intended to work.
OECD 1999
117
Chart II.6.
Inflows of permanent settlers by entry class and region of origin, Canada, 1980-1997 Thousands
B.
Humanitarian
A.
Family 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1980 83 85
1
Main entry classes
Main regions of origin

Europe America 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
Asia and the Pacific Africa and the Middle East
Economic
87
89
91
93
95
97
1980
83
85
87
89
91
93
95
97
C.
Economic permanent settlers

Main economic classes Business classes4
D.
Permanent settlers from Asia and the Pacific

Main countries of origin Hong Kong (China) China India Other 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Independents2 Assisted relatives3 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1980 83 85 87 89 91
93
95
97
1980
83
85
87
89
91
93
95
97
Note: Except for the family 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. Immigrants able to pass a selection test based on economic criteria. 3. 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. 4. Entrepreneurs, self-employed and investors. Source: Citizenship and Immigration Canada.
118
Although the number of skilled workers arriving increased by 7% in 1997 compared to the previous year, the sharpest increase in fact occurred between 1995 and 1996 (21%). Hong Kong, China, remains the top sending country of skilled workers, with 5 400 principal applicants accepted in 1997, but this was down significantly from 1996. China still ranked second, with the inflow of skilled workers doubling since 1995, when an immigration office was opened in Beijing. Between 1996 and 1997 the number of skilled workers from Iran, Pakistan, India, the Philippines and Chinese Taipei rose significantly (see Table II.8).
OECD 1999
Canada
Table II.8.
Immigrant landings1 by type, 1994-1997, Canada

Thousands
1994 1995 1996 1997
Family Skilled Principal applicants Accompanying dependents Business Principal applicants Accompanying dependents Refugees Government assisted3 Privately sponsored3 Recognised refugees4 Live-in-Caregiver5 Principal applicants Accompanying dependents Retirees Other6 Backlog Clearance7 Immigrant landings, of which, by nationality: Hong Kong, China India China Chinese Taipei
1.
93.7 workers2 69.1 28.6 40.5 27.4 7.0 20.3 19.7 7.6 2.8 9.3 5.0 4.7 0.2 7.4 1.6 total1 223.9 44.2 17.2 12.5 7.4
77.1 81.4 34.5 46.9 19.4 5.3 14.1 27.7 8.1 3.2 16.4 5.4 4.7 0.8 0.3 0.4 0.7 212.5 31.8 16.3 13.3 7.7
68.3 97.8 42.1 55.7 22.5 6.2 16.3 28.4 7.9 3.1 17.4 4.8 3.8 0.9 0.1 3.9 0.2 226.1 30.0 21.3 17.5 13.2
60.0 105.6 44.9 60.7 19.9 5.6 14.3 24.1 7.7 2.6 13.8 2.7 2.3 0.5 3.4 0.3 216.0 22.1 19.6 18.5 13.3
A landing corresponds to a person obtaining the right of permanent residence, either within Canada or from abroad. Including accompanying dependents for economic and humanitarian categories. 2. Figures include the Independent class and the Assisted Relatives class. Selection criteria are only applied to the principal applicants. 3. Including persons in designated classes, who do not strictly satisfy the United Nations convention on refugees criteria but are resettled for humanitarian reasons. 4. Asylum seekers who have been granted the refugee status. 5. Program for child care workers and assistants for elderly people in private households. 6. Mainly the Deferred Removal Order Class. 7. 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: Citizenship and Immigration Canada.
The sizeable drop in inflows for family reunion that began in 1995 (12% between 1995 and 1996) continued in 1997, with some 60 000 entries recorded. India remains the largest source of family immigration (see Table II.9). China was the only one of the main sending countries for which numbers increased in 1997. Family immigration from India fell by 17% between 1996 and 1997; that from Hong Kong, China fell by more than a quarter. The number of refugees arriving decreased by 15% between 1996 and 1997, dropping from 28 400 to 24 200. This decline affected all categories of refugees (see box 1). Refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina accounted for 15% of total refugees, followed by Sri Lankans (although their numbers dropped by 26 and 29% respectively compared to 1996) while the number of Croatian refugees increased by 75%. The Interim Immigrant Investor Programme is currently being revised. This programme, which was extended until 31 December 1998, will be redefined so as to ensure than business immigrants generate benefits for Canada, and new selection criteria will be established. In 1997, nearly two-third of business persons came from one of these four countries: Hong Kong, China, Chinese Taipei, Korea or China. The number of business immigrants arriving from Hong Kong, China, and Chinese Taipei declined (by 20 and 17% respectively between 1996 and 1997), while numbers from China rose by 38%.
OECD 1999
119
Table II.9.
Immigrant landings1 by type, 1993 and 1997, Canada

Top ten countries of origin in 1997 Thousands
Skilled workers Principal applicants 1993 Thousands Rank 1997 Thousands Rank
Business Principal applicants 1993 Thousands Rank 1997 Thousands Rank
Total Hong Kong, China China India Pakistan Chinese Taipei Philippines Iran France Romania United Kingdom Top ten (% of total)
34.0 3.0 0.8 1.0 .. 0.2 5.3 .. 2.2 1.0 1.8 45.0
2 10 7 .. 29 1 .. 4 8 5
44.9 5.4 5.1 3.4 3.3 3.3 2.3 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.2 62.8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Total Hong Kong, China Chinese Taipei Korea China Iran Pakistan Germany United Kingdom Switzerland United States Top ten (% of total)
8.3 3.5 1.8 0.6 0.1 0.1 .. 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 78.6
1 2 3 15 16 .. 5 7 6 9
5.6 1.9 1.0 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 78.7
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Family members 1993 Thousands Rank 1997 Thousands Rank
Total immigrants Principal applicants and dependents 1993 Thousands Rank 1997 Thousands Rank
Total India China Hong Kong, China Philippines United States Jamaica Sri Lanka Vietnam Guyana United Kingdom Top ten (% of total)
112.1 17.3 7.2 9.3 8.1 4.8 5.0 4.4 5.6 2.7 2.7 59.9
1 4 2 3 8 6 9 5 12 11
60.0 11.2 4.9 3.9 3.7 2.5 2.4 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.4 58.6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Total Hong Kong, China India China Chinese Taipei Pakistan Philippines Iran Sri Lanka United States United Kingdom Top ten (% of total)
255.8 36.6 20.5 9.5 9.9 4.2 19.8 .. 9.1 8.0 7.2 48.7
1 2 5 4 14 3 .. 6 8 9
216.0 22.1 19.6 18.5 13.3 11.2 10.9 7.5 5.1 5.0 4.7 54.6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1. A landing corresponds to a person obtaining the right of permanent residence, either within Canada or from abroad. Source: Citizenship and Immigration Canada.
The Asia-Pacific region continues to be the dominant sending region. Over the past three years, more than half of total entries were from this region. Although Hong Kong, China, is still the top sending country, the inflow fell by a quarter between 1996 and 1997. Arrivals from Pakistan have increased by nearly threefold since 1995, inflows from China have risen by 40% while entries from the Philippines have declined by one-third since the same year (see Table II.8). In 1997 there were some 22 600 immigrants to Canada from OECD countries, which was 13% fewer than the previous year. In 1997, the age structure of new immigrants was similar to that of 1996, three quarters being in the economically active age group. This proportion was identical for men and women. In recent years, slightly more women have been arriving in Canada than men, and this also held true in 1997, although the gap is narrowing. In 1997 there were 103 new women immigrants for every 100 men (as opposed to 109 in 1995). Temporary migration of workers Since 1995, the number of persons holding an employment authorisation on 1 June has averaged around 100 000 (see box). At 1 June 1998 some 98 300 persons held employment authorisations, including some 29 000 asylum seekers/refugee status claimants.
OECD 1999
120
Canada
From 1994 to September 1998, in addition to employment authorisations through the usual channels, just under 38 000 authorisations were given under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). In both 1994 and 1995 some 6 500 of these authorisations were granted annually, and their number has been rising steadily since, chiefly due to an increase in the entry of Professional Business Persons. These figures do not include business visitors, who are not required to apply for an employment authorisation. Total immigrant population and labour force The 1996 census put Canadas total population at 28.5 million. The number of immigrants (i.e. persons born abroad who have been granted immigrant status) was nearly 5 million, and rose by 27% between the 1986 and 1996 censuses. The immigrant population accounted for slightly less than 18% of the total population in 1996, which was the highest level in the past 50 years. Immigrants from Europe were still the largest group in 1996, but for the first time in this century they accounted for less than half of all immigrants because of the higher inflows from Asia. The proportion of immigrants born in Asia was 31% in 1996 as compared with 18% ten years previously. The percentage of immigrants from Africa and Latin America also rose, but still remains small. In 1996, new immigrants, i.e. those who had arrived between 1991 and 1996, had a higher education level than the native born population. More than one third of the new immigrants aged 25 to 44 had completed university education, compared with 19% among the Canadian born, but there are greater differences between the education levels of male and female immigrants than between males and females in the rest of the population. Education levels also vary depending on the countries of origin. In the 25-44 year age group, over half the migrants born in the United States had completed university education, followed by those born in the Philippines (48%), Chinese Taipei (45%), China (44%) and India (41%). Examination of the 1996 census data shows that immigrants represent roughly 19% of the labour force in Canada. In aggregate terms, their involvement and behaviour in the labour market as indicated by participation and unemployment rates is very similar to the Canadian born: the participation rates tend to be slightly lower but the unemployment rate is virtually the same. 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 trafficking rings, carbon dioxide detectors have been used in ship containers to detect stowaways. In addition, legislation was enacted in 1995 which authorised the inspection of international mail and the seizure of identity documents that could be used to circumvent immigration requirements. In November 1997, a bilateral meeting between the United States and Canada was held to discuss the longterm development of border co-operation with a view to making cross-border movements easier while preventing the entry of undesirable persons. To achieve this objective, it was decided in particular to strengthen cooperation and the exchange of information between the two countries. Policy developments In 1997-98, Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) made major progress in reaching new agreements between the federal and provincial governments to improve the immigration system. In recent years, CIC has continued to work on new selection criteria for immigrants. In October 1997, a working group met comprised of a broad range of participants, including representatives of government, the private sector and non-governmental organisations. On 1 April 1997, new regulations for family sponsorship came into force, tightening the previous regulations through more stringent monitoring of sponsors ability to follow through on their undertakings. These regulations make sponsors and those sponsored aware of their respective obligations. The objective is to reduce the impact of defaults of sponsorship on the social costs borne by government. In addition, CIC has improved its information system so as to be able to verify that there are bona fide family ties before authorising reunion. It has also developed a system of information exchange with municipal and provincial authorities.
OECD 1999
121
The new regulations provide inter alia that: i) sponsors must demonstrate that they have met the required income threshold for the twelve months prior to their application; ii) sponsorships will be binding for a ten year period; iii) sponsors and family members being sponsored must sign an agreement confirming that they understand their mutual obligations and responsibilities; and iv) sponsors are denied future sponsorships if they are in default of an undertaking, a transportation loan, or the Right of Landing fee loan. The new provisions mark a departure from previous policy where sponsorship undertakings were of variable length and were not generally enforced due to the lack of information systems capable of verifying applications. Since May 1997, CIC has been conducting a pilot project for software development professionals. CIC, Human Resources Development Canada, Industry Canada and the Software Human Resources Council are working together to streamline the process enabling foreign workers with specific computer and software development skills to enter Canada when nation-wide labour shortages have been identified. This project concerns temporary workers. It has the support of Canadian employers and continues to be seen as a short-term strategy for meeting temporary skills shortages. Long-term strategies are being developed by industry and by government so that Canadian education programmes will be better adapted to market demand. On 15 October 1998, CIC announced the pilot project for granting authorisation to work to the spouses of highly skilled workers admitted on a temporary basis. This project is being implemented over a short period (one year) and allows these workers spouses to obtain an employment authorisation without having to show proof of a job offer or undergo the usual validation procedure which ensures that no Canadian job seeker or permanent resident can fill the position. This measure should enable Canadian employers to hire highly skilled temporary foreign workers more easily. In December 1996, the Minister responsible for CIC appointed a three member Legislative Advisory Group to review existing immigration and refugee legislation and to develop recommendations on how Canada can continue to meet its immigration objectives. The Group reported back to the Minister on 31 December 1997. Their report covers all aspects of immigration to Canada, with major changes proposed for virtually all elements of the current programme. In January 1999, the Minister announced the broad orientations that the government intends to follow to modernise immigration and refugee protection policies and legislation. The revised legislation can be expected to facilitate family reunion, while respecting strict rules of sponsorship; modernise the system for selecting immigrants among skilled workers and business persons; and, facilitate the temporary entry of highly skilled workers. The Humanitarian Designated Classes Regulations introduced in May 1997 were extended until 31 December 1998. The conditions of admission for refugees are relatively flexible and anyone applying for assistance for humanitarian reasons is eligible. The annually revised list of countries currently comprises Bosnia-Herzegovina, Cambodia, Colombia, Croatia, Guatemala, El Salvador, Liberia and Sudan. The initial assessment of these regulations will be used to make future changes in the humanitarian component of the refugee repatriation programme. New regulations relating to Geneva Convention refugees from certain countries took effect in 1997. These allow those who are unable to obtain satisfactory proof of identity to proceed with applications to become permanent residents five years after a positive decision by the Immigration and Refugee Board. This measure was taken largely in response to problems encountered by refugees from Somalia and Afghanistan who have been unable to obtain documentation due to continuing civil strife in their country. The Adjustment Assistance Programme (see box) was replaced by the Resettlement Assistance Programme on 1 April 1998. The scheme continues to provide assistance to refugee and other humanitarian cases but differs in that service delivery will be outsourced rather than provided by CIC directly.
122
OECD 1999
Canada
Box 1.
An overview of the structure and approach of Canadas immigration programme
There are two main mechanisms through which foreigners may legally enter Canada for periods longer than allowed under short-term tourist and business travel arrangements: i) with permanent residence status through the permanent immigration programme and ii) on a temporary basis as students, refugee claimants or for temporary employment. Because it is possible to transfer from temporary to permanent resident status, total issues of permanent residence (often referred to as landed immigrants) include many who have been in the country for some length of time as temporary residents. About 15% of applications for permanent residence are processed in Canada; the remainder are processed overseas. Permanent immigration Acquisition of permanent residence status is possible under three main classes of entry: i) the family class who enter on the basis of having close relatives in Canada; ii) those entering for employment and business reasons, the skilled worker and business classes; iii) and those entering as refugees. The system works through a highly developed set of rules for each class of entry. There are no numerical limits, or other mechanisms for capping the number of permanent immigrants, the source of control being solely through the rules of entry. As a result, there is no mechanism for effecting immediate and precise determination of the numbers granted permanent residence status (in contrast to the system used in Australia). In November of each year, the Minister responsible for Citizenship and Immigration Canada issues a statement on the planned migration intake for the following year which is based on an assessment of the numbers who are likely to enter under the existing set of regulations. Note that Canadian authorities often refer to issues of permanent residence as immigrant landings. Entry under the family class is based on sponsorship by a Canadian citizen or permanent resident. There must be evidence of the sponsor having a bona fide relationship with the applicant. In addition, the sponsor must demonstrate an ability to provide financial support for those sponsored. 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 specific selection criteria and their weighting pattern are designed to reflect what is needed to succeed in Canadas labour market. Only the principal applicant is assessed. Entry under the business class is based on a requirement to make a minimum investment in a Canadian business (or business investment fund) or a requirement to establish, purchase or invest in a designated business that will create employment opportunities for others. Refugee status is granted both to Geneva Convention refugees and those who do not quite satisfy the Convention refugee requirements, but are nonetheless admitted for humanitarian reasons. There are three major sub-groups of refugees: 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 also having undergone a medical examination. Temporary immigration Temporary immigration to Canada is tracked through data on employment authorisations (by law, no person other than a Canadian citizen or permanent resident is permitted to be employed in Canada without an employment authorisation). The motivation for issuing temporary employment authorisations is both humanitarian and economic. Some authorisations have to be validated, i.e. Human Resources Development Canada ensures that there is no Canadian citizen or permanent resident available to fill the position. However, the majority of authorisations are exempt from validation. Those exempt include a wide variety of applicants such as persons awaiting results of an application for permanent residence from within Canada and applicants for refugee status. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) allows for temporary entry to Canada by citizens of the United States or Mexico under four categories of employment: trader and investor, business visitor, professional and inter-company transferee. Most of the entries under NAFTA are in the professional category where entry is based on an agreed list of specific professions. Naturalisation and integration policy Landed immigrants may apply for citizenship after three years of residence. As a result, trends in naturalisation tend to closely follow trends in permanent immigration, with a lag of about three years. The Canadian Government has in place several programmes designed to facilitate the integration of immigrants. The more important of these programmes are: Language Instruction for Newcomers to Canada (LINC); the Resettlement Assistance Programme (RAP), which provides assistance such as temporary accommodation and interpretation to persons admitted under the Annual Refugee Plan; the Host Programme; and, the Immigrant Settlement and Adaptation Programme (ISAP) which provides funds to community-based organisations to assist newcomers to integrate (e.g. interpretation, employment-related services and understanding cultural differences).
123
OECD 1999
CZECH REPUBLIC
Introduction In 1997 and 1998, the Czech Republic experienced a slowdown in its economic growth. The country is currently going through another period of recession, accentuated by the Central Banks restrictive monetary policy and inadequate private sector capacity. Over the same period, the stock of permanent residents continued to increase while the stock of long-term residents, more sensitive to economic conditions, stabilised, albeit at a high level. Most newcomers were people of Czech origin and foreigners arriving from neighbouring countries (former USSR, Poland and the Slovak Republic), but some diversification in sending countries was noted (see Table II.10). A new Aliens Act and a Refugees Act are being prepared. They will have to be geared to the possibility of the Czech Republics accession to the European Union and take into account the growing number of immigrants (including asylum seekers). Emigration The volume of emigration flows cannot be gauged with any accuracy owing to the unreliability of available sources. It can nevertheless be stated with some certainty that permanent emigration, including outflows to the Slovak Republic, has shown a clear trend of tapering off since the early 1990s (see Table II.10, in particular for the definitions of emigration and immigration). Beyond the fact that available figures greatly underestimate the flow of emigrants, it may be supposed that departing Czech workers foresee only a temporary (less than one year) stay abroad and so do not bother to report their change of residence. Today, most of the Czechs employed abroad are cross-border workers, in mostly low-skilled jobs concentrated in the building and service sectors in Germany and Austria. Flows of Czech contract and seasonal workers to Germany have declined considerably since 1993. Rising unemployment in the countries of Western Europe and the more restrictive measures they have adopted regarding the hiring of foreigners are part of the reason for this reversal in trend. Permanent immigration Official figures (based on changes of permanent residence) show a marked rise in permanent immigration, attributable to entries from countries other than the Slovak Republic, in 1997. A growing diversity in the countries of origin is also to be noted. While entries from European countries, especially the former USSR, predominate, flows from certain Asian countries (Vietnam in particular) are increasing. In 1995, for the first time, the National Statistics Institute identified entries of Czech citizens within the permanent immigration total. They accounted for nearly half of all permanent entries (10 500). They came from the Slovak Republic, Germany, North America and, to a smaller extent, other European countries (Switzerland, Austria, Bulgaria). Refugees and asylum seekers Due to the fact that the former Czech and Slovak Federal Republic (CSFR) did not ratify the Geneva Convention until 1992 (the Czech Republic endorsed it the following year), the flow of asylum seekers (about 2 000 per year) is on a quite different scale from that recorded in most European Union countries. Some 14 000 persons in all have been admitted to refugee camps since 1990. Ministry of the Interior services supply them with such essentials as food and medical care. A very small proportion of the asylum seekers (under 15%) had obtained refugee status by the end of 1997, either because their applications had been rejected or because their cases were still being examined.
124
In March 1997, a new law was adopted for speeding up the processing of applications for asylum. In addition, special arrangements have been made to give temporary shelter to war refugees from the former Yugoslavia.
OECD 1999
OECD 1999
population1 Inows of asylum seekers Holders of a long-term residence permit Slovak Republic Ukraine Vietnam Poland Russian Federation China Bulgaria Other Total
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Table II.10. Current gures on migratory ows and stocks of migrants in Czech Republic
Thousands
1994 1995 1996 1997 1994 1995 1996 1997
Total Total population change from beginning to end of year Natural increase Net migration Inows2 Arrivals (excluding those from Slovak Republic) Arrivals from Slovak Republic Outows3 Departures (excluding those to Slovak Republic) Departures to Slovak Republic4
10 330 1 11 10 10.2 6.1 4.1 3.4 0.2 3.1 1.2
10 321 9 21 12 10.5 6.7 3.8 1.9 0.4 1.5 1.4
10 309 10 22 12 10.9 7.4 3.5 1.5 0.5 1.0 2.2
10 299 9 21 12 12.9 9.8 3.1 0.8 0.5 0.3 2.1
Registered foreign workers by Ukraine Poland Bulgaria Belarus Moldavia United States Germany Other Total Slovak workers7
nationality6 12.7 8.7 0.6 .. .. 1.5 1.1 8.3 32.9 39.2 .. .. .. .. .. 18.6 2.6 3.5 20.5 26.7 12.1 0.8 0.3 .. 1.7 1.5 9.3 52.5 59.3 7.7 0.8 2.9 0.6 24.9 37.0 2.5 3.7 19.2 42.1 12.8 2.8 0.9 .. 1.6 1.5 9.3 71.0 72.2 17.0 2.7 5.9 1.2 18.7 45.5 2.3 3.4 23.7 25.2 13.7 3.3 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.5 11.3 61.0 69.7 24.7 8.7 7.6 1.5 21.0 63.5 1.4 2.3 29.3
Stocks of foreign residents by type of permits and nationality Holders of a permanent residence permit Slovak Republic5 Poland Vietnam Ukraine Russian Federation Bulgaria Other Total
3.0 11.9 1.1 1.6 1.7 2.6 10.6 32.5 13.8 12.7 8.6 8.1 1.9 2.9 1.1 22.2 71.2
6.5 12.1 1.5 2.1 1.7 2.7 11.9 38.6 33.2 26.0 12.7 11.0 2.7 4.2 1.6 28.6 120.1
9.9 12.1 2.5 2.8 2.0 1.8 14.7 45.8 40.3 43.5 15.1 12.4 4.7 4.7 2.5 29.6 152.8
12.7 11.9 5.1 4.6 2.5 2.4 17.1 56.3 39.5 38.8 15.8 13.1 6.5 4.4 4.2 31.2 153.5
Holders of a business authorisation by nationality Vietnam Ukraine Slovak Republic Germany Other Total Czech workers employed in Germany Contract workers Seasonal workers Illegal migrants caught at the border
Population on the 31 December of the given year. Permanent residents who had their change of address registered. 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. The data are issued by the Slovak Statistical Ofce and refer to the registrations of permanent residence in the Slovak Republic. Up to 1 January 1993, Czechoslovak 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 therefore registered in the Central Register of Foreigners. 6. 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. 7. 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: Statistical Yearbook of the Czech Republic (Czech Statistical Ofce); Ministry of the Interior; Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs.
Czech Republic
125
Following the Dayton Agreement signed in 1995 and the improvements in conditions in Bosnia and Herzegovina, a voluntary repatriation programme for temporary refugees was organised. It ended on 30 September 1997. A refugee aid programme was introduced in 1994. Agreements are regularly concluded between the central government and municipal authorities for furthering the social and economic integration of people with refugee status. Municipal authorities covered by these agreements receive financial aid from the government to help the refugees living in their districts. Nineteen such agreements were signed in 1997, applicable to about 300 refugees. Another programme for aiding persons of Czech origin has been initiated. In 1997, it concerned 139 people and their families, most of them arriving from Kazakhstan. Foreign population trends The stock of foreigners continues to grow in 1997, for the first time, the number of permanent residence permit holders rose faster than that of long-term permit holders. Long-term permits, issued for a maximum period of one year but renewable, are usually granted for employment reasons. The number of foreigners holding a long-term permit has flattened off, although at a fairly high level (over 150 000 permit holders since 1996). The increase in the number of permanent permit holders a status granted generally following marriage to a Czech citizen is mainly attributable to a rise in the number of Slovaks, Ukrainians and Vietnamese; whereas the number of Poles has stabilised at approximately 12 000. Regardless of the type of permit, breakdown by nationality is extremely varied. Ukrainians, Poles, Slovaks and Russians may have either permanent or long-term migrant status, whereas Vietnamese and, to a lesser degree, Chinese usually have long-term migrant status only. The many bilateral agreements signed with South Asian and Central and Eastern European countries before the dissolution of the Soviet bloc partly explain the current geographical diversity of migrant origins. Of the 5 600 foreigners who acquired Czech nationality in 1997, 4 700 of were former Slovak citizens. Naturalisation, which precludes any possibility of double nationality, is generally obtained after five years permanent residence in the country. This restriction does not apply to former Czech nationals, persons born in the Czech Republic, the adopted children of Czech citizens or the spouses of Czech citizens. Labour migration Temporary immigration by foreign workers, after declining appreciably in 1990-92 owing in particular to the departure of workers whose contracts had been obtained under agreements between the CSFR and other former Communist countries (especially Poland), has risen substantially in recent years (see Table II.10). The worsening labour market situation has, however, led the government to impose stiffer rules for issuing temporary work permits. As a result, the number of work permit holders fell by 14% from 1996 to 1997. Those primarily affected by the decrease were Ukrainian labourers, who for the most part are employed in low-skilled construction or factory jobs and form the largest group of foreign workers. The two other most represented nationalities, Poles followed by Bulgarians, were unaffected by the decline. There is a possibility that restrictions will be imposed on Slovak workers who, under an agreement concluded in 1992 between the Czech and Slovak Republics, are allowed free access to the Czech labour market. Immigration by Slovak workers is long-established, and is largely due to economic factors (wage and unemployment rate disparities). Slovak manpower, which is distributed throughout the economy, sometimes meets a need for special skills not to be found in the Czech Republic. Tighter requirements governing labour market access by foreigners have had to be combined with tougher penalties for employers illegally recruiting foreigners. Inspections by the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs and the Ministry of the Interior have revealed an upsurge in the employment of foreigners without residence and/or work permits. This would indicate that the lower official figures do not necessarily signify a replacement of migrant labour by natives or permanent residents. A second plank in the policy to control foreign labour is the signing of bilateral agreements on the admission of a fixed quota of workers. Agreements of this kind have already been concluded with Germany, Poland, the Slovak Republic, Vietnam, Ukraine and Russia. Negotiations are under way with Mongolia, Belarus, Bulgaria
OECD 1999
126
Denmark
and Austria. Furthermore, an agreement on trainees was signed with Switzerland in 1997 and, more recently, with Hungary and Lithuania. Czech law, which is very liberal as regards the control of commercial activities, has helped the trading sector to expand. In 1997, over 63 000 foreigners (against 45 500 the previous year) held a business licence, which remains valid for as long as a commercial activity is conducted in the country. The persons concerned are for the most part Vietnamese (24 700), Ukrainian (8 700) and Slovak (7 600). It may be assumed that some of these foreigners opted for business because they could not obtain a permit for paid employment or could not renew their permits. Illegal migration Figures released by the Ministry of the Interior on the number of people intercepted at the border show that, over the period 1993-97, about 136 000 persons (126 000 of them foreigners) were caught. Of these, 43 000 were intercepted in 1993 alone (see Table II.10). Three-quarters of those intercepted are stopped as they try to cross the border into Germany. The figures may be partly explained by the fact that nationals of many countries are able to enter Czech territory without needing to have a visa. This is true in particular of nationals of Russia and the Baltic States. Of the persons most frequently intercepted in 1997, 13% were Romanians and 12% from the former Yugoslavia. Policy developments The new Aliens Entry and Residence Act is due to take effect in the near future. Two types of residence permit will be instituted temporary and permanent. The Act will make it more difficult for tourists wishing to settle or work in the Czech Republic to change their status. They will now be obliged to go through prior formalities in embassies or consulates in their home countries. A minimum stay of from eight to ten years will be required of persons wishing to acquire permanent resident status. It is planned, in order to comply with Community legislation, to restore a visa policy for ten or so countries, including Romania and Bulgaria. A measure of this kind was adopted as regards the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in October 1998. The Refugees Act will be amended in order to accelerate the processing of applications for asylum by, on the one hand, systematically rejecting applications by nationals from countries deemed safe and, on the other, strengthening the protection of refugees. Finally, ways to counter the presence of illegal aliens are gradually being put in place. Readmission agreements have been signed with Austria, Poland, the Slovak Republic, Germany, Hungary, Canada and, more recently, France (1997), Bulgaria (1998) and Slovenia (1998). Negotiations on the subject are under way with Ukraine and Belarus. In October 1997, a report outlining the problems faced by gypsies and proposing suitable solutions was submitted to the government. It emphasised the need for urgent policy measures to educate gypsy minorities and bring them into the labour market. Classes will be set up and additional resources earmarked for underachieving gypsy children. Steps will be taken to combat the discrimination often practised by employers against workers of gypsy origin.
DENMARK
Introduction The Danish economy has been in a phase of expansion since 1993. In 1998, GDP grew by 2.5%. In this context of continuing growth, unemployment has declined. In January 1999 the unemployment rate stood at 6%, as compared with roughly 12% in January 1994.
OECD 1999
127
Long term immigration by group of Denmark Other Nordic countries Other EU countries Other European countries Africa Asia Other regions
Long term emigration by group of nationality1 Denmark Other Nordic countries Other EU countries Other European countries Africa Asia Other regions Grants of residence permits, by Refugee EU provisions Family reunication Employment Others category3
Asylum seekers by region of origin Europe of which: Former Yugoslavia Africa of which: Somalia Asia of which: Iraq Other regions Stock of foreigners, immigrants and descendants4 Foreigners Refugees Europe and North America Other regions Immigrants and descendants, by region of origin Nordic countries Other EU countries Other European countries Asia Other regions
1. A long-term immigrant/emigrant is dened as a person who has lived in/out of the country for over one year. 2. Including former Yougoslavs who have been recognised as refugees after 2 years of temporary residence in Denmark. 3. 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. 4. An immigrant is dened in Danish statistics as a foreigner or a Danish citizen born abroad. A descendant is a person born in Denmark with parents who are either immigrants or descendants of immigrants. Source: Danmarks Statistik.
128
Table II.11. Current gures on migratory ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Denmark
Figures in thousands unless otherwise indicated
1994 1995 1996 1997 1994 1995 1996 1997
nationality1
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 6.0 2.1 4.3 6.7 2.1 0.7 2.4 1.6 1.6 0.5 0.6 196.7 65.0 52.8 78.9 283.7 36.8 51.9 74.3 84.5 36.2
45.9 12.9 3.2 3.5 18.72 2.3 3.8 1.4 18.0 12.7 1.4 1.6 0.6 0.3 0.7 0.7 37.9 20.32 3.8 6.3 2.2 4.7 5.1 1.3 0.8 1.7 1.2 1.5 0.5 0.6 222.7 72.6 68.6 81.6 314.6 38.3 53.4 93.9 89.6 39.3
37.1 12.4 3.3 3.9 7.8 3.6 4.5 1.5 19.8 13.8 1.6 1.8 0.6 0.4 0.9 0.7 32.3 8.7 5.9 8.7 2.8 6.3 5.9 1.3 0.7 1.7 1.4 1.9 0.7 1.0 237.7 79.9 72.3 85.5 336.7 38.8 53.8 103.8 95.4 44.8
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 29.5 5.9 5.9 7.7 3.1 6.9 5.1 1.3 0.7 1.5 1.2 1.8 0.8 0.5 249.6 83.7 75.3 90.6 347.0 38.4 54.0 106.9 100.7 47.0
Acquisition of Danish nationality, by region of origin Nordic countries Other EU countries 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 (%) Nationals, by labour force status In the labour force (%) Self-employed (%) Wage and salary workers (%) Unemployed (%) Not stated (%) Out of the labour force (%) Foreigners, by labour force status In the labour force (%) Self-employed (%) Wage and salary workers (%) Unemployed (%) Not stated (%) Out of the labour force (%)
5.7 0.4 0.3 1.9 2.0 0.3 0.8 5 215.7 55.5 4.7 39.3 5.3 6.1 44.5 5 019.0 56.1 4.8 40.1 5.1 6.1 43.9 196.7 40.8 3.7 19.0 11.6 6.5 59.2
5.3 0.3 0.2 1.5 2.2 0.3 0.7 5 251.0 54.7 4.6 38.9 4.3 6.9 45.3 5 028.3 55.5 4.7 39.8 4.0 6.9 44.5 222.7 37.6 3.7 18.2 9.0 6.8 62.4
7.3 0.3 0.3 2.1 3.1 0.5 1.0 5 275.1 54.3 4.5 46.1 3.7 45.7 5 037.4 55.1 4.6 47.0 3.5 44.9 237.7 37.0 3.7 25.6 7.6 63.0
5.5 0.3 0.3 1.7 2.0 0.3 0.9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
OECD 1999
Denmark
Migration movements Those who enter Denmark as long-term immigrants are recorded in the immigration statistics only after they have lived in the country for a full year. As a result, information concerning long-term entries for 1996 did not become available until 1998. Asylum seekers and refugees admitted temporarily as war refugees are not included in long-term immigration statistics, even if they have resided in Denmark for more than one year. In 1996, 37 100 persons migrated to Denmark, a great many less than in 1995 (see Table II.11). The sharp rise in long-term immigration in 1995 was chiefly due to the grant of refugee status, and hence a long-term residence permit, to 16 100 asylum seekers from the former Yugoslavia who had been temporarily admitted in previous years. These persons had not been recorded among the immigrant population, even though some of them had been living in Denmark for four or five years. The first estimates for 1997 indicate an even larger number of immigrants than in 1995. In 1996, one-third of all inward migrants had Danish nationality, most of them having come from Greenland and the Faroe Islands. Europeans made up 60% of the inflow of foreigners to Denmark that same year. Their number has increased greatly since the early 1990s, mostly because of the rapid development of economic and human resource exchanges with other Nordic countries and the European Union. Proportionately, the inflows from Africa and Central and Eastern Europe have increased the most during the 1990s. After remaining stable throughout the period 1990-95, emigration increased in 1996 (+2 000), with departures totalling approximately 17 500 (mostly Danes or nationals of other Nordic or EU countries). In 1996 net migration was once again positive (17 400) and up from the annual average for the period 1990-94, this being due to the increase in flows of immigrants from Central and Eastern Europe, Asia and Africa. Net migration of Danish nationals was negative. Residence permits In 1997 nearly 30 000 residence permits were issued for first entries and renewals (nationals of other Nordic countries do not require residence permits). Since the beginning of the 1990s the proportion of permits issued for the purpose of family reunion has been declining. In 1997 it was a little over one-quarter of all permits issued, compared with nearly 40% in 1990. This was due to the stricter family reunion rules introduced in 1992. On the other hand, there has been an increase in the share of permits granted to EU nationals, which rose from less than 10% in 1990 to 20% in 1997. The residence permit issued to EU nationals entitles them to work in Denmark without any other authorisation. The number of work permits issued increased from 2 100 in 1993 to 3 100 in 1997. Refugees and asylum seekers In 1992 the number of asylum seekers all but tripled, with 14 000 applications. Having remained constant in 1993 the number fell steeply in 1994, and by 1996 stood at less than 6 000. The decline continued in 1997, with only 5 100 asylum seekers, but the first figures available for 1998 show an increase of about 600 applications. Most of the applicants are from Somalia, Iraq and the former Yugoslavia. In 1994 Denmark introduced compulsory visas for nationals of Bosnia-Herzegovina and a number of African countries. It also created a new procedure for asylum seekers from former Yugoslavia, who now have to apply directly to a Danish government office in Zagreb (3 300 applied in 1994). The number of individuals granted refugee status has fluctuated considerably since the beginning of the 1990s. It stood at 4 000 in 1991 and fell to 2 800 in 1994. There was a sudden jump in 1995 (to over 20 000), followed by a return to more usual levels. In 1997 the number of persons granted refugee status was just below 6 000. Nationals of the former Yugoslavia were still the largest group in 1996, accounting for over half of those who obtained refugee status. The 1995 amendment to the Aliens Act empowers the Danish Immigration Service to determine whether an application for asylum is justified or not. The individual whose application is denied can no longer appeal to the Refugee Board, which has to endorse the decision of the Immigration Service. A good many applications have been rejected as manifestly unfounded due to a lack of sufficient justification. This amendment to the law
OECD 1999
129
has helped to accelerate the processing of applications by the Immigration Service and to limit the number of asylum applicants from countries that Denmark considers to be safe. Foreign population The resident population of Denmark was estimated at 5.3 million on 1 January 1998. Statistics on resident foreigners are based on population registers and concern those foreigners permanently resident in Denmark. Asylum seekers, persons who are provisionally resident and other foreign temporary residents are excluded. Foreign residents account for 4.7% of the total population. Their number has risen steadily since 1984, from 108 000 to just under 250 000 at 1 January 1998. One-third are refugees, mostly from the former Yugoslavia, Somalia, Iraq and Iran. Citizens of Nordic countries, the European Union and North America together account for 30% of the foreign population. The remainder come mainly from Turkey (15%), the former Yugoslavia (nonrefugees who arrived in the late 1960s and early 1970s) and Pakistan. Between 1984 and 1997 just over 60 000 persons acquired Danish nationality. Of the 5 500 persons naturalised in 1997, nearly 20% were originally from Turkey, 10% from Iran and 7% from Sri Lanka (see Table II.11). Foreigners and the labour market The proportion of foreigners in the labour force (3%) is smaller than their share of the total population. At 1 January 1997 the number of foreign workers was slightly under 88 000. The participation rate of Danes (55%) is significantly higher than that of foreigners (37%). This difference is partly attributable to the low participation rate of refugees: not only do they have to take part in an integration programme lasting 18 months or longer before they may enter the labour market, they also tend to comprise large numbers of children. Thus, nationals of the former Yugoslavia have a low participation rate (23%) largely because so many of them are refugees. By contrast, the participation rates of Nordic country or EU nationals are comparable to that of Danish nationals. At 1 January 1997 about 2.6 million persons were employed in Denmark, of whom nearly 70 000 were foreigners. Immigrants from Nordic countries, EU member countries and North America have an employment status comparable to that of Danish workers. Foreigners from Turkey, Pakistan and other Asian countries are more frequently self-employed. By sector of activity, 40% of Pakistani nationals and 36% of Turkish nationals work in retail trading and catering. Since 1994 the total number of unemployed has fallen continuously, a trend which concerns Danes and foreigners alike. However, the unemployment rate among foreigners is still very high at 21%, compared with 6% for Danes. The fact that foreigners are more vulnerable to unemployment is partly due to the type of jobs they perform, which are low-skilled and diminishing in number. Turkish and Pakistani nationals are among those hardest hit by unemployment, with jobless rates of around 40% in 1996. Those rates declined slightly in 1997. Policy developments In June 1994 measures were taken to improve the situation of refugees from the former Yugoslavia. These included more training (notably language courses), better housing, increased employment opportunities and more leisure activities. Under legislation passed in January 1995, most of the Bosnian war refugees have been granted residence and entitlement to the same integration programmes as statutory refugees. Additionally, a strategy to dismantle labour market barriers to immigrants and refugees was introduced in autumn 1994. At the same time, some municipalities have restricted their intake of refugees and immigrants in order to avoid high concentrations of immigrant groups. In 1995 several changes were made to the Aliens Act in respect of asylum seekers. A procedure was introduced to enable applications to be speedily refused if judged to be unfounded or based on insufficient evidence. Administrative procedures for processing applications were simplified, and the number of applications from safe countries decreased. Also, the terms of admission were tightened by requiring further information from applicants, and arrangements were made to allow for the detention of asylum seekers and for a new procedure to register them through a computerised finger-printing system. In addition, the Danish government decided to set an annual quota for resident permits given to persons from the former Yugoslavia.
OECD 1999
130
Finland
In December 1996 an amendment to the Aliens Act reinforced provisions for the expulsion of foreigners charged with drug trafficking. Since June 1997, foreigners who are unco-operative during the expulsion procedure have been put on file so as to assist the police in the processing of applications for asylum. The Danish immigration services are also authorised to carry out DNA tests on family reunion applicants and on unsuccessful asylum seekers who attempt to resist expulsion. At the time of its ratification of the Schengen Agreements in December 1996, Denmark signed with the other signatories to these agreements and with member countries of the Nordic Union which are not members of the EU a co-operation agreement providing for the application of these Agreements within the Nordic Union. The Danish parliament ratified this agreement in June 1997. On 26 June 1998 the Danish Parliament passed its first law on integration, which entered into effect on 1 January 1999. The purpose of this law is to promote the integration of immigrants and refugees into Danish society. The integration programme focuses essentially on newly arrived immigrants, who are helped to adjust to the requirements of the Danish labour market. Where such adjustment does not seem possible, education or vocational training is offered. Responsibility for integration has been assigned to local authorities and no longer rests with the Refugee Board, which has to focus all its attention on the situation of refugees. This means that the local authorities have to deal with all aspects of integration: housing, education and training programmes, and payment of the various allowances.
FINLAND
Introduction Since 1994 the economic situation in Finland has been steadily improving, with annual GDP growth of 6% in 1997 and 5% in 1998. Strong growth has been accompanied by a drop in unemployment, from 18% in 1994 to under 12% in 1998. Over the past decade there has been a sharp rise in immigration, with the resident foreign population growing threefold between 1 January 1991 and 1 January 1998. Migration and the foreign population In 1997 the number of immigrants was slightly up on 1996, with some 13 600 arrivals. The largest inflows were from Russia, followed by Estonia, Sweden and Iraq (see Table II.12). The number of Russian and Swedish immigrants continued to rise slightly, whereas the number of Estonians entering the country continued to decline. Better economic and social conditions in Estonia are the main factor behind the decline in emigration flows from that country to Finland. In 1997 inflows from Bosnia and Herzegovina decreased, whereas those from Iran doubled and those from Iraq increased steadily. Total emigration has risen sharply since 1993, when it stood at 6 400, to 10 600 in 1996. With the exception of 1996, emigrants have mainly been Finnish; in 1997, 80% of the 9 900 recorded departures were of Finns. Finnish emigrants went mainly to the United States until the Second World War, and subsequently to Sweden. The range of host countries then broadened to include the other Nordic countries and later the EU. Since 1994, net migration has been positive and has ranged from 3 000 to 4 000, down from higher figures of the early 1990s (9 000). Recent trends indicate that Finnish emigration flows exceed immigration flows, but this is offset by the fact that there are more foreigners entering than leaving the country. In 1997 positive net migration (3 700) reflected the difference between net arrivals of foreigners (6 600) and net departures of Finns (2 900). As immigration is a recent phenomenon in Finland, the foreign population is still relatively low compared to that of other OECD countries. As a share of the total population it stood at 1.6% at 1 January 1998. Of the
OECD 1999
131
Table II.12.
Current gures on migratory ows and stocks of total and foreign populations in Finland
1994 1995 1996 1997
Inows by main nationality Nationals Foreigners of which: Former USSR1 Estonia1 Sweden Net migration by main nationality Nationals Foreigners of which: Former USSR Estonia Sweden Foreign population by main nationality2 Former USSR1 Estonia1 Sweden Somalia Former Yugoslavia Other countries Acquisition of nationality by former nationality Former USSR Vietnam Sweden Other countries Mixed marriages % of total marriages
11.6 4.0 7.6 1.9 1.4 0.5 2.9 3.2 6.1 1.7 1.2 0.2 62.0 15.1 7.5 6.7 3.5 2.3 26.9 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.4 2.2 8.8
12.2 4.9 7.3 2.0 1.0 0.6 3.3 2.6 5.8 1.7 0.8 0.3 68.6 15.9 8.4 7.0 4.0 2.4 30.9 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.4 2.1 8.8
13.3 5.8 7.5 2.0 0.7 0.6 2.7 1.8 4.5 1.6 0.4 0.3 73.8 17.0 9.0 7.3 4.6 2.6 33.3 1.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.6 .. ..
13.6 5.4 8.1 2.4 0.6 0.7 3.7 2.9 6.6 2.3 0.5 0.3 80.6 19.0 9.7 7.5 5.2 2.8 36.4 1.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.9 .. ..
1. A great part of the Russians and of the Estonians have Finnish origins. 2. Data are from population registers and refer to the population on 31 December of the years indicated. Source: Statistics Finland.
80 600 foreigners then resident in Finland, almost one-quarter were Russian, 12% Estonian and 9% Swedish (see Table II.12). In 1997 the number of EU nationals continued to rise. Of the latter, the largest group were Swedes (7 500), followed by Germans and British (just under 2 000). Between 1990 and 1998 the proportion of women in the foreign population increased, reaching 48% at 1 January 1998 as compared with 43% eight years earlier. On average, foreigners are younger than Finns, with 80% of the foreign population under 45 years of age compared with 60% of Finns. That said, over the decade, the foreign labour force has aged, with the 25-44 age group steadily giving way to the 45-64 age group. At 1 January 1998, the only group to have increased in number since the previous year were the Russians, whereas the number of Vietnamese, Chinese and Iranians had declined. This was due to the fact that more of these nationals have acquired Finnish citizenship, and to a decline in new immigration flows. Of the 118 000 people resident in Finland but born abroad, 100 000 were residents of foreign origin at 1 January 1998. Almost half of those born abroad were born in Sweden (27 400) or in Russia and in other parts of the former Soviet Union (28 800). In 1997 more than 1 400 people acquired Finnish citizenship. Nationals of the former Soviet Union still accounted for the largest share of naturalisations (18%), followed by Vietnamese (12%) and Swedes (7%). Since 1994 naturalisations have increased in number. In 1997 the increase was spread across most nationalities, unlike 1996 when it was confined largely to Asian nationals.
OECD 1999
132
Finland
Refugees and asylum seekers In the early 1990s the number of asylum seekers ranged from 2 000 to 3 600 per year; since 1994 the figure has dropped to under 1 000. In 1997 almost one-third of all applications were from nationals of the former Yugoslavia, followed by Somalis (20%) and Iraqis (10%). The initial data available for 1998 indicate some 1 200 applications. The Finnish Parliament establishes a quota every year for the attribution of refugee status. Set at 500 for 1996, the quota was substantially exceeded (the final figure was 1 200) because of exceptional cases from the former Yugoslavia and Iraq. Nationals from these two countries accounted for 70% of all refugees. The quota for 1997 was also set at 500, but Finland took in 1 400 refugees that year. Most were from the Middle East or Africa. By end-1997, an estimated 16 000 residents in Finland possessed refugee status. Illegal immigration Estimates of illegal immigration are based on statistics relating to illegal immigrants apprehended at the border or in airports. Most of them attempt to enter via the border with Sweden, where there are fewer controls owing to free-circulation agreements between the Nordic countries, rather than via the border with Russia, which is more tightly controlled. At the request of the Ministry of the Interior, a working party has, since 1 November 1997, been looking into the issue of illegal immigration in Finland. Migration and the labour market Foreigners migrate to Finland as refugees and asylum seekers rather than to find work. This explains to some extent the high rate of unemployment among foreigners from countries other than the United States, Canada or those of the EU. At end-1997, people of working age accounted for 73% of the foreign population, compared with 67% for nationals. The most recent data on labour force participation rates date back to 31 December 1996, when the participation rate for foreigners was 54%, compared with 71% for nationals. At 31 December 1997 some 14 000 foreigners were unemployed. According to the Employment Survey, unemployment was estimated at 42% for foreigners and 13% for Finns. Recently, however, the employment situation for foreigners has improved. Unemployment was highest among Russians and Estonians, who accounted for 45% of all unemployed foreigners. By and large, unemployment has not declined among refugees, in particular citizens of Bosnia, Iraq, Somalia, the former Yugoslavia and Iran, over 70% of whom are out of work. The high level of unemployment among foreigners is to some extent attributable to the requirement that refugees register as job-seekers in order to receive training and certain benefits. Yet they are still not capable of holding down a job in Finland, the main reason being that they do not speak Finnish. There are no reliable statistics on foreigners in temporary employment in Finland, with the exception of trainees. In practice, there are few temporary workers, most of them are employed by foreign firms established in Finland and workers who are on Finnish territory to install foreign-made industrial plant. Estonians and Russians are employed to harvest the raspberry crop, but this is seasonal work. Unemployment in Finland is still too high to warrant intensive recourse to outside labour. Furthermore, Finland has virtually no branches of industry that call for temporary labour. In 1997 there was a big increase in the number of Finns emigrating to Norway, this being prompted by sector-specific labour shortages and the intensive recruitment campaign that Norwegian employers have conducted in Finland, in particular for nurses. Policy developments On 16 October 1997 the Finnish Government approved a programme relating to its policy on immigration and refugees. This programme ratified a two-tier organisational model for government, making the Ministry of the Interior responsible for immigration controls and security, together with the issue of residence permits, while the Ministry of Labour takes charge of immigrants and their integration into Finnish society. The Ministry of Labour, in co-operation with the Ministry of Education, also has the heavy responsibility of preventing all
OECD 1999
133
forms of racism and ethnic discrimination. This decision was taken because the Ministry of Labour has its own regional and local networks, and because helping foreigners to find work is a key factor in their integration. The objective of Finlands immigration policy is to ensure that all immigrants (i.e. immigrants, Finnish migrants returning from abroad, and refugees) are effectively integrated into society and the labour market. Successful integration is based on the active participation of immigrants in the economic, social and political life of the country. In February 1997, the Finnish Government adopted a resolution aimed at promoting tolerance and combating racism. Various ministries are to take steps to prevent racism and ethnic discrimination. They and their administrations are also to recruit to permanent or temporary posts foreign staff with the necessary skills. In order to improve the integration of foreigners already in Finland, the government has started a four-year (1995-99) project financed by the European Social Fund. The project, which promotes access to employment for the socially excluded, focuses on specific measures to help those who are at risk of being marginalised and establishes a new style of co-operation between the various authorities and organisations concerned. In addition, a pilot project to improve the employment situation of immigrants by means of a human capital database was launched in the Helsinki region in 1995. The database, which contains information on an immigrants educational background and vocational and language skills, is designed to help small- and medium-sized enterprises recruit immigrants with special skills. In 1996 Parliament approved amendments and addenda to the Aliens Act as proposed by the Committee for Policy on Immigration and Refugees. They relate to the issuance of residence permits for ethnic Finns returning from the Soviet Union (mainly Russia and Estonia). These persons are recognised as being of Finnish origin if they themselves, a parent or at least two of their grandparents hold official documents indicating that they are Finnish citizens. Proof of other links with Finland or Finnish citizens, even if unsupported by official documents, may be sufficient. Thus the spouses/cohabitees and children of those meeting the above requirements can readily obtain a residence permit.
FRANCE
Introduction The analysis of recent migration movements and policies in France reveals that inflows of new immigrants have remained stable at an annual average level of approximately 100 000 and that the control of these flows and the integration of immigrants are still among the key objectives of migration policy. Major legislative changes were introduced in 1998. These mainly relate to the conditions for entry and residence and the right to asylum (Law of 11 May 1998) and the conditions for acquiring French nationality (Law of 16 March 1998). Concurrent with these legislative reforms, it was decided to give a new orientation to French migration policy, in particular by linking the principles governing the attribution of aid for the resettlement of foreign workers in their country of origin with new forms of co-development. Permanent immigration Permanent immigration (i.e. for which residence permits valid for one year or more are issued) is composed mainly of family immigration, visitors (see below) and workers. The downward trend in permanent entries observed since 1994 was reversed in 1997 (see Table II.13). This increase was mainly attributable to the inclusion of the first 19 000 individuals to benefit from the regularisation programme, the implementation of which was decided on in June 1997 and was concluded at the end of December 1998. It is also due to a new and sharp rise in the volume of visitors (a 70% increase on 1996).
134
The annual number of entries from non-EU countries, which were fewer than 50 000 in 1995 and 1996, rose to nearly 75 000 in 1997, an increase of over 50%.
OECD 1999
OECD 1999
Permanent immigration
1. 2. 3.
Table II.13. Current gures on migratory ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, France
1994 1995 1996 1997 1994 1995 1996 1997
Registered ows by category Family reunication (broadly dened) Family members of French nationals Family members of foreigners Family members of refugees Workers Wage earners Self-employed Visitors Refugees Regularisation of foreigners in an irregular situation Total of which: EEA Estimated ows by main category1 Family members of foreigners Visitors Other Total of which: EEA Total registered and estimated ows Temporary immigration by category Asylum seekers Students Holders of a provisional work permit2 Trainees Total
37.7 16.1 20.6 0.8 19.6 18.3 1.2 5.2 7.0 69.4 11.4 6.0 2.1 5.4 13.5 10.0 82.9 26.0 16.3 4.1 0.6 46.9
31.6 16.5 14.4 0.7 14.1 13.1 1.0 6.4 4.7 56.7 7.9 4.3 2.4 5.0 11.6 8.2 68.3 20.4 15.1 4.5 0.4 40.4
30.4 15.6 13.9 0.9 11.9 11.5 0.5 8.9 4.3 55.6 7.2 6.5 7.5 4.4 18.4 15.4 74.0 17.4 16.0 4.8 0.5 38.7
31.1 14.4 15.5 1.1 11.7 11.0 0.7 15.1 4.1 18.9 62.0 6.4 8.5 7.8 5.2 21.5 17.9 83.5 21.4 19.2 4.7 0.6 45.8
Registered outows of foreigners3 Expulsions Actual removals to the borders Assisted departures Foreigners involved in an assisted departure procedure by category (Cumulated gures since 1984) Workers Spouses4 Children4 Acquisition of French nationality Legal procedures of which: Naturalisation Declarations of which: Decision following a wedding Declaration of becoming French5 Total Mixed marriages % of total marriages Stocks of foreigners aged 15 and over according to work status6 Total foreign population Labour force of which: employment Participation rate (%) Unemployment rate (%)
1.2 11.3 1.3 .. .. .. .. 49.4 29.1 43.6 19.5 33.3 126.3 23.3 9.2 2 805.7 1 593.9 1 202.8 56.8 24.5
1.0 10.1 1.6 .. .. .. .. 40.9 24.7 21.0 16.7 30.5 92.4 23.8 9.4 2 803.0 1 573.3 1 232.2 56.1 21.7
1.2 11.6 1.6 .. .. .. .. 58.1 34.7 21.9 19.1 29.8 109.8 24.0 9.6 2 836.1 1 604.7 1 217.0 56.6 24.2
0.9 9.2 1.0 73.4 32.7 11.7 29.0 60.5 35.7 23.2 20.8 32.5 116.2 .. .. 2 817.7 1 569.8 1 205.2 55.7 23.2
Estimates made by the Ministry of the Interior on the basis of residence permits issued. Provisional work permits (APT) are granted for a 9 month period and are renewable. In the absence of a population register, the only available data on the departures of foreigners are those which are due to administrative decisions and judicial orders concerning expulsions, removals of illegal immigrants to the border and voluntary departures assisted by the State. 4. Accompanying dependents of workers involved in an assisted departure procedure. 5. People born in France to foreign parents who declared their intention to become French in accordance with the legislation of 22 July 1993. 6. In March of the year indicated. Sources: Ofce des migrations internationales (OMI); Ofce franc ais de protection des refugi es et apatrides (OFPRA); Ministry of the Interior; Labour Force Survey.
France
135
Family reunion, be it of foreigners, of family members of French nationals or of the families of refugees and stateless persons, is the main reason for permanent entry into France, well ahead of inflows of permanent workers, both wage earners and self-employed. Total inflows under this category (which have averaged around 30 000 per year over recent years and consist predominantly of women) are mainly from the Maghreb countries and Turkey. The number of people entering as family members of foreigners increased in 1997, the first time since 1990, to 15 500. The size of families measured at entry remains small (on average 1.53 persons) and the profile of family reunion continues to shift, in many cases involving the constitution of new families. The increasing diversity in origin countries notwithstanding, two-thirds of these entrants were from the Maghreb and Turkey, as in previous years. The number of family members of French nationals entering France (nearly 14 500 in 1997) fell again. Spouses comprised just over three quarters, followed by the parents of French children (16%) and ascendants and children of French citizens. The number of family members of refugees and stateless persons (1 100 persons in 1997) rose over the previous year. This rise mainly concerned Asian nationals. The visitors category, which was redefined in 1997, consists of persons who have been granted a temporary residence card (valid for a one-year period and renewable) as researchers or university teachers, members of artistic or cultural professions, or for reasons related to private and family life. Most of the entrants are in this latter category, which includes in particular the spouses of French citizens authorised to reside in France immediately following their marriage, and foreigners with personal and family ties in France who do not qualify for family reunion. Entries of visitors totalled slightly over 15 000 in 1997. Foreigners from African countries accounted for 54%, those from the Americas and Asia 16% each, and those from non-EU Europe (including the former USSR) for less than 13%. The immigration of permanent workers from non-EU countries (both wage earners and the self-employed) rose slightly over course of 1997. There were some 5 300, of whom slightly fewer than 700 were wage earners. Five countries accounted for nearly half these: the United States, Algeria, Japan, Morocco and Lebanon. Overall, an increasing proportion of these new wage earners were women and were employed in the service sector. They had higher qualifications than previously. Overall, disparities in the skill levels of nationalities persist. According to the data from the Office des migrations internationales (OMI), some 6 450 permanent workers arrived from the EEA in 1997, a fall on the previous two years. Nearly 40% of these workers were women. These EEA nationals work mainly in the tertiary sector. The skill-level of their jobs varies significantly with their nationality. The number of foreigners granted refugee status (just over 4 100 in 1997) has been falling steadily over the past six years. In 1997 their numbers fell by approximately 5%. In fact, this decline concerned only European nationals (mainly from the former Yugoslavia) and nationals of Asian countries (Turkey, Laos and Vietnam). The number of statutory refugees from other major regions rose very slightly. Asia ranked first with 60% of total (Sri Lankans, Turks and South-East Asian nationals), followed by Africa (23%, one-third of whom are nationals of the former Zaire), Europe including the former USSR (13%) and the Americas (3%, half of whom are Haitians). In June 1997 the French government decided to implement a regularisation programme for foreigners without the required papers. This operation was concluded at the end of 1998. Thus far 80 000 of the 143 000 applications have been accepted. A significant number of those accepted are family members in the broad sense (including 10 000 spouses of documented foreigners, 10 000 adult members of long-established foreign families and 19 000 parents of children born in France). These partial results are explained by the fact that the eligibility criteria are based on family ties or long-standing integration in France attested to by at least seven years of residence. It should also be noted that the bulk of applicants and of those regularised were nationals of African countries. The largest number of applicants were Moroccans, Algerians and Malians, followed by Congolese (nationals of the former Zaire) and Chinese, and then Tunisians, Turks, Senegalese and Congolese (Congo-Brazzaville), and lastly Sri Lankans, Filipinos and Pakistanis.
136
There are considerable disparities in the regularisation rates for each nationality. During the operation, it came to light that most of the foreigners who were regularised belonged to the better-off social categories with
OECD 1999
France
relatively high employment rates in their country of origin rather than to the poorest classes of the population. Moreover, most applicants for regularisation had entered France legally. Temporary immigration and seasonal immigration Temporary entries mainly consist of temporary seasonal workers, students and asylum seekers. Entries of new permanent foreign workers are currently very small (as is the case in a number of OECD countries of immigration). Although, for the labour market as a whole, the recourse to temporary labour is increasing in France, seasonal immigration (slightly over 8 000 persons in 1997, mainly Moroccans and Poles employed in agriculture) underwent a structural downturn in the mid-1980s. In 1997, as in 1996 there were slightly more recipients of temporary work permits (just under 5 000) than permanent foreign salaried workers (see Table II.13). These recipients included, most notably, nationals from the Americas (US citizens, Brazilians and Canadians), followed by Algerians (down by 15% from 1996), Poles and Russians. The number of students rose compared with the three previous years, with women students predominating. The number of applications for asylum increased in 1997, reversing the downward trend hat had prevailed since 1990. LOffice franais de protection des rfugis et apatrides (OFPRA) recorded some 21 500 applications in 1997 and practically the same number in 1998. Half of these asylum seekers came from Europe (the majority of whom from Romania and Bulgaria), one-third from Asia (mostly from Sri Lanka and China), and the rest from Africa and the former USSR. In 1997 OFPRA reviewed 24 000 applications; the automatic refusal rate was 83%. Departures from France In France, the only departures to be recorded are those prompted by administrative action, i.e. forced departures and assisted departures. Of the forced departures, expulsions (some 900) declined by over 20% in 1997, while removals to the frontier fell from 40 400 in 1995 to 33 000 in 1997. The number of readmissions, under the Schengen Agreements or other international conventions, increased however, rising from 2 500 in 1996 to 3 700 in 1997. The two main schemes for assisted departures are government aid for the resettlement of certain wage earners and job seekers, and aid for the resettlement of foreigners who are instructed to leave the country. In 1997, less government aid for the resettlement of workers was accorded than in 1996. The data available for 1997 on foreigners instructed to leave the country (slightly over 1 000 persons) show that 90% requested resettlement aid. These were comprised mainly of asylum seekers of Romanian origin whose application for asylum had been rejected. The foreign population France, as a whole, has a low rate of demographic growth. Natural increase mainly accounts for the little increase that there is. The foreign population accounts for less than 7% of the total population. Every year, naturalisations reduce the foreign population and increase the French population correspondingly. In 1996, a total of just under 735 000 births were recorded: of these, 6% were to two foreign parents and in 5.8% of cases to one foreign parent. The net migration balance for that year (40 000) accounted for nearly 17% of the total population growth in France. The proportion of foreign births in total births was higher in 1996 than the proportion of foreigners in the total population (approximately one and a half times larger). The Ministry of the Interior put the number of foreigners holding a valid residence permit at 31 December 1996 at 3.23 million, of whom slightly less than 1.6 million were economically active. The number of foreigners, which had declined from 1990 through to 1994, started to rise again in 1995, and increased more sharply in 1996 (+39 000 persons). The proportion of women in the foreign population (43.5% in 1996) continues to grow, accompanying the development of family oriented immigration. Nationals of the European Union account for nearly two-fifths of the foreign population (just over 1 250 000 persons). The nationals of three EU countries (Italy, Spain and Portugal) and of the Maghreb account for nearly three-quarters of all residence permit holders. Almost 85% of foreigners have a residence permit valid for ten years.
OECD 1999
137
The foreign labour force The foreign labour force, estimated annually in the Labour Force Survey, numbers some 1.6 million, accounting for 6.2% of the total labour force (a percentage that has been in decline over the past twenty years). The number of foreign workers in employment, which since 1995 had been falling, rose slightly in 1998 however. The number of self-employed foreigners stood at approximately 142 000 in 1998. This figure has been slowly increasing since 1995. A growing proportion of foreign workers are women: they accounted for 37% of the foreign labour force in 1998 (as compared to 35% in 1995). Portuguese nationals are the largest group of foreign workers, followed by Algerians and Moroccans. While the service sector is the main employer of foreign wage earners, large numbers still work in agriculture and manufacturing, as well as in construction. A detailed analysis of salaried employment by industry shows that it is real estate activities and construction that employ the highest percentage of foreigners, followed by personal services, agriculture and the motor industry. Greater vulnerability of foreigners to unemployment In 1997 and 1998 foreigners remained more affected by unemployment than the French. Indeed, the gap between the unemployment rates of foreigners and French citizens widened in 1998: 11.1% for the French and 23.7 for foreigners (with a rate of 10.2% for EU nationals and 31.4% for non-EU nationals). Foreign nationals accounted for 12.3% of those unemployed in 1998 as opposed to 11.5% in 1997. Nearly 37% of women from nonEU countries are unemployed. Young people aged 15 to 24 from non-European Union countries, in particular Algeria and other African countries, are the most likely to be unemployed, with average unemployment of 50%. Economic and social integration of foreigners The economic and social integration of foreigners encompasses many aspects, such as the acquisition of French nationality, mixed marriages, the schooling of children of foreign nationality and labour market integration. Acquisition of French nationality In 1997, a total of 116 000 foreigners acquired French nationality through all procedures combined: 60 000 by decree, 34 100 by formal statement and 21 000 by marriage. Adding to these the attributions of French nationality at birth to children born in France of foreign parents, the number of persons who acquired or were granted French nationality in 1997 totalled 122 000. The proportion of women amongst those acquiring French nationality by declaration is rising. Over a ten year period (1988-97), it has increased from 40 to 47%. Nationals of African countries account for over half of those who obtain French nationality by acquisition. In 1997, the five main nationalities of origin remained the same as those for 1996 (Moroccan, Portuguese, Algerian, Tunisian and Turkish): they continue to account for over three-quarters of total acquisitions. Mixed marriages After peaking during 1990-92 (an annual average of 31 500), the number of mixed marriages then fell significantly, rising again from 1994 (+3% on a cumulative basis between 1994 and 1996); there were some 24 000 mixed marriages in 1996. This increase is largely one of marriages between French women and foreigners. The breakdown of foreign spouses by nationality is relatively stable, and the number of marriages between French citizens and nationals of African countries, particularly those of the Maghreb, continues to grow. The schooling of migrants children The schooling of migrants children represents a key element in Frances integration policies. At the beginning of the 1997 school year, some 11.9 million pupils were enrolled in the primary and secondary schools of Metropolitan France, of whom 739 000 were of foreign nationality, i.e. 6.2% of the total (see Table II.14). This is
OECD 1999
138
France
Table II.14.
Foreign pupils1 attending public and private schools in France, 1994/95, 1996/97 and 1997/98
Primary level Secondary level Total Pre-primary and primary Lower secondary Upper secondary Special education
School year
1994/95 1996/97 1997/98
551.8 .. 424.8
228.5 199.3 183.2
130.0 122.4 118.5
16.8 14.8 12.3
927.1 .. 738.9
% of foreign pupils in all pupils 1994/95 1996/97 1997/98

1.
8.4 .. 6.7
7.0 6.2 5.7
6.0 5.6 5.4
15.3 12.6 11.6
7.6 .. 6.2
On the assumption that the pupils nationalities have been recorded on the same basis across all levels of the system and across the public and private sectors. Sources: Ministere ` de lEducation nationale, DPD.
nearly 190 000 fewer than during the 1994-95 school year. This decline has occurred at all levels of the system. By nationality, the number of pupils varies according to a number of factors, such as the dominant trends of migration flows, birth rates, geographical patterns of departures and acquisitions of nationality. In absolute terms, Moroccan pupils are still the largest group (slightly less than 200 000), followed by Algerians (110 000), Portuguese (84 000), sub-Saharan Africans (80 000) and Turks (76 000). Labour market integration Major programmes for vocational training and for labour market access for young people and the unemployed comprise the essential elements of the policies aimed at promoting migrants entry in the labour market. The integration of immigrants in distressed urban areas is also of concern to policymakers at local and national levels. Significant measures have been taken in France over the past two years to improve housing and working conditions in certain distressed urban areas and to improve the quality of transport and the availability of public services, which are key factors for urban development. In 1997, foreigners accounted for 8.4% of the participants in training programmes or employment subsidy schemes. The proportion of foreign women participating in these various schemes was almost the same as that of foreign men, all nationalities combined, and was even higher in work experience and training schemes (15 as opposed to 12%). Discrepancies remain in the proportion of foreign participation according to the type of aid measure: when a scheme prepares participants directly for employment (as in apprenticeships), it is around 3%, while in ordinary training programmes it is over 12%. Policy developments Two key developments in migration policy will be outlined below. The first concerns the two legislative reforms carried out during the first half of 1998 relating to the entry, residence and the forced departure of foreigners, the procedures for obtaining asylum, and the acquisition of French nationality. The second concerns international co-operation. Discussion of these developments is preceded by an initial assessment of the June 1997 regularisation programme. The June 1997 regularisation programme: a provisional assessment In June 1997 it was decided to carry out a programme to regularise certain categories of foreign nationals. This programme ended in May 1998. The operation was aimed primarily at regularising the unlawful status, with regard to their entry or residence, of people married to French citizens, of foreigners having entered France legally outside the family reunion procedure, of the spouses of refugees, and of long-established foreign families. It also applied to certain categories of children who had entered France outside the family reunion procedure and, under certain conditions, other clearly specified categories of foreigners (foreigners with no family
OECD 1999
139
responsibilities, foreigners who were ill, students pursuing higher-level studies and people refused asylum). According to the most recent available information, around 143 000 applications were received and some 80 000 residence permits granted. Most of these permits (85%) were granted on family-related grounds. The entry, residence and expulsion of foreigners With respect to entry conditions, the Law of 11 May 1998 requires the government to justify its grounds should it refuse a visa to certain categories of foreigner, in particular to the family members of a French citizen or a national of the European Economic Area, those qualifying for family reunion or persons registered in the Schengen Information System. This legislation abolished the accommodation certificate, replacing it by a declaration signed by the person at whose dwelling the foreign national will be staying confirming that the foreigners accommodation needs will indeed be met. It also introduced changes in the family reunion procedure and extended it to include minors born to either spouse during a previous marriage. As regards residence, the Law of 11 May 1998 extends the validity of European Economic Area nationals first residence permit to ten years. It introduces three new types of temporary residence permit specifically for scientists, artistic and cultural professionals and family members. The private and family life permit entitles eligible persons to a work permit and enables them to obtain a permanent resident permit after five years unbroken residence in France. The law also introduces new categories of individuals eligible for a permanent resident permit, in particular foreigners living outside France who formerly held a permanent resident permit and who are currently receiving a retirement pension. These persons and their spouses are now issued a permit known as a retired persons residence permit. As regards measures concerning forced departures, the law substantially simplifies the procedures for removals to the frontier and administrative detention. It protects certain categories of foreigners: these can no longer be removed to the frontier after being convicted of a crime. Asylum The Law of 11 May 1998 amended the 25 July 1952 Asylum Act. It extends the possibility of refusing the admission of asylum seekers from a so-called safe countries into France and establishes two new forms of protection: constitutional asylum and territorial asylum. Drawing on the Preamble to the 1946 Constitution, constitutional asylum makes possible the granting refugee status to persons persecuted because of their activities to promote freedom. Territorial asylum may be granted to those able to show that their life or freedom is threatened in their country or that they are liable to inhuman or degrading treatment there. Nationality The Law of 16 March 1998 re-established principle of jus soli as it existed in the Nationality Code between 1945 and 1993. Two conditions are laid down: the person must have established their principal residence in France, evidenced by having resided there habitually for a five-year period. The law reduced to one year (from the previous two years) the delay before which a foreigner married to a French citizen can obtain French nationality by declaration. Under certain conditions, minors born in France of foreign parents may obtain nationality by declaration at the age of 16, or at the age of 13 with their legal representative acting on their behalf. The law now applies the principle of dual jus soli without restriction to children born in France of at least one parent born in Algeria before its independence (July 1962); that parent is no longer required to have resided in France. The law also states that any minor born in France of foreign parents holding residence papers will be granted a republican identity document. This constitutes legal proof of identity and enables the child to be readmitted into France without a visa and to move freely in the Schengen Area. Reintegration and co-development After having launched the local development and migration programme in 1995, France set out in 1998 a co-development policy overseen by an interministerial delegate for co-development and international migration reporting to the Minister for Employment and Solidarity. One of the first manifestations of this policy, which promotes active co-operation with origin countries, was to find timely solutions to the problem of
OECD 1999
140
Germany
enabling the return to their origin countries under acceptable conditions of those who did not meet the requirements to be accepted under the regularisation programme. Two different schemes were adopted to this end: resettlement aid and a resettlement contract in the country of origin. The resettlement aid is only for those who are obliged to leave France; in some cases they are accompanied by their family. Psychological help as well as administrative, material and financial assistance are provided in France prior to their departure. France also makes available a resettlement subsidy and aid for small business start-up projects upon the persons arrival in their country of origin. The resettlement contract in the country of origin is currently offered to nationals of Mali, Morocco and Senegal who are asked to leave France. This contract entitles them to training in France, followed by additional training in their country of origin upon they return. The OMI has generally observed that six months after their return the individuals have succeeded in resettling; such success may be followed by a recommendation from the OMI that they be issued with a visa enabling them to travel between their country of origin and France.
GERMANY
Introduction Inflows of foreigners continued to decline in 1997. Every type of flow (but especially those of asylum seekers and ethnic Germans Aussiedler) diminished substantially. Political and economic developments in certain major origin countries, combined with an active policy of encouraging refugees to return voluntarily, helped to produce an increase in departures, towards Bosnia-Herzegovina in particular. For the first time since 1984, the net migration balance of foreigners was negative, albeit slightly. During 1997, the employment situation continued to deteriorate. Average total employment during the year (new Lnder excluded) fell by 280 000 on 1996, i.e. by 1.4%. The gap between the unemployment rate for nationals (11% on annual average in 1997) and that for foreigners (20.4%) widened even further. As regards migration policy, the Government is working to establish effective cultural and economic integration programmes for first- and, above all, second-generation immigrants. In May 1999 the Parliament approved a new law modifying the Nationality Code. Migration and settlement Available figures on migration flows of foreigners chart both inflows and outflows. The recorded entries include, notably, stays in excess of three months and asylum seeker entries. All persons occupying a private residence for a period exceeding three months are required to register. Because of this broad definition of immigration flows, net flows need to be considered rather than inflows only, so that the amount of migration is not inflated compared to flows recorded in other countries. Over the past 30 years, immigration of foreigners has moved cyclically (see Chart II.7), reflecting the successive changes in German migration policy and the upheavals in the Central and Eastern European countries. Germany, which had called extensively on foreign labour, signing numerous recruitment agreements in the early 1970s, officially terminated labour immigration in 1974. From 1989 to 1993, fairly liberal legislation allowed many asylum seekers and ethnic Germans (Aussiedler) to settle in Germany. But since 1993, inflows of immigrants, asylum seekers and Aussiedler from the principal sending countries (Central and Eastern European countries, former Yugoslavia, former USSR, Turkey) have steadily declined. Entries of Aussiedler fell from almost 180 000 in 1996 to a little over 100 000 in 1998. In 1998, the number of entry applications was down to 47 000. The large-scale outflow of Bosnians in 1997 (84 000 departures as against 27 000 the previous year) explains why the migration balance of foreigners was slightly negative (21 800) that year.
OECD 1999
141
Chart II.7. Migration flows of foreigners,1 1960-1997, Germany Thousands

Net migration of foreigners Inflows of foreigners 1 200 1 000 800 600 400 200 0 -200 1960 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 1 200 1 000 800 600 400 200 0 -200
In 1997, only the positive migration balance of German nationals (including Aussiedler) and the natural growth of the foreign population were responsible for the increase in total population which was very small that year (see Chart II.8). The proportion of foreigners in the total population was 9% at the end of 1997 compared to 8.9% the previous year. The fraction of those foreign nationals from European Union countries and OECD area countries (primarily Turkey, Italy and Greece) remained steady (25 and 64% respectively). The massive influx of immigrants and asylum seekers, especially in the early 1990s, is the reason why over a third of foreign residents have been settled in Germany for less than six years. On the other hand, nearly 50% of foreign residents have been settled in the country for ten years or more. Naturalisations The number of naturalisations declined in 1997 (272 000 as against 303 000 in 1996). For a very large part, the foreigners naturalised were of Kazakh or Russian origin along with a smaller number of Turks (see Statistical Annex, Table B.1.7). In particular, the number of nationals from the former USSR (Kazakhs and Russians excepted) dropped sharply, from 21 500 in 1996 to 9 000 in 1997.
1.
Registered inflows (foreigners staying in Germany more than 3 months) and outflows of foreigners. Including registered asylum seekers. The data cover western Germany up to 1990 and Germany as a whole from 1991 on. Source: Statistisches Bundesamt.
The Aliens Act was amended to ease naturalisation procedures for long-standing foreign residents in Germany. The new provisions came into force in July 1993. The commonest requirement to be met concerns the period of residence eight years for young people of the second generation, and fifteen years for adults. Special provisions apply to people of recognised German origin who consequently have a right to reside in Germany and obtain German nationality. The requirements for a discretionary decision are more restrictive, particularly with regard to knowledge of the German language. A new law modifying the Nationality Code was approved by Parliament in May 1999 (see below). Refugees and asylum seekers Tougher legislation designed to clarify who is entitled to apply for asylum came into force on 1 July 1993, following an amendment to the Basic Law. Its effect has been to reduce drastically the number of valid applications while increasing the proportion of applications granted. Some 105 000 applications were registered in 1997, down threefold from 1993 (see Table II.15). In 1997, the largest flows were from Turkey (16 800), former Yugoslavia (14 800) and Iraq (at 14 100 entries, the only flow to exceed the 1996 figure). Germany has signed bilateral agreements with Turkey, Chile, Vietnam, Slovenia, Croatia, the former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia, Albania and the Palestinian authority, and will soon do so with Bosnia-Herzegovina. Funds are, with the consent of the State concerned, released by the German government to grant low-interest loans to refugees wishing to set up a business in their home country once the political and economic situation allows. At the end of 1997, about 5 800 loans had been granted. Migration and the labour market
142
All foreigners from outside the European Economic Area must obtain a work permit to take up paid employment in Germany. In 1997, nearly 451 000 new permits were issued (see Table II.15), a number which has stayed
OECD 1999
Germany
fairly steady since 1995. From 1990 to 1997, the proportion of recent immigrants in all work permit issues for a first job rose from under 50 to over 60%. The majority of new permits, known as ordinary permits, are subject to the rule of prior entitlement for German or foreign workers with comparable status. In addition, they are valid only for a specific activity. The remaining permits are special permits, which give free access to the labour market for a limited or unlimited period without geographical or occupational restriction. The employment of contract labour and of guest workers (Gastarbeiter), being regarded as a form of co-operation with the Central and Eastern European countries, is an exception to the rule of prior entitlement, although annual quotas are set for each nationality and occupation depending on the labour market situation. The proportion of contract workers in the total of new permit holders has fallen; in 1997, it amounted to 12%, against 20% in 1992. On the other hand, employment of seasonal workers rose for the third year running (see Table II.15). The total workforce has been shrinking since 1992. Since total employment has declined even more markedly (see Chart II.9), there has been a substantial increase in unemployment in Germany. Furthermore, fluctuations in the employment of foreign workers, viewed over a long period, have been greater than for the labour force in general. The gap between unemployment rates in the native and foreign population has continued to widen since the early 1980s. This would indicate that foreigners are more vulnerable in this respect, owing in some cases to inadequate skills. From 1996 to 1997, unemployment rose from 10.1 to 11.0% for the population as a whole, but from 18.9 to 20.4% for foreigners. However, the rate conceals significant disparities depending on nationality and sector of the economy. The hardest hit were Turks (25.5% at the end of the year), followed by Italians (21%) and Greeks (19.5%). Illegal migration The illegal entry and employment of foreign labour persist, despite manifold efforts to combat illegal immigration. The total number of persons intercepted at the borders rose from 27 000 in 1996 and 35 200 in 1997 to
Chart II.8.
Components of German population change, 1970-1997 Nationals and foreigners Thousands

Natural increase Total change2
Net migration Acquisition of German nationality1
Nationals3
700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 -100 -200 -300 -400 1970 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96
Foreigners
700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 -100 -200 -300 -400 1970 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96
Note: The data cover western Germany up to 1990 and Germany as a whole from 1991 on. 1. Including naturalisations on the basis of a claim. 2. Net migration, natural increase and acquisition of nationality. 3. 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. Source: Statistisches Bundesamt.
143
OECD 1999
Table II.15. Current gures on the components of total population change, on migratory ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Germany
1994 1995 1996 1997
Components of population changes Total population (total change) Natural increase Net migration
205.8 115.1 320.8 224.0 203.4 168.3 259.2 18.3 88.3 152.6 259.2
288.6 119.4 408.0 288.1 206.3 180.7 313.6 0.6 86.9 227.2 313.6
195.4 86.8 282.2 256.5 179.7 133.3 302.8 61.1 92.8 148.9 302.8
45.4 48.2 93.7 245.5 141.7 115.4 271.8 200.0 93.5 21.8 271.8
Germans (total change)1 Natural increase Net migration Acquisition of German nationality Foreigners (total change) Natural increase Net migration Acquisition of German nationality
Migration of foreigners2 Inows by nationality of which: Poland Turkey Italy Former Yugoslavia Portugal Russian federation
774.0 78.6 63.9 38.7 63.2 26.5 33.4 152.5 21.1 17.6 6.6 12.9 23.6 1.0
788.3 87.2 73.6 48.0 54.1 30.5 33.0 227.2 19.5 30.4 14.5 16.5 27.6 13.8
708.0 77.4 73.2 45.8 42.9 32.0 31.9 148.9 19.3 29.7 9.0 5.7 29.1 8.6
615.3 71.2 56.0 39.0 31.2 26.4 24.8 21.8 13.6 10.0 1.1 1.0 0.1 13.3
Net migration by nationality of which: Russian federation Turkey Italy Poland Portugal Former Yugoslavia
Inows of ethnic Germans from: Central and Eastern Europe of which: Former USSR Romania Poland Inows of asylum seekers of which: Turkey Former Yugoslavia Iraq Afghanistan Stock of foreign population by duration of stay (31 December of the year indicated)2 Less than one year (%) 1 year to less than 4 years (%) 4 to less than 11 years (%) 11 years or more (%) Total (%)
144
222.6 213.2 6.6 2.4 127.2 19.1 30.4 2.1 5.6
217.9 109.4 6.5 1.7 127.9 25.5 26.2 6.9 7.5
177.8 172.2 4.3 1.2 116.4 23.8 18.1 10.8 5.7
134.4 131.9 1.8 0.7 104.4 16.8 14.8 14.1 4.7
6 990.5 6.3 23.9 22.3 47.4 100.0 259.2
7 173.9 7.9 23.1 24.5 44.5 100.0 313.6
7 314.0 5.6 18.2 27.7 48.5 100.0 302.8
7 365.8 5.2 15.8 29.8 49.2 100.0 271.8
Acquisition of German nationality3
OECD 1999
Germany
Table II.15. Current gures on the components of total population change, on migratory ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Germany (cont.)
1994 1995 1996 1997
Issuance of work permits for a rst employment4 of which: Asylum seekers Contract workers By duration of stay in Germany Newly entered of which: Polish workers Not newly entered By kind of permit5 General permit Special permit Stock of employed foreign workers by economic activity (Western Germany)6 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 nationality7 of which: Poland Hungary Croatia Czech Republic Turkey Seasonal workers by nationality8 of which: Poland Slovak Republic Croatia Romania Hungary Czech Republic Unemployment (national denition) Total number of unemployed workers (Germany as a whole) Total number of unemployed workers (western Germany) Unemployment rate (%) (western Germany) Total number of foreign unemployed workers (western Germany) Foreigners unemployment rate (%) (western Germany)
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 .. 154.5 136.7 3.9 5.8 2.3 2.5 3.5 3 698.1 2 556.0 9.2 408.1 16.2
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 1.8 192.0 170.6 5.4 5.6 3.9 2.8 3.7 3 611.9 2 564.9 9.3 424.5 16.6
440.0 21.3 54.5 262.5 180.8 177.5 346.3 93.4 2 084.7 27.3 21.9 823.1 196.1 217.3 103.4 22.6 35.5 48.9 588.6 0.1 47.3 24.3 9.1 5.0 2.3 1.8 220.9 196.3 6.3 5.7 5.0 3.5 3.4 3 965.1 2 796.2 10.1 496.0 18.9
451.0 24.8 54.8 285.4 205.6 165.6 352.4 98.5 2 017.9 26.5 20.0 791.7 174.5 213.6 102.6 22.9 582.2 36.4 47.5 0.1 42.1 23.0 5.6 3.9 1.4 1.5 226.0 202.2 6.4 5.8 5.0 3.6 2.3 4 384.5 3 020.9 11.0 521.6 20.4
Note: The data cover Germany as a whole, unless otherwise indicated. Data for Former Yugoslavia cover Montenegro and Serbia. 1. Figures include ethnic Germans whose German origins have been recognised. 2. Data are from population registers. 3. Statistics include naturalisation claims, which concern essentially ethnic Germans. 4. Citizens of EU Members States are not included. 5. A general permit is only granted if no domestic worker is available. This is not the case for the issuance of a special permit. Activity of holders of a special work permit is not restrictive. 6. Data are for 30 September of each year and include cross-border workers but not the self-employed. 7. Contract workers are recruited under bilateral agreements and quotas by country of origin are revised annually. 8. Seasonal workers are recruited under bilateral agreements and they are allowed to work 3 months per year. Sources: Bundesanstalt fur Arbeit; Statistiches Bundesamt.
145
OECD 1999
Chart II.9. Change in employment and unemployment in Germany, 1981-1998 Total population and foreigners Percentages
A. Employment and labour force
Total labour force Employment of foreigners1 Annual change, % 7.5 Annual change, % 7.5 Total employment
39 700 in 1998. The borders most concerned are the Czech and Polish frontiers, though growing numbers of illegal migrants are being stopped at the border with France. Clandestine networks, especially those smuggling workers from the Central and Eastern European countries, are developing. Total fines levied on employers of illegal foreign immigrants have grown, even though the number of breaches of the labour laws in this regard did not rise in 1997 (78 500 offences as against 86 800 the previous year). Germany, in order to improve the effectiveness of measures to curb flows of non-EU foreign nationals, particularly those using the asylum-application channel, is endeavouring to sign readmission agreements with the main countries from which the illegal migrants come. Policy developments In May 1999, the Parliament approved a draft Bill modifying the Nationality Code, in force since 1913. The mandatory residence period preceding naturalisation is shortened: adult foreigners may acquire it after eight years of legal residence (instead of the fifteen required under the present law). Over 4 million foreigners (out of a total 7.4 million) meet this requirement. Children of foreign parents of whom at least one was born in Germany or settled in Germany before the age of 14 receive German nationality automatically. Other children born of foreign parents must, between the ages of 18 and 23 years, choose which nationality they will definitively take. The new government regards the new law as a measure which will favour the integration of foreigners and their families long settled in Germany. The most controversial aspect of the first draft of the Bill, the offering of the opportunity to naturalised foreigners, as to Germans residing abroad and wishing to acquire the host countrys nationality, to keep their first nationality, was not included in the final version. The Federal Government, while seeking to restrict the number of new non-EU immigrants, is, in conjunction with the Lnder and city administrations, pursuing an active policy for integrating foreigners and their families who have lived in the country for a long time. One of the groups targeted by government and association aid measures is that of young people of immigrant origin. Emphasis is usually laid on learning German, especially among young people who
OECD 1999
5.0
5.0
2.5
2.5
-2.5
-2.5
-5.0
-5.0
-7.5 1981 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97
-7.5
B. Unemployment rates2
Total population Percentages 20.0 Foreigners Percentages 20.0
17.5
17.5
15.0
15.0
12.5
12.5
10.0
10.0
7.5
7.5
5.0 1981 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97
5.0
1.
146
Figures represent, for a given year, percentage change in the stock of employed foreigners compared to the previous year. Data are from Social Security records (in June of the given year). The data only cover western Germany. 2. Figures on unemployment are given as an annual average and correspond to the national definition based on the register of unemployed people. The data only cover western Germany. Sources: Statistisches Bundesamt and OECD Economic Outlook, n 65, June 1999.
Greece
have not received their schooling in Germany. Proficiency in the German language is an invaluable asset in successful social and economic integration and in the acquisition of occupational skills. Programmes are being conducted, for example, with such sending countries as Greece, Spain, Italy, Turkey and Portugal. Qualifications acquired in Germany by foreigners taking part in these programmes are, like training courses attended in the home country, recognised by the two partner countries. These schemes are designed to put these young peoples proficiency in two (or more) languages and their belonging to two cultures to professional advantage. Other schemes are more specifically centred on women arriving in the country in the context of family reunion. Projects exist for vocational skills training, for example in the health services (training as nursing aids, or in caring for elderly people). The Federal Government is at the same time supporting initiatives by some foreigners (particularly Turkish nationals) who wish to return to their country of origin. It provides information on the conditions in their origin country and the prospects for salaried work or self-employment. Technical training recognised by the country of origin is offered in Germany. The Federal Government and industry have together funded measures to promote return migration and develop self-employment in the home country. In June 1995, a vocational training centre was opened in Turkey. In co-operation with Hungary, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic, upskilling programmes have been made available to guest workers (Gastarbeiter) who return to their country of origin. Over and above the measures aimed at facilitating the integration of immigrants and persons from immigrant families, the Ministry of Labour is combating racism by promoting better inter-cultural understanding.
GREECE
Introduction Extensive land and coastal borders and a labour market with an important seasonal element lie at the roots of the present situation whereby undocumented foreigners are understood to comprise approximately 10% of the total labour force. The regularisation programme currently in the course of implementation seeks to encourage the integration of these workers into the formal economy and civil society. A Decree has recently been published to extend asylum seekers and refugees right to take up employment. Its practical effect will be contingent however upon further improvements in the Greek economy. Emigration Greeces National Statistical Service ceased collecting data on emigration in 1977. Information has therefore to be obtained from the records of recipient countries. The once substantial emigration flows to the United States, Canada and Australia are now almost negligible and are primarily linked to family reunion. Germany is now the principal destination with an inflow of 16 400 in 1997. It is also the only country for which departure data is available. On the assumption that Greek nationals leaving Germany are returning to Greece, then net migration of Greek nationals between the two countries became slightly positive in Greeces favour for the first time in 1994. At 5 300, it was strongly so in 1997. In 1997, remittances transmitted through official sources amounted to just over US$2.9 Billion, a decline of 2.4% on the 1996 figure. The principal reasons for the decline were the same as last year: slow growth in Germany (whence approximately one quarter of the remittances are transmitted), the reevaluation of the US dollar against the drachma and the increased assimilation of overseas Greeks. Migration and settlement The estimated total foreign population in Greece recorded a slight increase (1%) in 1997 to stand at just over 309 000 at the end of the year. It is noteworthy that about 45% of the total are of Greek background. This
OECD 1999
147
Table II.16.
Residence permits issued to foreigners,1 by country of origin, 1994-1997, Greece

Thousands
of which: Women
1994 1995 1996 1997 1996 1997
Russian Federation Bulgaria Albania Romania Egypt Former Yugoslavia Ukraine United States Turkey Georgia Cyprus United Kingdom Poland Germany Philippines Syria Lebanon Italy Other Total
1.
17.0 3.5 3.7 3.5 3.6 2.9 .. 2.8 6.2 .. 5.5 3.2 1.9 1.5 2.7 1.1 1.3 1.0 15.6 77.2
17.3 3.7 4.2 2.6 3.6 2.9 0.5 2.8 5.1 2.9 4.7 3.1 1.7 1.5 2.3 1.3 1.2 0.9 15.9 78.2
13.9 4.3 3.4 2.7 3.1 2.9 1.4 2.4 2.3 5.3 2.1 2.7 1.8 1.5 1.9 1.1 1.1 0.8 15.7 70.4
13.0 6.1 4.4 3.3 3.3 3.0 2.9 2.5 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.2 2.2 1.8 1.8 1.2 1.1 0.9 17.5 74.6
8.2 2.8 2.4 2.0 0.4 1.8 0.9 1.3 1.1 2.8 1.0 1.5 1.4 0.9 1.6 0.3 0.4 0.3 8.9 39.9
7.9 4.0 3.0 2.4 0.5 1.8 2.3 1.3 1.1 1.4 1.1 1.2 1.6 1.0 1.5 0.2 0.4 0.4 10.2 43.5
Data refer to total number of permits issued. One person can be granted several 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. Data include ethnic Greeks. Source: Greek Ministry of Public Order.
estimate only includes, however, those in possession of a valid or expired permit and those who are on the waiting list. There are believed to be approximately 500 000 undocumented immigrants, around three quarters of whom took advantage of the recently implemented regularisation programme (see below), a small proportion of whom can be expected to show up in the figures for 1998; the bulk of the applications will be treated in 1999. Temporary foreign residents Almost 75 000 residence permits (of one year renewable) were issued in 1997, an increase of 6% on 1996 (see Table II.16). This increase was largely due to greater inflows from countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, in particular Ukraine. These were in all likelihood ethnic Greeks: the number of residence permits granted to non-ethnic Greek foreigners remained stable. It is expected that these statistics may undergo further increases in the future, as a result of a new law regarding the family reunion of migrant workers (see Policy developments, below). Over half of the foreign population with residence permits lives in Greater Athens. This proportion declined slightly during 1996 and 1997 reflecting a redistribution toward the rural and the intermediate urban areas. Such a redistribution is welcome given the higher unemployment rates in the large urban areas. Labour migration and work permits 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 unions and employers organisations Both the Ministry of Public Order and the Ministry of Labour provide data on legal foreign workers. The statistics on legal foreign workers obtained from the Ministry of Public Order are somewhat different from those published by the Ministry of Labour. According to the more inclusive statistics of the former there were
OECD 1999
148
Greece
35 700 foreign workers in 1997. The latters estimate is 12 000 less. As was the case last year, these ministries figures point to conflicting trends: according to the former, the number of foreign workers registered a very slight increase; according to the latter their number fell by some 6%, attributable to a decline in the inflows from the European Union. Of the non-ethnic Greek foreign workers, 37% are from the EU (the United Kingdom, Germany and Spain being the most important); less than 10% are from other OECD Member countries. Among the ethnic Greeks, large contingents are from Albania, Cyprus, Turkey and the United Kingdom. Settlement of ethnic Greeks The data on the immigration of ethnic Greeks from the former Soviet Union (Greek Pontians) show a continuation of the generally downward trend. Having peaked at almost 14 000 in 1990 the inflow was less than 5 000 in 1997. This is in all likelihood the result of a multiplicity of factors including the near exhaustion of the potential pool, the employment and re-integration problems confronting the Pontians in Greece (despite the numerous programmes on the part of the Greek state, see Policy developments below for recent developments in this vein), the relative stabilisation of the political situation in the source countries and the success of the Greek governments policies aimed at encouraging them to stay in the host countries whilst maintaining cultural and political links with the mother country. Naturalisations Following an amendment introduced in 1997, regulations governing the naturalisations of foreigners married to Greeks are now much more relaxed: upon the birth of a child the application can be examined immediately. Otherwise the spouse, in common with other categories of foreign national, must have been resident in the country for ten of the preceding twelve years. The figures for naturalisations fluctuate considerably. Those of ethnic Greeks have moved within a range of between 100 and 2 700 over the period 1986-96; in the case of non-ethnic Greeks between 300 and 3 700. This being the case, it would be hazardous to attribute 1997s 160% increase in the naturalisations of non-ethnic Greeks to the aforementioned amendment: at slightly over 1 000 the absolute figure was well within the established range. In the case of ethnic Greeks, the rate of increase was rather more modest, 26% for a total of 1 250; this figure is likely to be revised downwards following the discovery of some fraudulent hellenisations especially among migrants from countries of the former Soviet Union. A review of procedures can also be expected. Illegal immigration Regularisation programme In addition to the officially recorded labour force of some 4.3 million, Greece is host over the course of the year to an estimated 500 000 undocumented foreign workers. The strongly seasonal character of the Greek economy (especially in construction, tourism and agriculture), has acted as an important pull factor. As a complement to the signature of bilateral agreements with Albania and Bulgaria designed to facilitate seasonal employment and thereby the normalisation of the migration flows, the Government has judged it sensible to encourage the orderly integration of undocumented foreign workers into the labour market. To this end, a regularisation programme has been in the course of implementation since November 1997. The initial registration phase was completed at the end of May 1998. At almost 375 000, the number of applications for regularisation was higher than anticipated. As expected, a preliminary sample analysis revealed that just over half were Albanian. The overwhelming majority (85%) were in the 20-44 age cohort, over 70% were male, and just over half of were married. The preliminary sample analysis also suggests a higher level of education among the non-documented migrants than the Greek population; adjustments have yet to be made for age differences however. The issuance of a green card is contingent on the decision of a committee of Greeces public employment service. This decision will take into account, inter alia, the type of the work performed by the immigrant and the needs of the labour market. The cards will be valid initially for between 1 to 3 years. Subsequent renewals
OECD 1999
149
based on the same criteria will be possible. In common with all regularisation programmes, there remains the concern that the regularised immigrants enhanced labour market status is likely to give rise to renewed demand for undocumented labour. Deportations The number of foreigners deported declined by over 6% in 1997 to just under 17 900. Almost two thirds of those deported were Romanian or Bulgarian. Refugees and asylum seekers Due exclusively to an almost threefold increase in applications by Iraqi citizens, requests for asylum increased by almost 170% in 1997 to 4 400. It is not known if these were Kurds fleeing persecution or Iraqis fleeing economic hardship and political persecution more widely defined. During 1997, the Greek government granted asylum to 130 of the almost 2 500 cases examined. Having plummeted since the mid-1980s this recognition rate of approximately 5% is in line with that of previous years. Even when acceptances for humanitarian status are included (a further 4%), Greece has one of the lowest total acceptance rates in the EU. Refugees are known to use Greece as a springboard for migration to other Western countries. Of the less than 6 200 individuals granted asylum since 1980 it is not known how many are still in Greece. The new legal infrastructure (see Policy developments, below) is expected to improve their integration and perhaps also statistical collection. Policy developments Family reunion for medium and long term migrants A Presidential Decree was issued at the beginning of 1998 allowing those workers who have held a residence permit for over seven years or who possess a permit giving them the indefinite right of stay to bring their family members (spouse and children under 18 years of age) to Greece. Permission for family reunion is however subject to four conditions: that before the arrival of the migrant in Greece they were cohabitants and dependants; that all the incoming family members possess a certificate attesting to their good health; that the adults do not have a criminal record; and, finally, that the sponsoring immigrant can provide proof of his/her financial ability to support the dependants. Return migration of ethnic Greeks from Albania Special Identity Cards granting the right to accommodation and guaranteeing equal treatment in the labour market have been issued to Greek Albanians since April 1998. The cards, valid for three years and renewable, are also given to spouses, children and grandchildren provided that they can furnish formal documents attesting to their relationship. Asylum seekers and refugees In last years report reference was made to new legislation passed in 1996 to extend health care and temporary employment rights to asylum seekers and to foreigners granted refugee status. The new law also contained provisions for the family reunion of recognised refugees, expediting recognition procedures for asylum seekers as well as granting temporary protection status to special categories of persons who take refuge in Greek territory for reasons beyond their control (e.g. civil wars, natural disasters etc.). In order for the law to be implemented, however, Presidential Decrees had to be issued by December 1997 confirming it. They were not. A Presidential Decree regarding the employment of recognised refugees, those granted humanitarian status and asylum seekers was issued in June 1998 however. Further, fresh legislation has been drafted which will expedite recognition procedures, facilitate family reunion and also give refugees and asylum seekers more social protection. It is hoped that the implementation of these new laws, harmonized with the EU and UNCHR
OECD 1999
150
Hungary
regulations, will improve the status of migrants, asylum seekers and refugees, especially if these changes are accompanied by an improvement in the Greek economy.
HUNGARY
Introduction Since 1997 the Hungarian economy has experienced accelerating growth. GDP grew by 4.6% in 1997 and by 5.1% in 1998. In 1998, total employment grew faster than the labour force. The unemployment rate fell to 8% from the 8.9% recorded in 1997. Officially recorded immigration flows have remained stable over the last three years, as has the number of foreign residents. Over two thirds of the immigrants are of ethnic Hungarian origin and come mainly from Romania, the former Yugoslavia and Ukraine. Undocumented immigration persists. Temporary migration and settlement Immigration flows rose steadily from the middle of the 1980s, reaching a peak in 1990. The lifting of exit restrictions in neighbouring countries, their economic and political situation and ethnic conflicts, all led to largescale movements of people. In 1990, almost 40 000 people arrived in the country legally with the intention settle or to stay for over a year. The inflow fell steeply thereafter: the 1992 figure was half that of 1992. The figures for the last four years show the inflow of documented long term immigrants stabilising at 13-14 000 per year (see Table II.17). The majority of immigrants come from neighbouring countries, one third from Romania. The proportion of migrants from the Ukraine grew to 17% in 1997. The number of immigrants from the former Yugoslavia is accounted for more than 30% of immigrants in 1993; by 1996 their proportion had fallen back to 8%, in 1997 it began to rise again. The proportion of immigrants coming from EU countries increased from 1995 to reach 12% in 1997. Budapest and its surrounding area and the zone along the southern border (neighbouring Romania and the former Yugoslavia) are the most important host centres. Those from more developed countries and/or with higher skills mostly live in Budapest. Naturalisation and permanent immigration In 1998, 6 400 naturalisation applications were accepted, a 25% fall on the 1997 figure and half that of 1996. In 1998, as in 1997, 60% were of Romanian origin. Ukrainians and nationals of the former Yugoslavia comprise the majority of the remainder. The overwhelming majority of the applicants are of Hungarian origin, or were themselves once Hungarian citizens. Re-naturalisation requests accounted for one fifth of the total and descendants of Hungarian citizens accounted for 70%. Others cite family reasons (Hungarian spouse or child). In these three cases the naturalisation law accords applicants preferential treatment. At the end of 1997, almost 74 000 foreign citizens lived in Hungary as permanent residents. Labour migration Precise data on the number of foreigners employed in Hungary are not available. However, a reasonable estimate of those legally employed can be made on the basis of the number of work permits and residence permits issued. After the fall in 1996 (which was largely due to a change in the regulations) the number of newly issued work permits has continued to rise: from 14 000 in 1996 to 19 700 in 1997 and to 22 600 in 1998 (see Table II.17). Approximately 9 000 residence permits were granted for practising gainful activities for which a work permit is
OECD 1999
151
Registered long-term immigration by country of origin2 Romania Former USSR EU countries Former Yugoslavia Other Total of which: Women Share of ethnic Hungarians among long-term immigrants, by country of origin (%) Romania Former USSR EU countries Former Yugoslavia Total Grants of residence permits by type of permit Short-term permits (including renewals) Long-term permits (including renewals) Permanent permits3 Permanent permits4 Inows of asylum seekers and refugees Stocks of permanent residents of which: Women Stocks of foreign residents (long-term and permanent residents), by country of origin Romania Former USSR Former Yugoslavia Germany Other Total of which: Women
1. 2.
Data are estimates. Foreigners registering in the given year and holding a long-term permit. A long-term permit is usually granted after one year living in Hungary with a short-term permit which cannot be extended more than one year. Therefore data on long-term immigrants cannot be fully considered as ow data. 3. All permits granted in the year. 4. Granted permits from the applications of the given year. 5. Valid work permits at the end of the year. Sources: Registers of foreigners, Ministry of the Interior; Ofce for Migration and Refugees, Ministry of the Interior.
152
Table II.17. Current gures on migratory ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Hungary
1994 1995 1996 19971 1994 1995 1996 19971
4.3 1.9 1.3 2.5 2.7 12.8 5.7
4.7 1.8 1.3 1.6 3.8 13.2 5.7
4.0 1.8 1.5 1.0 4.4 12.8 5.6
4.3 2.3 1.6 1.3 4.0 13.4 6.3
Acquisition of the Hungarian nationality of which, in per cent of total acquisitions: Romania Former Yugoslavia Former USSR Applications for acquiring Hungarian nationality Grants of work permits (excluding renewals), by country of origin Romania Former USSR Poland Other Total Registered foreign workers, by country of origin5 Romania Former USSR Poland Other Total Number of deportations and expulsions of which: Romanians Former Yugoslavs
9.9
10.0
12.3
8.7
70.1 8.6 16.0

3.8
70.4 11.3 11.8

3.4
69.7 16.3 10.0

2.9
60.4 18.6 9.1

3.1
92.3 53.4 5.8 82.8 59.3

51.4 17.7 5.8 3.4 3.4 81.9 44.1
91.0 48.3 7.3 78.0 56.6

30.3 22.4 3.9 2.2 5.9 81.4 43.8
93.9 58.6 11.5 67.7 68.6

25.0 15.1 4.5 2.8 1.3 77.4 41.8
.. .. .. .. .. 21.9 20.4 4.8 2.7 2.1 73.7 40.1
8.0 2.3 1.3 7.0 18.6 9.0 1.8 1.0 8.3 20.1 15.6 10.9 1.3
8.9 2.0 1.8 5.7 18.4 9.8 2.6 1.4 7.2 21.0 17.6 10.0 3.0
6.8 2.2 1.0 4.4 14.4 8.5 2.2 1.0 7.1 18.8 14.0 7.9 2.3
9.0 3.3 1.1 6.4 19.7 9.5 3.1 1.1 6.7 20.4 11.9 7.3 2.5
68.3 15.6 15.6 7.4 30.9 137.9 65.0
65.7 16.1 16.8 7.8 33.5 139.9 65.6
61.6 17.0 16.4 8.3 38.9 142.2 66.1
57.4 18.6 16.0 8.4 43.4 143.8 66.7
OECD 1999
Hungary
not required. The number of (15-74 year-old) settled immigrants and refugees who can take up employment without further permission was 61 000 in 1998. On the basis of the above figures, the number of registered foreigners legally present on the Hungarian labour market can be estimated at 90-95 000. Work permits are generally granted for professions in which there is a shortage of labour or for persons who bring special knowledge and expertise. Just over one third are employed in the tertiary sector (60% of them highly qualified) the remainder work in the primary and secondary sectors (72% of whom are qualified). The main branches are culture, recreation, sport and other services (28%) and building, processing, industry and trade (16%). Education and agriculture account for 6%. The composition by nationality of work permit holders has not changed much over the last three years; almost half (47%) were Romanian citizens, 13% come from the successor states of the Soviet Union, mainly from the neighbouring Ukraine. Poland, the former Yugoslavia, China and Mongolia each account for between 4 and 5%. Approximately 16% of the permit holders came from the developed European countries and overseas. A relatively large group foreigners working in Hungary is comprised of senior managers of foreign companies. They do not require a work permit. Refugees and asylum seekers Since March 1998, when the law on refugees was codified, Hungary has admitted refugees from outside Europe. As a result, Hungary is considered as a safe third country, i.e. foreigners who have travelled through Hungary to the countries of the European Union to apply for refugee status can be sent back there. In such cases it is the task of the Hungarian authorities to process the refugees application. So far, this rule has only been applied on a large scale by Austria. (In February 1997, the modification of the readmission agreement between Austria and Hungary came into force. According to this new version, the Hungarian authorities have to accept anyone who is presumed to have entered Austria illegally through Hungary.) By the autumn of 1998, Austria had sent back 2 500 people to Hungary. The number of asylum applications increased from 2 100 in 1997 to 7 100 in 1998. Half of the applications were from non-Europeans and 46% from nationals of the former Yugoslavia. The number of recognitions is still low: approximately 360 received refugee status, a further 260 were granted exceptional leave to remain either for humanitarian reasons or because they could not safely be returned. For many migrants, this latter status is not satisfactory as it is difficult for them to obtain permission to work and they are not eligible for social assistance. Undocumented migration The number of those attempting to illegally cross the Hungarian borders increased markedly at the beginning of the 1990s. In 1991 Hungarian border guards intercepted 10 000 attempting to enter the country illegally and caught 14 000 attempting to leave. In the same year, foreign authorities readmitted a further 5 000. During the following years, the number of illegal border crossings decreased; the 1994 figure was 40% less than that of 1991. The trend reversed in 1997. In that year, 15 000 and in 1998 nearly 22 000 illegal border crossings were recorded. Attempts at clandestine emigration rose by 25% in 1997 and by 50% in 1998. Approximately two thirds of all registered illegal border crossings were attempts to leave the country, indicating Hungarys transit role in undocumented East-West migration flows. This role is confirmed by the disaggregated data on illegal border crossings: over 80% of the illegal migrants apprehended entered the country through the Eastern and South-eastern borders, from Romania and the former Yugoslavia, whereas 95% of those caught attempting to leave Hungary tried to do so at the Slovenian, Slovakian and primarily at the Austrian frontier sections. Illegal migration often involves organised traffickers. Data indicate changing trends in the number and also the proportion of trafficker-assisted border crossings. They were particularly high in 1991 and 1992, when many illegal migrants came in big groups from Turkey and Asian countries. Between 1993 and 1997, both the number and the proportion of assisted border crossings was much lower. In 1998, the importance of trafficking increased considerably: the numbers (both inward and outward) more than doubled and the proportion of assisted illegal
OECD 1999
153
border crossings was close to one third. The number of traffickers arrested has ranged since 1991 at between 300 and 700 a year. The 1998 figure was 680. Approximately 12 000 foreigners were expelled from Hungary in 1997 and 16 600 in 1998. The number of foreigners who were turned back at the borders on the basis of entry regulations was much higher; in 1997 53 000 and in 1998 32 000. Undocumented foreign workers Irregular labour migration is only one aspect, albeit a rather visible and sensitive one, of the informal economy. The informal sector in Hungary is estimated to account for 30% of GDP and the participation of foreigners in this economy is understood to be wide-ranging. Given that it is possible to enter Hungary from practically all European countries without a visa, it is not surprising that the majority of undocumented workers enter as tourists and regularly or occasionally undertake a variety of jobs. Their residence is made legal by leaving the country once a month to have an exit stamp put into their passports because the visa free agreement allows them to stay only under such conditions. Many of these tourists from the neighbouring countries work in construction and agriculture doing occasional or seasonal work. Participation of foreigners in retail activities and market/street trading carried out without a valid permit is also commonplace, although its significance has decreased. Households are often employers; they offer many kinds of work but usually only for short periods, maybe a couple of hours per week or month. The majority of undocumented labour migrants are from the neighbouring countries, mainly from Romania, but also from Ukraine and the former Yugoslavia. Many are ethnic Hungarians who speak the language and have relatives or other contacts in the country. Migration from neighbouring countries into Hungary is fundamentally of a temporary nature. Those involved try to take advantage of the opportunities presented by the open borders, but do not wish to settle permanently. Even if the phenomenon is less visible, irregular employment also exists among westerners. Most are young, they typically work for foreign companies in media and internet activities or as language teachers. Policy developments Recent developments in migration policy reflect the fact that Hungary is increasingly becoming a country of immigration. The legal framework related to migration has been in continuous development from the beginning of the 1990s but is still widely considered as incomplete. Efforts are being made to bring the fragmented regulations into compliance with best world standards. Following on from the 1989 Emigration Act, in 1993-1994 two Acts regulating immigration entered into force: the Act on Hungarian Citizenship and the Act on the Entry, and Settlement of Foreigners in Hungary, commonly referred to as the Aliens Act. The Aliens Act requires an individual to spend a minimum of three years working and living in Hungary with a residence permit before obtaining immigrant status. The Citizenship Act also stipulates that eight years of residence in Hungary are a necessary prerequisite for naturalisation. In 1998, as the last major pillar of the legal regulation of the migration issues, the Act on Refugees came into force. A widely discussed element of the previous regulation was the geographical reservation, limiting asylum to only those coming from Europe. A basic new element was removing this limit. Provisions relating to the permission for foreign citizens to take up employment came into effect on 17 October 1991. These were modified in 1995. In November 1996, a law on labour market access came into operation rendering the rules governing employment of foreigners more restrictive. Foreigners who travel to Hungary with the purpose of working there must obtain an employment visa or an income earning activity visa before entering Hungary, regardless of the length of their stay there. The work permit can be issued only if there is no locally available person with relevant qualifications to fill the post. Employers are obliged to register their labour force demand 60 days in case of seasonal or occasional employment, 30 days prior to the submission of the application for an employment permit.
154
The sanctions imposed on employers for infringing the regulations were recently increased. Nevertheless, the sanctions imposed are greater on the employee than on the employer. If a foreigner is caught working withOECD 1999
Ireland
out a valid work permit, the employer must pay a fine equal to at least five times the minimum wage during the period of illegal employment; the worker, on the other hand, can be banned from Hungary for between one and five years. According to the Association Agreement with the European Community, Hungary is obliged to bring its existing and future legislation into line with that of the European Community. In the area of migration this concerns two major aspects: the free movement of EU citizens and the strengthening of frontier controls. Special provisions, with preferential treatment for EU citizens are under preparation; some were recently introduced (e.g. concerning companies key personnel). In addition the development of more effective border control has been given priority.
IRELAND
Introduction Net migration of Irish nationals has over recent years become more responsive to changes in labour market conditions, especially when the domestic situation is viewed in a relative sense vis--vis the position abroad. This is especially the case for graduates, the migration flows of whom have tended to exhibit a rotational aspect, described below. Further, the destinations chosen by Irish migrants have become more diverse as has the composition of the nationalities recorded in the inflows. Reflecting the variable character of relative differences in domestic and overseas economic performance, migration flows displayed considerable volatility during the 1980s and early 1990s. Thereafter Irelands economic performance, both in relative and absolute terms, improved spectacularly. Real GDP growth has since 1994 consistently exceeded 7%; since 1995 Ireland has been the fastest growing economy in the OECD zone. With average net employment growth approaching 4% since 1994 unemployment has steadily declined from a peak of over 15% in 1993 to fall below 10% in 1998. This degree of economic buoyancy has given rise since 1996 to net population inflows, derived both from reduced outflows and increased inflows. Emigration Net outflows reached very high proportions in the latter half of the 1980s, indeed, at almost 45 000 in 1988/89 (13.0 per thousand of the population) the level equated with that of earlier periods of very high emigration. Having fluctuated around migration balance between 1991 and 1995 net migration has since followed a positive upwards trend, reaching 23 000 in the most recent twelve month period for which up to date data are available, i.e. the year to April 1998 (see Chart II.10). This was due to both reduced outflows (21 200, a decrease of 27% on 1996/97) and a constant inflow of 44 000. In 1989 nearly 70% of those who emigrated went to the United Kingdom, some 12% to the United States, 6% to other European Union countries and about 14% to other destinations. By 1993 the United Kingdom was no longer, after six decades, the destination of the majority of Irish emigrants. This trend towards increasing diversity in destinations has continued. In 1998 the United Kingdom share was 40% while that for the rest of the EU had risen to 20, the same proportion as for the United States and for all other countries taken in aggregate. Characteristics of emigrants Irish emigrants, who were previously largely unskilled, or at best possessed rudimentary manual skills, are now broadly representative of the social structure of Irish society. Indeed, there appears to be a tendency towards disproportionately higher emigration among those with third level qualifications (advanced diplomas or degrees). Within a year of obtaining such qualifications almost one in seven of the 1996 graduate cohort had taken up jobs abroad. This figure, though high, has steadily declined from the peak of over one in four for the 1988 cohort.
OECD 1999
155
Chart II.10.
A.
Trends and characteristics of migration, Ireland

B. Migration flows,2 1988-1998
Thousands
Components of population change1

Intercensal periods Thousands
Natural increase Total change 60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -60 -80
Net migration
Emigration
Immigration
Net migration 60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -60 -80
71 18 81 8 18 1-9 91 1 -1 9 19 01 01 -1 1 11 -2 6 26 -3 6 36 -4 6 46 -5 1 51 -6 1 61 -7 1 71 -8 1 81 -9 1 91 -9 8
1988
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
18
C. Age distribution of migrants,2 1998

Percentages Emigrants 60 50 40 30 Immigrants
D.
Net migration and unemployment rate 1971-1998

Correlation coefficient = 0.67 Net migration (thousands) 40 20 0 -20
20 -40 10 0 0-14 15-24 25-44 45-64 65 and over 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Unemployment rate (%) -60
1. Annual average. Data for 1991-98 are estimates on the basis of the 1996 census results. 2. Data are estimates. Sources: Commission on Emigration, Reports (1954); Census of population of Ireland 1991, Volume 1, Population classified by area; Census of population of Ireland 1996 ; Population and migration estimates, CSO, 1998.
156
Irelands graduate labour force involves what might be described as an ongoing or even constant migratory element, which exists to a significant degree even when the economy is buoyant. Relatively large numbers of those possessing diplomas or degrees (especially in the technical areas) initially emigrate, but a high proportion also return at a later stage having acquired experience and enhanced skills. This rotational pattern tends to be self perpetuating as Irish employers, especially when seeking qualified technical personnel, often favour applications from emigrants rather than hire recently qualified graduates. As a result, the latter can sometimes find it difficult to acquire employment in the domestic labour market, especially in the initial stages of an economic upswing. Estimates based on 1991 Irish Census data, reveal that no less than 30% of the population aged over 40 years with third level qualifications had resided outside the country for at least one year. The corresponding proportion for the adult population as a whole (i.e. 25 years of age and over) was 10%. This represents a very high return rate (it is undoubtedly higher now) for the most educated emigrants, and is important in dispelling fears of a brain drain.
OECD 1999
Ireland
Immigration Just as the numbers emigrating from Ireland have steadily fallen since 1994, the numbers entering the country have shown a tendency to increase, albeit at a slower pace. The inward flows now also include sizeable numbers of non-nationals (47% in 1997/98). The latter largely comprise persons coming to work (mainly in skilled activities but also notably in the catering trade), students coming to attend third level institutions and dependants of persons in these groups. From the Labour Force Survey data, which provide the only means of estimating the stock of non-nationals in Ireland, it is apparent that this component of the Irish population has increased substantially over recent years. The number rose from 83 000 in 1983 to just over 96 000 in 1995 and it soared to 118 000 in 1996; the 1997 figure of 114 000 (3.1% of the total population) represents only a slight fall-back (see Table II.18). The increase has been particularly rapid among non-EU citizens (other than those from the United States). Numbering just 8 400 in 1983, there were 22 000 in 1997. The great majority of foreign residents are EU passport holders (approximately 81 000) of these some 64 400 were from the United Kingdom. Inflows of workers from outside the European Union Analysis of the data on the issue and renewal of work permits (which are required for all engagements for financial gain, irrespective of duration) provides some indication of the trends in the numbers of non-EU nationals entering the country in order to take up employment. The number of issues and renewals rose rapidly between 1989 and 1993, from 2 500 to about 4 300 and has not varied greatly from this level since that date. The number of permits issued to persons from India and Pakistan has declined markedly over recent years. The number was as high as 1 500 in 1994 but had fallen to less than 500 by 1997. Significant factors here have been a) the imposition of more restrictive registration conditions governing eligibility to work as a medical practitioner and b) a tightening of immigration procedures generally. However, there have also been in recent years significant increases in the numbers entering employment from some other countries which had previously been of relatively low importance. These include, for example, Australia, Malaysia, South Africa and Switzerland (although for all four of them combined the figure is less than half that of India). Refugees and asylum seekers Until the early 1990s the numbers of refugees and asylum seekers were very small; since then they have risen sharply, from less than 40 in 1992 (not including the several hundred Bosnian programme refugees, displaced from the former Yugoslavia, whom the Irish Government agreed to accept in that year) to some 4 500 in 1998. Possible reasons for the recent increase include increasing numbers of asylum seekers generally, and the fact that other countries are adopting a more restrictive stance with regard to applications. The number of persons who have been granted official refugee status is relatively small (the total over the period from the beginning of 1992 until August 1998 was 333). Over the same period the number of persons whose applications for asylum were refused was just under 980. When these figures are viewed alongside that of the total number of applications it is clear that, withdrawals and leavers notwithstanding, there is now a considerable backlog of cases pending. Despite a five-fold increase since mid-1997 in the number of staff assigned to dealing with them it is estimated that the existing backlog of cases will not be eliminated until the middle of the year 2000. Policy developments The basic legal framework covering foreign nationals in Ireland in regard to rights of entry, residence and employment is the 1935 Aliens Act and the subsequent ministerial orders appended to it. In 1996, in response to the rapid increase in the numbers of asylum seekers the Refugee Act was introduced to parliament with the primary objective of codifying asylum procedures in law and rendering them more transparent. However, due inter alia to a legal challenge and to the view taken by the Justice Minister that certain of the provisions of the Act were
OECD 1999
157
Table II.18.
Current gures on migratory ows and stocks of total population and labour force in Ireland
1994 1995 1996 1997
Immigration by country of United Kingdom Other European countries United States Other countries
origin1
30.1 15.2 5.8 4.3 4.8 34.8 14.8 5.5 9.6 4.9 4.7 3 570.7 3 479.6 91.1 58.2 12.2 9.4 11.3 2.6 0.4
31.2 15.6 6.3 3.8 5.5 33.1 13.3 5.1 8.2 6.6 1.9 3 601.5 3 505.3 96.2 60.0 13.0 8.2 15.0 2.7 0.4
39.2 17.6 7.2 6.4 8.0 31.2 14.1 5.1 5.2 6.8 8.0 3 626.1 3 508.3 117.8 71.3 15.4 12.7 18.1 3.2 1.2
44.0 20.0 8.1 6.6 9.3 29.0 12.9 4.1 4.1 7.9 15.0 3 660.6 3 546.2 114.4 64.4 16.4 11.3 22.3 3.1 3.9
Emigration by country of destination1 United Kingdom Other European countries United States Other countries Net migration1 Total population2 Irish nationals Total foreign population United Kingdom Other EU countries United States Other countries % of foreign population in total population Asylum seekers Labour market Work permits issued and renewed India and Pakistan United States and Canada Other countries Employment by nationality2 Irish nationals in employment Foreigners in employment United Kingdom Other EU countries United States Other countries Employment to total population ratio Irish nationals in employment (%) Foreigners in employment (%) United Kingdom (%) Other EU countries (%) United States (%)
4.3 1.5 0.9 1.9 1 181.6 1 150.4 31.2 14.0 5.0 2.8 9.4
4.3 1.4 0.7 2.2 1 233.6 1 199.3 34.3 21.3 5.7 2.6 4.7
3.8 0.6 0.9 2.3 1 285.3 1 241.9 43.4 27.6 7.1 3.0 5.7
4.5 0.5 1.4 2.6 1 338.4 1 294.7 43.7 26.7 7.6 3.2 6.2
33.1 34.2 24.1 41.0 29.8
34.2 35.7 35.5 43.8 31.7
35.4 36.8 38.7 46.1 23.6
36.5 38.2 41.5 46.3 28.3
Note: Figures for the EU refer to the 15 member countries of the Union from 1997 on. 1. CSO estimates made on the basis of 1996 Census results. 2. Estimated from the annual Labour Force Survey. Fluctuations from year to year may be due to sampling error. Sources: Central Statistical Ofce; Labour Force Survey.
unworkable, it has only been partially implemented. Nevertheless, as from 28 August 1997 that part of the act which enables Ireland to ratify the Dublin Convention has been brought into law. In order to deal with the continuing inflow of asylum seekers new administrative procedures were put in place under the existing legislation in early 1998. Under the new arrangements (which follow the principles of the 1996 Act), Department of Justice officials adjudicate on asylum applications in the first instance. There is, however, an independent appeals procedure presided over by practising lawyers. The system also includes procedures (with provision for appeal) whereby what appear to be manifestly unfounded applications are dealt with speedily.
OECD 1999
158
Italy
Important issues associated with the refugee question that continue to be controversial include: The right of asylum seekers to work. Heretofore the official view has been that granting asylum applicants early access to employment would act as a pull factor, leading to further abuses of the asylum system, further pressure on the processing arrangements, and delays the recognition for genuine refugees in need of protection. There are now, however, indications that the Government may change the regulatory procedures to allow asylum seekers to work in certain circumstances. Support systems for asylum seekers. At present, refugees in Ireland receive welfare payments. Their accommodation (usually in the private sector) is also paid from public funds. The question of providing support through direct provision (e.g., vouchers, accommodation in special reception centres) has been raised. The Government is considering various options, but has indicated that in the context of new arrangements, it does not favour the creation of large-scale reception centres. The fact that the United Kingdom (with which Ireland shares a Common Travel Area for their citizens) announced its intention in July 1998 to in future provide support to asylum seekers in kind rather than in cash, is likely to have some influence on policy. It is the Governments intention to review the question of the implementation of the 1996 Refugee Act in the light of the conclusions of a) a comparative study of relevant legislation in Ireland and in other EU member states (soon to be completed) and b) the experience gained in the Department of Justice in operating the current procedures.
ITALY
Introduction Over the past two years, major changes have been seen in Italy with regard to immigration legislation, the trend and control of flows and the regularisation of undocumented foreigners. At the same time Italy has experienced the arrival of large numbers of migrants and refugees from Albania, Turkey and, more recently, Kosovo. However, these entries have been on a fairly limited scale by comparison with immigration flows to the other European Union countries. Migration and the resident foreign population According to Interior Ministry statistics, slightly over 1 200 000 foreigners were legally resident in Italy at 31 December 1997, that is to say 145 000 more than in the previous year (see Table II.19). The increase was due partly to further arrivals, notably refugees from Kosovo, and partly to the new residence permits issued under the regularisation programme of 1996. In 1997, foreigners accounted for 2.2% of the total population, an increase of 0.2% from 1996. This percentage is still well below the EU average (4.9%). The foreign population is heavily concentrated in northern and central Italy (51% and 30% respectively), particularly in Lombardy, Lazzio, Veneto and the cities of Rome and Milan. The heaviest migration flows in 1997 were from Central and Eastern Europe and North Africa: Moroccans accounted for 10.5% of total arrivals (representing an increase of 39% over two years) and Albanians for 6.8% (their number having doubled during the same period). Filipinos accounted for 4.1% of arrivals, their number having likewise increased steeply. In 1997 nearly 71% of immigrants were aged between 19 and 40. Immigration is thus essentially workrelated, although a 3% increase in the number of minors and persons aged over 40 is indicative of a tendency for foreigners to settle in Italy. A little over 45% of immigrants are women, though with wide differences in presence according to country of origin. Most immigrants from Morocco, Tunisia, Senegal and Egypt are men, while women predominate among immigrants from Eastern Europe and the Balkans and especially from Cape Verde and the Philippines.
OECD 1999
159
Foreigners who hold a permit of By group of nationality Europe Africa Asia America Other By reason for presence Employment2 Family reunication Studies Religion Tourism (long-term) Retirement Asylum seekers/refugees Other and not specied By region of residence North Central South Acquisition of Italian nationality
Legal action taken against foreigners Foreigners for whom a penal action has been undertaken 54.3 Foreigners under arrest 22.4 Foreigners who are to be expelled 56.6 Expelled foreigners 6.1
1. 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. 2. Including self-employed and unemployed. 3. Number of non-EU foreigners who hold a work permit. Excluding unemployed with a residence permit who are registered in the local employment Ofces. Sources: Ministry of the Interior; ISTAT.
160
Table II.19. Current gures on foreign population in Italy

1994 1995 1996 1997 1994 1995 1996 1997
residence1
922.7 367.2 259.6 150.4 140.4 5.1 516.7 164.5 55.5 53.5 39.7 43.3 10.3 39.2 473.3 284.2 165.2 6.6
991.4 404.3 265.0 164.2 152.5 5.4 544.2 185.2 61.8 57.4 48.6 44.0 10.4 39.8 507.6 320.2 163.6 7.4 54.4 21.6 56.0 7.4
1 095.6 426.0 314.9 195.5 154.8 4.4 685.4 204.4 45.7 54.9 30.0 43.1 3.9 28.4 .. .. .. 7.0 69.0 23.6 34.5 5.1
1 240.7 486.4 351.0 225.5 172.8 5.0 782.3 243.4 57.3 59.2 44.5 45.9 5.6 2.5 636.7 378.4 225.6 9.2 56.5 24.2 49.1 8.4
Characteristics of non-EU foreigners who newly obtained a work permit Level of education (%) No diploma Primary level Secondary level University Sector of activity (%) Agriculture Manufacturing Domestic work Other Stocks of foreign employment3 Characteristics of registered foreign unemployed (excluding EU citizens) Length of registration (%) Less than 3 months 3 months to 1 year More than 1 year Age groups (%) Less than 18 19-24 25-29 30 and over
99.8 76.3 20.3 2.9 0.5 21.6 38.4 13.1 26.9 307.1 86.9 36.5 34.3 29.1 1.9 15.2 27.4 55.5
111.3 76.7 19.6 3.1 0.6 18.5 44.0 9.3 28.2 332.2 98.4 34.6 34.6 30.8 1.6 14.2 25.4 58.8
129.2 78.3 18.2 2.9 0.5 21.9 44.2 5.4 28.5 .. 146.9 35.9 35.4 28.8 1.5 15.0 24.6 58.9
166.5 82.2 14.9 2.4 0.4 22.6 43.5 5.3 28.6 532.7 177.9 .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
OECD 1999
Italy
The number of foreign minors is put at between 130 000 and 140 000, while the number of residence permits issued rose from a little over 35 000 in 1996 to more than 43 000 in 1997. This increase is indicative of changes in family composition and the desire of foreigners to settle in Italy, as confirmed by the growing number of residence permits issued for family reunion (up by 18.5% in 1997). In 1997, nearly 155 000 residence permits expired and nearly 40 000 applications for permits were refused. Naturalisations and integration The desire of foreigners to settle permanently in Italy has been manifesting itself increasingly, to judge from such indicators as labour market entry, participation in social and cultural integration programmes, creation of family ties and development of social relations. The presence of minors and the annual number of family reunion procedures are other significant indicators of this desire for permanent abode. Family reunion authorisations are requested mostly by Moroccans and Albanians, followed by nationals of the United States, Romania, Sri Lanka, China, Cuba and Tunisia. By contrast, nationals of Poland and the Philippines, who are present in large numbers, have very little recourse to family reunion procedures. In 1997, nearly 24 000 family reunion authorisations were granted. The proportion of married foreigners amounted to 44% in 1997, up 6% from 1991. A little over 11% of these persons had children, another indication of the tendency to settle permanently and start families. According to Interior Ministry data, more than 9 100 mixed marriages were performed in 1994. In 1997, Italian nationality was granted, through marriage or naturalisation, to over 9 300 persons (see Table II.19), most of them women (6 300). The vast majority of recipients were of Romanian, Swiss, Moroccan and Dominican Republic origin. Refugees and asylum seekers In 1997, nearly 1 800 residence permits were issued to asylum seekers and over 3 200 to refugees. A little under 1 900 applications for refugee status were lodged in 1997 at the Central Commission, an increase of 176% on 1996. The increase was essentially due to the inflow of Albanians in March and of Kurds from Iraq in July. The rate of refusal remained high, however (69%). Nearly 89% of the asylum seekers entered Italy illegally, the main points of entry being the coast of Puglia and Rome and Milan airports. Most of the arrivals were from Albania and Iraq. The Central Commission examined 1 850 applications in 1997 but awarded refugee status to only 350 persons. The relatively low number of applications for refugee status is due to several factors. Many asylum seekers from Somalia and the former Yugoslavia, for example are given work permits on humanitarian grounds, which relieves them of the need to apply for refugee status. The lengthy formalities involved tend to act as a deterrent, and periodic regularisation programmes legalise certain situations rendering unnecessary the need to apply for refugee status. Even so, requests for asylum increased considerably during the first few months of 1998. The inflow of Kurds, Kosovars and Albanians between 1 July and 20 September brought the number of applications to 4 850. Foreign workers and the labour market Despite some rigidity in the Italian labour market, employment of foreigners has trebled over the past six years and their unemployment has fallen by one-fifth. The unemployment rate among foreigners stood at 18.5% in 1997 as against 50% in 1990. This decline reflects the service sectors expansion in recent years and an increase in the number of temporary contracts for the low-skilled jobs shunned by Italian workers. Demand for foreign labour is particularly strong in the manual trades and in such sectors as seasonal tourism, agriculture, construction, domestic services and home care. Moreover, this demand seems set to increase, given the demographic characteristics of the Italian population. Residence permits granted for economic reasons (i.e. employment) account for 60% of total permits, most of them being issued to self-employed persons or workers required for temporary jobs.
OECD 1999
161
Various new measures introduced under the 1998 Immigration Act should facilitate the entry of foreigners for work-related reasons, notably a system of preferential quotas for nationals of countries with which Italy has concluded agreements on entry flow regulation and readmission. Newly hired foreign workers are for the most part unqualified and perform unskilled jobs under temporary contracts. The majority of these persons are from Morocco (21%), the former Yugoslavia (13%), Albania (13%) and Tunisia (9%). In 1997, the number of new work permits issued to non-EU nationals rose by nearly 25%. Most of these authorisations were granted to men, nearly half of them aged 20 to 29. The main sectors of employment were agriculture (40%), services (48%) and industry. The situation of self-employed foreigners is less buoyant. Although the number of permits issued doubled between 1990 and 1997, they represent only 5% of total work permits granted, and self-employed foreigners are outnumbered six to one by self-employed Italians. Illegal immigration The number of foreigners in an irregular situation is estimated at nearly 235 000, most of them from Morocco, Albania, Tunisia, Romania, Poland and Brazil. Illegal entry of foreigners by way of the southern coasts has been a notable feature of the past few years. In March and April of 1997 nearly 17 000 Albanians landed in Italy, of whom 62% were granted temporary residence permits. In 1998, most of the arrivals were from Kosovo, Turkey, Iraq and North Africa. The points of entry were the Salentine Peninsula and the ports of Bari and Brindisi (in Puglia), Pantelleria and Lampedusa (islands off Sicily) and the coasts of Calabria. The heaviest inflows occurred in January, February, July, August and October. While it is impossible to put a reliable figure on undocumented arrivals in Italy, notably because of the number of persons turned back at the border and those that escape detection, it is estimated that over 20 000 persons entered Italy illegally between 1 January and 31 October 1998. July and August of 1998 saw an easing of the strained relations between police and North African immigrants (Tunisians and Moroccans) in the initial reception centres established under the 1998 Immigration Act. This was largely due to the Italian governments intensification of diplomatic relations with the countries of origin on the subject of migration flow regulation. Governmental negotiations with Albania also proved useful, particularly on the question of flows from that country and their links with criminal organisations. An agreement was signed at the end of October 1998 that provides for effective measures to combat transportation of undocumented foreigners to Italy. Different measures have been adopted in the case of Kurds and Kosovars, who are considered to be potential asylum seekers. The Italian government intends to regard them as refugees and grant them temporary renewable work permits on humanitarian grounds. Policy developments Immigration was a hotly debated issue in 1997 and 1998. The focal points were the large numbers of foreigners arriving on Italian shores and the adoption of new legislation on the entry and residence of foreigners, which gave rise to numerous discussions and clashes in Parliament. A new regularisation procedure was initiated early in 1999. New legislation on the entry and residence of foreigners Act No. 40 of 6 March 1998 replaces the legislation of 1990 and separates regulation of immigration from that of asylum and other humanitarian treatment. The new Act has three main objectives: regulation of entry on the basis of annual quotas set by the government; sterner action to combat illegal entry and criminal exploitation of migrants; and, increased support for the integration of foreigners residing legally in Italy. The Act also brings Italian legislation on border controls into line with the Schengen Agreements, which came into force in Italy in October 1997. Albanians, Moroccans and Tunisians, because of their numerical preponderance and the bilateral negotiations in progress, will receive priority in their applications for residence permits if they were already living in Italy when the Act came into effect and can prove that they have employment.
OECD 1999
162
Japan
The new legislation introduces a system of official deportation and immediate escort to the border in cases of illegal entry, ineligibility for a residence permit, or threat to public order. Foreigners for whom a deportation order has been issued will be sent to special centres and may be held there for 20 to 30 days at the request of the competent authority. These new deportation measures were strenuously debated in Parliament. The same legislation contains measures to promote and improve the integration of foreigners residing in Italy, although some of these measures may seem a little ambiguous. For instance, a permanent residence permit may be issued to persons who have been residing legally in Italy for at least five years. But this permit may be withdrawn at any time if certain requirements, notably as to income, cease to be met. Family reunion will be authorised upon proof of a minimum monthly income (L 480 000 for the addition of one family member). This means-testing could be seen as inconsistent with the constitutional right of all persons, foreigners included, to live with their families. It will now be possible for a foreigner within the annual quota and on the consulates waiting list to come to Italy and look for work, instead of having first to obtain an offer of employment. Finally, the new Act provides for health-care assistance for all foreigners, in particular minors, regardless of status, together with social security cover, compulsory schooling for children and adult education. New regularisation procedures A fourth programme of regularisation for foreigners in irregular situations is now under way, following those of 1986, 1990 and 1996 (see Table II.20). Initially the new round was to concern 38 000 persons, an arbitrary figure set by the Italian authorities. Those persons had to have been living in Italy prior to 28 March 1998 and prove that they had employment. Owing to the very large number of applicants meeting these requirements, the quota was increased to 300 000 by a legislative decree of 13 April 1999. An Interior Ministry circular dated 13 May 1999 has further relaxed the regularisation procedure so that more persons may benefit.
Table II.20. Regularisation requests of immigrants in an illegal situation, three last regularisation programmes, by region of residence, Italy
Thousands
1990 1997 19981
North Centre South Islands Total
89.2 75.9 30.6 39.1 234.8
115.3 75.8 48.2 19.4 258.8
123.5 75.5 26.5 10.1 235.6
1. At 15 April 1998. Sources: Ministry of Labour; Ministry of the Interior.
The most important provision of the ministerial circular is the possibility of a deadline extension until 20 October 1999 for persons as yet unable to submit all the papers required. In order to make things easier for self-employed workers, the circular also stipulates that persons unable to prove that their annual income is at least equal to the benchmark minimum for Italy may submit their applications for regularisation with an undertaking to supply all the necessary details of income when the permits come up for first renewal, i.e. in one years time. Finally, the circular broadens the range of acceptable proof of presence in Italy prior to 28 March 1998.
JAPAN
Introduction As evidenced by the sharp decline in the ratio of employment vacancies to job seekers, the labour market began to slacken markedly from the beginning of 1997. Having been at that time just under 0.75 it is now below 0.5 and continues to fall, albeit at a much slower pace. Since February 1998 employment growth has been negative. By the end of the year the net reduction had reached an estimated 500 000 bringing the unemployment rate up to 4.5%, the highest since records began in 1953.
163
OECD 1999
Table II.21.
Current gures on migratory ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Japan
Thousands
1994 1995 1996 1997
Inows of foreign Stock of total
nationals1
237.5 125 034 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 2.5 620 24.8 34.8 10.1 6.8 6.8 5.8 3.8 4.5 5.6 1.7 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 105.6 6.4 33.5 181.5 290 65.6
209.8 125 568 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 3.2 610 25.1 16.0 9.9 7.4 7.2 5.9 4.1 4.6 5.3 1.7 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 88.0 6.6 32.4 193.7 280 55.5
225.4 125 864 1 415.1 657.2 234.3 201.8 84.5 44.2 193.1 626.0 438.2 258.8 6.5 172.9 98.3 252.6 14.5 9.9 4.0 630 27.4 20.1 11.1 8.8 7.5 5.9 4.6 5.0 5.0 2.0 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.1 98.3 8.6 30.1 211.2 280 54.3
274.8 126 166 1 482.7 645.4 252.2 233.3 93.3 43.7 214.8 625.5 483.7 274.5 6.3 202.9 107.3 266.2 15.1 9.7 4.7 660 29.9 22.2 12.9 9.6 7.8 6.4 5.1 5.0 5.0 2.5 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 107.3 12.1 32.2 234.1 280 49.6
population2
Stock of foreign nationals3 By country of origin Korea China (including Chinese Taipei) Brazil Philippines United States Other By status of residence Permanent residents4 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: Korea China Foreign labour force (estimates)5 Foreign residents with permission of employment by status of residence6 Specialist in humanities or international services Entertainer Engineer Skilled labour Instructor Intra-company transferee Professor Investor and business manager Religious activities Researcher Journalist Artist Medical services Legal and accounting services Total Trainees and Working Holiday Makers Estimates of students engaged in part time jobs Estimates of Japanese descents engaged in gainful activities7 Illegal Number of foreign nationals deported
1. 2. 3.
workers8
Excluding temporary visitors and re-entries. Registered population as of 1 October of the years indicated. Data are based on registered foreign nationals as of 31 December of the years indicated. The gures include foreigners staying in Japan for more than 90 days. 4. 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. 5. Estimates including illegal workers. Excluding permanent residents. 6. 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. 7. Estimates made by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 8. Estimates made by the Ministry of Justice on the basis of the number of overstayers. Sources: Ministry of Justice; Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Ministry of Labour.
164
OECD 1999
Japan
The slack labour market notwithstanding, the registered inflow of skilled foreign workers increased by almost 20% in 1997. Compared to other OECD countries their stock remains low however. Together with the other categories of foreign labour (those with a residence status permitting unrestricted employment, the majority of the trainees in the small and medium sized enterprises and the illegally employed) they account for less than 1% of the total labour force. Due in part to the implementation of a programme to dissuade employers from hiring them, the number of undocumented migrants has been in decline since 1993. It would appear that ethnic Japanese from South America and foreign trainees are increasingly taking their place. The sub-contracted employment of foreign workers has risen strongly recently to now account for almost 40% of the total. As flexibility is increasingly sought it can be expected to rise still further. Migration flows and changes in the foreign population Following a further strong rise in the inflow of those staying for more than 90 days (the registration of whom is obligatory under the Alien Registration Law), the recorded stock of foreign nationals stood at just under 1.5 million (1.18% of the total population) at the end of 1997, a rise of almost 5% on 1996 (see Table II.21). Koreans are the most numerous, accounting for over 40% of the total; their numbers are steadily and slowly declining however. Above the general trend increases in the next two nationalities, Chinese and Brazilian (each now accounting for approximately one sixth of the total stock), explain the major part of the overall increase. Entrants to Japan are assigned a residence status according to their economic activity in Japan or their personal status as a foreigner eligible to enter and reside there. In principle, permanent residence cannot be accorded immediately but rather after a fairly extensive period of stay. Numbering 625 450, permanent residents account for 42% of the foreign population. Of these, almost 90% are special permanent residents, i.e. those Koreans who had lost Japanese nationality on the basis of the Treaty of Peace with Japan, and their descendants who, born of foreign parents, are not automatically entitled to Japanese nationality. Those entering as long term residents (who have no restriction placed on their employment) numbered 65 000 in 1997 to bring their stock to 484 000, one third of the total foreign population. Slightly over half of these are the spouses or children of Japanese nationals. The remainder are ethnic Japanese, the grandchildren and later descendants of Japanese emigrants (the overwhelming majority from South America), the inflows of whom numbered 33 400 in 1997. Under a guideline issued by the Immigration Bureau in 1997, foreign nationals can now stay in Japan under the status of long term resident in order to support their children, legitimate or illegitimate, born conjointly of Japanese nationals. Entries of individuals with restricted permission to work totalled 94 000, an increase of just under 20% over the previous year. At the end of 1997 the total number of foreign nationals residing with this status was just over 107 000, an increase of just over 9% on 1996. The increases were broadly spread across employment categories; this includes those entering under the status of entertainer the number of whom having declined by 50% in 1995 due to a tightening of controls has since almost rebounded, the inflow in 1997 being just over three quarters of the 1994 figure. Entries of trainees numbered almost 50 000 in 1997, an increase of 9% on 1996. Official stock data are unavailable. A recent estimate has put the figure at 115 000. Naturalisations Naturalisations are continuing to increase. In 1997 there were over 15 000, almost three times the 1988 figure. Koreans account for almost two thirds and Chinese almost one third. The majority had previously possessed permanent resident status. Asylum Japan receives few applications for asylum. However, their number is showing a markedly upward trend. Having received a total of fewer than 1 200 applications during the period 1982-95, in 1996 147 applications were recorded, 242 in 1997 and 284 during the first eight months of 1998. China and Myanmar account for the majority. Since 1982 just over 200 applications have been accepted; in a further 106 cases the applicants were granted exceptional leave to remain.
OECD 1999
165
Illegal immigration Through the matching of embarkation and disembarkation cards the number of foreign nationals overstaying their legal period of stay has been estimated twice yearly since 1992. Continuing the trend observed since 1993, their number fell by 2% in 1997 to stand at 277 000 in January 1998. Koreans, Filipinos, Chinese and Thais together account for almost two thirds of the total. The falls across all the significant nationalities with the exception of the Philippines (the bucking of the general trend by this latter is almost certainly linked to the aforementioned imposition of controls on the entries of entertainers) can be attributed to tightened visa control, improved co-operation between the agencies charged with tackling the problem as well as to a publicity campaign dissuading employers from hiring illegal workers. Implementation of the May 1997 amendment to the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act which provides for the imposition of severe penalties on those found to have organised or abetted the smuggling of aliens has also had an impact. Just under 8 000 of the almost 50 000 deported in 1997 had entered without proper documentation (in 90% of cases without a passport), an almost 50% rise on 1996. Corresponding to the growing problem of illegal entry by boat almost 90% were from China. In view of the likelihood of further increases in unemployment in China as a result of the restructuring of State enterprises the Japanese authorities are considering introducing additional amendments to the Immigration Act in order to further counter the criminal organisations involved in clandestine immigration. Foreign workers Policy on the entry of foreign workers The scope for the acceptance of foreign workers is controlled by the Immigration Control and Refugees Recognition Act and other related immigration laws and regulations the implementation of which is the responsibility of the Ministry of Justice. Containing neither quota systems nor a labour market test, these laws adopt rather a positive list approach the requirements of which are set out in an Ordinance drawn-up by the Ministry of Justice following consideration of factors that might affect Japanese industry and the general welfare (Article 7): implicitly this includes consideration of labour market developments. Within this framework, the basic principles of current migration policy are set out in the Economic Plan (1996) and the Employment Counter Measures Plan (1996). According to these plans, which differ little from those set out in the recent past, Japan will readily accept foreigners possessing technological expertise, skills or knowledge or who engage in business which requires a knowledge of foreign culture not possessed by Japanese nationals. Those with lower levels of qualification, however, are not to be accepted. The ethnic Japanese, who enter under the status of long term resident rather than foreign worker, are not subject to this basic principle. Foreigners entering Japan for employment are given an authorised period of stay as stipulated by their entry category in the Immigration Act. They can apply for an extension of the period if they remain under the same circumstances. Japanese immigration policy, then, has neither a concept of permanent nor of temporary foreign worker. Foreign workers dependants (i.e. their spouses and unmarried minor children) are not in general authorised to work. Stock of foreign workers In spite of the recession, the Ministry of Labour estimates that the number of foreigners, with the exception of permanent residents, working in Japan increased by 5% in 1997 to approximately 660 000. This estimate includes illegal workers, for whom the number of overstayers (277 000) serves as a proxy. However, it does not take account those working in violation of their visa status, for example, language teachers working on tourist visas. Technical intern trainees (see below) are included but not general trainees. Three quarters of the aforementioned rise is attributable to the increase in the number of ethnic Japanese, the inflow of whom grew by 11% in 1997 to now account for over one third of the total stock.
OECD 1999
166
Japan
Table II.22.
Inows of foreigners by main categories and nationality, 1997, Japan

Thousands
Dependents Dependents Temporary Accompanying Designated Long-term Students Trainees of Japanese of permanent visitors dependents activities1 residents nationals residents
Other
Total
Asia Korea Chinese Taipei China Others Europe North America Oceania South America Africa Stateless Total
2 092.9 899.6 791.7 97.5 304.2 672.8 625.1 89.7 41.9 9.1 3.4 3 534.9
18.8 6.8 1.7 7.4 2.8 2.0 1.9 0.9 0.3 0.2 24.2
44.4 1.6 0.5 21.3 20.9 1.0 0.6 0.4 1.6 1.5 0.1 49.6
10.7 2.8 0.3 5.3 2.3 2.0 2.6 0.4 0.2 0.3 16.1
0.5 0.2 0.3 0.1 1.1 1.6 3.3
14.3 0.9 0.5 5.9 7.0 0.5 1.1 0.2 15.4 0.1 31.6
0.3 0.1 0.1 0.3
7.4 0.1 0.1 5.8 1.4 0.1 25.8 33.4
54.2 5.5 1.8 6.4 40.4 27.9 27.0 3.9 2.0 1.4
2 243.4 917.5 796.8 149.8 379.3 706.3 659.5 97.0 87.3 12.6 3.5
116.4 3 809.7
1. Constituted mostly of Working Holiday Makers. Source: Ministry of Justice.
According to the most recently collated results of the reports requested by and voluntarily submitted to the Reporting System on the Employment of Foreigners, established in 1993 by the Ministry of Labour, those of June 1997, there had been no significant changes over the previous twelve months in the occupational distribution of foreign workers: 35% of those directly employed were in the service sector and just over 60% in the manufacturing sector. Those engaged in subcontracted employment now account for just under 40% of the foreign workers. This proportion has been rising continually since 1994, the first year that data on them were compiled and when they accounted for just over one quarter of the foreign workforce. Foreign trainees and technical interns Accompanying the growth in the direct investment by Japanese companies in other Asian countries the employees of their overseas affiliates or joint ventures have been coming to Japan as trainees since the 1960s. The companies three primary objectives have been to compensate for their foreign employees lack of basic education and general training, to enhance their understanding of the companies products and production processes and to encourage their long-term commitment. Since 1990, small and medium sized enterprises without an overseas presence have been permitted to bring in overseas trainees. They typically do so through intermediary bodies such as Chambers of Commerce and employers associations; this exempts them from the 5% ceiling on the proportion of trainees to regular workers. The Technical Internship Training Programme, an extension of the general trainee scheme, was introduced in 1993 under the supervision of the Japan International Training Co-operation Organisation (JITCO). Within the framework of this programme, regular trainees, who pass certain skill tests after a period of training, can become technical intern trainees thereby changing their status of residence to come under the designated activities category and so becoming entitled to the same rights as their Japanese colleagues vis--vis the labour standard law, the minimum wage law and other labour-related laws. In addition to possessing good working skills, technical intern trainees play an important role in supervising and assisting the regular trainees. In 1997 their maximum period of stay was extended from two years to three. JITCO has concluded agreements as a record of discussions with the governments of China, India, Indonesia, Laos, Peru, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam regarding the exchange of information on trainees and on sending organisations. At 49 600 the inflow of trainees in 1997 was 9% higher than in 1996 (see Table II.22). China accounted for 43%, only slightly less than the combined figure for the five next most important countries (Indonesia, Korea, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand). The number of regular trainees permitted to change their status of residence
OECD 1999
167
from trainee to technical intern is increasing rapidly, the number in 1997 (6 300) being almost equal to the total of the preceding four years. Since the start of the programme slightly less than 60% of those accepted were from China and just under 30% were from Indonesia. Japanese nationals residing abroad Due largely to the increasing scale of intra-company transfers, the number of Japanese nationals residing abroad has been rising strongly since 1987. The total number of those residing in foreign countries for three months or longer and who had reported to a Japanese embassy or consulate exceeded 780 000 in 1997. Permanent residents, the proportion of whom is slowly declining, accounted for just over one third of the total. North America accounts for almost 40% of the total, South America just under 30% and Asia slightly over 20%. Policy developments Intra-company transfers In line with the growing world-wide trend towards an increased liberalisation of the regulations governing the movements of highly skilled workers, the maximum period of stay for intra-company transferees (5 years) was abolished in January 1998: transferees may now apply for an extension of their permit. Programmes to encourage the use of the proper channels for obtaining employment In order to discourage illegal migration and to increase the proportion of technical and highly skilled workers in the inflows from Asia and South America, the Ministry of Labour has begun an information dissemination programme in the countries of these regions. The information concerns the labour market situation for foreign workers, Japans job placement system and other related matters. Within the framework of this programme seminars were held and pamphlets were distributed in Thailand in the 1998 fiscal year.
KOREA
Introduction Towards the end of 1997, in the wake of the financial crises affecting the majority of the other economies in its region, the Korean economy moved into deep recession. In 1998 output fell by 5.5%. It is expected to increase in 1999 as domestic demand bottoms out, with a stronger pick up likely in 2000. The timing and strength of the recovery, though, will depend to some extent on developments elsewhere in Asia: export growth has decelerated markedly in recent months, reflecting sharp declines in shipments to Japan and other Asian countries. The capacity and willingness of banks to lend, which have been eroded by the rise in non-performing loans and the need to meet capital adequacy ratios, will also be of determining influence. Unemployment has quadrupled since the beginning of the crisis, reaching 8.5% in January 1999. The issue of foreign workers, of whom the importation and the employment (the vast majority unskilled, the majority illegal) had hitherto been a source of some controversy despite their small scale, has ceased for the time being to be a one of political moment. Although social and political pressure to clamp down on illegal migrant workers and their employers has increased, it would appear that trade unions are not demanding that the legal employment of foreigners be scaled back. The number of skilled foreign workers, small prior to the crisis, has sharply decreased. As for the unskilled, whose numbers have declined to a greater degree, there is evidence to suggest that in spite of the high level of open unemployment and the generally weak insurance coverage there remains unsatisfied demand on the domestic labour market for low-wage workers prepared to perform the more disagreeable jobs.
OECD 1999
168
Korea
Table II.23.
Stock of foreign population in Korea by nationality, 1988, 1990, 1995-1998

Thousands
1988 1990 1995 1996 1997 1998
China of which: Chinese with Korean descents United States Chinese Taipei Japan Indonesia Vietnam Other Total
11 24 4 6 45
14 24 5 0 6 50
19 7 22 23 9 3 6 27 110
27 9 26 23 12 10 10 40 149
35 12 28 23 14 14 13 50 177
31 .. 26 23 13 10 8 37 148
Note: Foreigners staying in Korea for more than 90 days and registered in population registers as stated by the law. Source: Ministry of Justice.
Foreign population The rate of growth in the number of foreign nationals, staying more than 90 days and registered as required under the Emigration and Immigration Act, having remained low through to 1991 increased rapidly following the 1992 normalisation of diplomatic relations with China. This normalisation led to substantial increases both in the inflows from China of Chinese and of ethnic Koreans and in the number of trainees entering from other neighbouring countries. By 1997 the foreign population had reached 177 000, still less than half of 1% of the total population however. In 1998, the number of foreign nationals decreased by 29 000, a fall of over 16% (see Table II.23) As with the previous increases, all nationalities with the exception of the Taipei Chinese recorded falls in their numbers. The stability in the numbers of this latter community is attributable to the fact that it is composed largely of immigrants from China who arrived during the first half of the century and their descendants who, born of foreign parents, are not automatically entitled to Korean nationality. Given that there has been little intermarriage and that most Taipei Chinese born in Korea attend Taipei Chinese-only schools and so retain their culture and language, it is not surprising that the children tend not to seek Korean nationality. Foreign workers There are three types of migrant worker in Korea: the legally employed; de facto employees accepted under the industrial and technical training program (ITTP); and the illegally employed. All categories combined, they accounted prior to the crisis for less than 1% of the total workforce. The legal migrant workers are comprised solely of professionals, teachers, technicians and entertainers. The use of workers-cum-trainees is largely confined to areas of the manufacturing sector such as textiles, electronics, chemicals, toys and musical instruments. Illegal workers are typically found in unskilled positions in the construction sector and areas of manufacturing and service sectors. The total stock of foreign workers declined by 30% during 1998. Disaggregated by employment status, the declines were negatively correlated with skill level and degree of employment protection: the number of skilled workers fell by almost a quarter, trainees by just under 30% and illegal workers by one third (see Table II.24). Skilled workers Reflecting Koreas increasing integration into the global economy and its consequent need to facilitate the entry of skilled professionals both to render foreign direct investment projects more attractive and to promote the acquisition of expertise, the inflow of skilled workers accelerated through to the first half of 1997. Accompanying the deterioration in the economic climate later in the year their entries then went into decline (see Table II.24). The decrease in the number of technicians in 1998 was the largest of all the categories. Although
OECD 1999
169
Table II.24.
Foreign workers in Korea by category, 1995-1998

Thousands
1995 1996 1997 1998
Skilled workers Language teachers Other teachers Entertainers Researchers Technicians Other professionals Others Trainees by recruting agencies Korean Federation of small businesses Companies investing abroad Others Estimates of the number of overstayers1 China Bangladesh Philippines Mongolia Vietnam Pakistan Sri Lanka Others Total (skilled workers, trainees and overstayers)
1. Most of the overstayers are presumed to be working illegally. Source: Ministry of Justice.
8.2 4.2 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.6 0.2 1.7 38.8 .. .. .. 81.9 36.5 5.5 10.3 .. .. 3.0 2.1 24.5 128.9
13.4 7.5 0.8 1.0 0.5 0.9 0.3 2.4 68.0 46.5 21.6 129.1 50.6 9.6 14.6 3.5 4.4 5.5 1.6 39.3 210.5
14.7 7.6 0.9 1.4 0.7 1.0 0.3 2.8 90.4 61.9 26.9 1.6 148.1 57.8 9.0 13.9 7.6 6.4 5.9 2.2 45.2 253.1
11.1 4.9 0.8 1.1 0.6 0.5 0.3 2.9 64.2 43.3 19.8 1.1 99.5 55.6 7.5 6.4 5.6 3.7 3.1 1.1 16.6 174.9
language teachers, mostly from English-speaking countries, still compose the largest share at just less than half the total their numbers also fell back sharply. In 1997 the government, in order to stimulate foreign direct investment, not only relaxed the rules surrounding it but also revised the Immigration and Emigration Law to abolish the ceiling on the period of stay granted to foreign skilled workers. It also simplified the administrative procedures governing the issuing of their visas. We can therefore expect their inflows to pick up quite rapidly. Trainees Created in 1992, the initial purpose of Koreas trainee programme (the ITTP) was to permit foreign workers employed by the overseas subsidiaries of Korean firms to come to Korea for up to one year in order to upgrade their skills. Then, as now, unskilled foreign workers were not permitted to work in Korea. Later, the programme was extended to medium and small size companies in the manufacturing sector suffering from labour shortages; de facto, their trainees are workers. In this way, the training programme has effectively become a programme of unskilled labour importation. The maximum period of stay has been extended twice, in late 1993 and in 1996, to bring it up to three years. In 1997, after a great deal of nation-wide debate concerning the possible introduction of a work permit system, a revision was made to the ITTP allowing trainees to be employed as legal workers upon completion of a certain period of training. Two thirds of the trainees admitted under the ITTP do so through the Korea Federation of Small Businesses (KFSB). Almost negligible numbers are admitted through the National Federation of Fisheries Co-operatives (NFFC) which has been permitted to bring in trainees since 1997 and latterly the Korean Construction Association (KCA). The remainder are selected by the overseas subsidiaries of Korean firms (see Table II.24). Each of the three federations requires approval from its relevant Ministry for the firms it selects to receive trainees and the numbers allocated to them.
OECD 1999
170
Korea
In 1998 the government froze the quota for trainees. This proved to be unnecessary: due to lack of demand there were at the end of 1998 fewer than 65 000 trainees, a 30% fall on the corresponding figure for 1997. This decline was broadly uniform in aggregate across the small businesses and the international companies. Illegal workers As wages increased and labour shortages became more severe from the early 1990s onwards, the employment of illegal migrant workers rapidly increased. The figures presented in Table II.24 and discussed below are based on the assumption that all those and only those overstaying their visa are illegally employed; they do not include those who are working in violation of their visa status, for example private sector language teachers working on tourist visas. (In view of Koreas geographical situation and its uncommonly tight border control, very few will have entered the country clandestinely.) In 1992 they accounted for almost three quarters of all foreigners working in Korea. After rising to over 80% in 1993 the proportion then fell back to just under 60% in 1994. The proportion has since remained remarkably stable reflecting, it would be reasonable to suppose, the influence of the ITTP. The number of Chinese overstayers declined only slightly in 1998 whereas other nationalities registered a total decline of just over 50% (see Table II.24). Over half of the Chinese are believed to have Korean ancestors and are understood to benefit from the existence of a firmly embedded social network. Policy developments Amnesty for overstayers and measures to combat the illegal employment of foreigners The Ministry of Justice, having taken the view that the success of any direct measures implemented to combat the illegal employment of foreigners, the overwhelming majority of whom are overstayers, would be limited by the disincentive presented by the immigration fines they would incur if caught attempting to leave the country, a considerable risk given the uncommonly tight border controls, announced in December 1997 that until the end of March 1998 they would be allowed to leave the country without having to face this penalty. This amnesty period was subsequently extended through to the end of July. In August 1998 the number of overstayers had fallen to 92 000 from the estimated 148 000 present at the beginning of the year The direct measures implemented aimed on the one hand to facilitate their substitution for legal workers and on the other to render their continued employment more costly. Financial support for the purchase of new machinery was made available to small and medium sized companies in the hope that increased capital investment would render employment in the companies less disagreeable to nationals. Thus far this policy has met with scant success. Few companies have taken up the funding, dissuaded, it would appear, by previous difficulties in retaining nationals. In those that have, the number of foreign workers replaced has been extremely modest. The penalties on the employers of illegal migrants, on private recruitment agencies (these have long since been prohibited from dealing with migrant workers) and on illegal migrants themselves were raised. The government also appointed labour officers to investigate migration-related issues. This too would appear to have had scant impact. By April 1999 the number of overstayers had risen to 111 000. In response to the new figures the government announced that a second amnesty would take place during May 1999. Draft law on the Status of Overseas Koreans In 1998 the government presented a draft law on the Emigration, Immigration and Legal Status of Overseas Koreans. Overseas Koreans are defined as those living abroad who possessed Korean nationality but rescinded it in order to take up a foreign nationality or who have Korean ancestors but have never themselves possessed Korean nationality. Under this draft law, persons in these two categories would be permitted to stay in Korea for two years with a possibility of extension and would be permitted to visit Korea any number of times. They would be permitted to take up employment and to engage in other economic activities such as acquiring real estate. Those staying
OECD 1999
171
more than 90 days would be eligible for voting rights. Finally, despite not having Korean nationality, those taking up work as civil servants, teachers or soldiers would be entitled to receive a state pension. Although the draft law was not passed it has not been abandoned. Should it be passed it can be expected to have a huge impact on Koreas migration flows: reports indicate that approximately seven million people come within its scope.
LUXEMBOURG
Introduction Luxembourg is the smallest of the OECD countries, covering 2 586 km2 and with a population of 423 700. In 1998, one resident in three was foreign and cross-border workers accounted for one-quarter of the total workforce. Like other European countries, Luxembourg has passed legislation regulating immigration, but it is currently promoting the integration of foreigners through innovative cultural and vocational training programmes. Migration flows and resident foreign population Since 1990, the annual flow of foreigners has averaged some 10 000 arrivals and 6 000 departures (see Table II.25), although net migration was below 4 000 in 1996 and 1997. Nearly 90% of immigrants come from European countries. The Portuguese are still by far the largest group of foreigners living in Luxembourg, even though the number of new arrivals has been falling since 1993. Based on the initial estimates available, the foreign resident population at 1 January 1998 was nearly 148 000, out of a total population of 423 700. Luxembourg is the OECD country with the highest proportion of foreigners; they accounted for just under 35% of its population at 1 January 1998. Since the end of the nineteenth century, this proportion has steadily increased. Foreigners accounted for barely 3% of the population in 1875 and 10% at the end of the Second World War. The structure of the foreign resident population by nationality has changed over the years. Between the end of the Second World War and the 1970s, Italians constituted the largest foreign group. They were subsequently overtaken by the Portuguese, whose numbers increased steadily during the 1980s to reach 54 500 at 1 January 1998, that is to say slightly less than 37% of the total foreign population. The Portuguese are followed by the Italians, French, Belgians and Germans, in that order (see Table II.25). Over the past twenty years, the difference in the fertility rate between Luxembourg women and foreigners has narrowed. In 1970, the average number of children per woman (the fertility index) was 2.37 for foreign women and 1.88 for Luxembourg women; in 1997 the figures were 1.74 and 1.69 respectively. Since 1990, the proportion of mixed marriages has increased, from 22% in 1990 to nearly 28% in 1997. This increase is essentially due to marriages between Luxembourg men and foreign women. Naturalisations The annual number of naturalisations has ranged between 700 and 800 since 1993 (749 in 1997). The temporary increase observed at the end of the 1980s was due to a change in the legislation on nationality (Act of 11 December 1986 lowering the required age to 18). In theory, some 50 000 foreign residents meet the criteria required for naturalisation, but have not applied for it. This is largely because 90% of the resident foreign population is composed of EU nationals. They have little to gain from acquiring Luxembourg nationality, unless they wish to apply for a post in the Luxembourg civil service or become actively involved in politics. Moreover, Luxembourg does not allow dual nationality, which means that applicants must give up their previous citizenship.
OECD 1999
172
OECD 1999
Net migration Portugal France Belgium Germany Other countries Foreign population by main Portugal Italy France Belgium Germany Spain Other countries Mixed marriages % of total marriages
Table II.25. Current gures on the components of total population change, on migratory ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Luxembourg
1994 1995 1996 1997 1994 1995 1996 1997
Components of total population change Natural increase of which: foreigners Net migration of which: foreigners Population (31 December) of which: foreigners Migration ows by country of origin/destination Inows Portugal France Belgium Germany Other countries
1.7 1.7 4.0 3.9 406.6 132.5 10.1 2.4 1.3 0.9 0.8 4.8 4.0 1.2 0.4 0.4 0.3 1.7
1.6 .. 4.6 4.7 412.8 138.1 10.3 2.4 1.5 0.9 0.6 4.9 4.6 1.2 0.6 0.4 0.2 2.1 138.1 51.5 19.8 15.0 11.8 9.7 2.8 27.5 0.8 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.6 26.8
1.8 1.9 3.7 4.7 418.3 142.8 10.0 2.0 1.5 1.1 0.7 4.7 3.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.2 1.6 142.8 53.1 19.8 15.7 12.4 9.9 2.8 29.1 0.8 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.5 24.4
1.6 1.9 3.8 3.7 423.7 147.7 10.4 1.9 1.7 1.2 0.7 4.9 3.8 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.2 1.6 147.7 54.5 19.9 16.5 13.2 10.0 2.9 30.7 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.6 27.6
Inows of foreign of which: women Inows by region or country of origin EU of which: France Belgium Germany Portugal Italy Other countries Inows by major industry division Agriculture, forestry Extractive and manufacturing industries Building Trade, banks, insurances Transport, communications Hotels Personal services Other services Inows by status of residence Resident workers Cross-border workers Stock of workers (excluding unemployed) Total employment (including nationals)4 Breakdown by nationality (%)5 Luxembourgers Resident and cross-border foreigners Stock of cross-border workers by nationality4 France (% of total cross-borders) Belgium (% of total cross-borders) Germany (% of total cross-borders) Job-seekers (national denition) of which: foreigners (% of total job seekers)
workers3
16.2 5.7 14.7 6.0 2.5 2.5 2.2 0.6 1.5 0.2 1.1 1.6 7.5 1.0 1.9 0.3 2.4 5.5 10.7 207.9
16.5 5.9 15.5 6.7 2.6 2.2 2.2 0.5 1.0 0.2 1.3 1.8 7.4 1.1 1.9 0.3 2.5 5.7 10.7 213.5
18.3 6.7 17.2 8.1 2.9 2.5 2.1 0.6 1.1 0.2 1.3 1.6 9.3 1.4 1.8 0.1 2.5 5.6 12.6 219.5
18.6 6.4 17.7 8.6 3.0 2.6 1.8 0.6 0.9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 226.5
nationality1
132.5 49.4 19.7 14.3 11.3 9.5 2.7 25.4 nationality2 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.5 23.2
46 54
51.3 51.0 30.5 18.5 4.6 53.6
44 56
55.5 51.5 30.5 18.0 5.1 54.3
44 56
59.6 51.7 30.0 18.3 5.7 57.7
41 59
64.4 52.3 29.5 18.2 6.4 57.9
Acquisition of nationality by country of former Italy France Germany Belgium Other countries
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. 5. Salaried workers as of 31 March of each year. Sources: STATEC; Inspection gen erale de la Securit e sociale (IGSS); Administration de lEmploi.
Luxembourg
173
Refugees and asylum seekers Until 1987, most asylum seekers in Luxembourg came as part of quotas accepted by the government under international refugee resettlement programmes. Thus, refugees from Chile were accepted in 1974, followed, between 1977 and 1980, by three contingents from Vietnam and Cambodia. Between 1982 and 1987, three further contingents were accepted: from Poland in 1982, Iran in 1986, and Vietnam in 1987. Since 1988, the number of asylum applications has fluctuated considerably. The introduction in March 1992 of an ad hoc humanitarian status for refugees from the former Yugoslavia (except for citizens of Kosovo and Montenegro) explains the reduction in the number of asylum seekers falling under the Geneva Convention. Beneficiaries receive social assistance from the government, free medical care, clothing and a work permit valid for the length of stay corresponding to their status. From the beginning of the war Yugoslavia in 1992 over 3 000 nationals of the former Yugoslavia had registered by 1 November 1995. Many 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). Asylum applications have been rising since 1996, mainly due to the arrival of asylum seekers from Albania and Kosovo, but also from Montenegro, Bosnia and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. The trend rose sharply in 1998, with 1 600 new applications (compared with 400 in 1997). Employment of foreigners In 1997, Luxembourgs employed labour force in was estimated at 226 500, of whom slightly over 28% were cross-border workers living in France, Belgium or Germany. Employment of residents (both nationals and foreigners) continued to rise slowly because of continuing immigration and the increase in the female participation rate. The proportion of foreign wage-earners has continued to increase over recent years. Thus, at 31 March 1998 foreigners accounted for nearly 60% of the total of 217 000 wage-earners, as compared with 46% in 1990. The slowdown in economic growth and the increase in unemployment since 1991 (3.6% in 1997) have not yet led to a fall in the numbers of foreign and cross-border workers. In 1997, new hires of foreign workers reached a little over 18 600 (see Table II.25), but it should be noted that the number of newly hired Portuguese fell over the last two years, as did Portuguese immigration. The breakdown of workers by sector of activity shows that a majority of workers in the primary sector are foreign. Cross-border workers are more numerous in the secondary sector as well as in transport. The majority of foreigners in employment are either blue collar or office workers in the private sector. Since the beginning of the 1970s, the number of cross-border workers employed in Luxembourg has increased considerably, from 7 200 in 1970 to 64 400 in 1997. Whereas in 1970 the majority of cross-border workers lived in Belgium, the relative share of these workers by country of origin began to change in 1992. Today, more than half of such workers live in France, 30% in Belgium and 18% in Germany. A study published in January 1995 based on social security records made it possible to identify certain characteristics of these cross-border workers. Most are wage-earners. More than two-thirds are men, although women are relatively more numerous in the category of office workers, as far as cross-border workers from France and Germany are concerned. German cross-border workers tend to be more frequently employed in the construction and public works sector and the French in business services and real estate. In 1997, there were some 8 000 officials and international civil servants working in the European institutions located in Luxembourg; they are not counted in Luxembourgs labour force. Policy developments A number of measures have been introduced recently to supplement the legislation and regulations governing the employment of wage-earners who not European Economic Area nationals. The impact of these new provisions is not yet clearly reflected in the available statistics. Of the considerable legislation passed during recent years, the following pieces are worthy of note:
OECD 1999
174
Mexico
The Act of 28 January 1994 laying down the procedure for electing representatives of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to the European Parliament. This Act specifies the conditions under which resident foreigners from other European Union countries are able to participate in the elections. The Act of 4 March 1994 abolished the last remaining restrictions that previously prevented foreigners from becoming founding members of non-profit associations. The 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 of the European Economic Area. The Acts of 23 December 1994 are of fundamental importance in Luxembourgs constitutional history 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. These constitutional amendments were taken into account by the Act of 3 July 1995, which abolished the requirement that candidates for elections to trade associations be of Luxembourg nationality. The Act of 18 August 1995 includes several provisions updating the basic law on immigration (enacted 1972) with regard to foreigners entry, stay, medical examination and labour market access. These new provisions took account in particular of the entry into force of the 1990 Schengen Agreement as well as the provisions applicable to Member States of the European Union and the European Economic Area. The Act of 28 December 1995 established the procedure whereby residents who are nationals of other European Union countries can participate in local elections. The Act of 19 July 1997 increased the sanctions applicable for the offence of slander or libel motivated by the victims membership of an ethnic group, nation, race or particular religion. Other legislation concerns the integration of foreign children through education. The objective is one school for all but with special measures for foreigners with difficulties, notably linguistic ones. The trilingual basis of education (Luxembourg, French and German) is reaffirmed as a cornerstone of national identity, but special teaching methods are used with foreigners 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 specified that foreign pupils are to be integrated into Luxembourg schools with due regard to their native culture and mother tongue (primarily Portuguese). In a ministerial circular of May 1998, the Ministry of National Education proposed the introduction of an early education project that would become mandatory in all communes as from 2001. One of the objectives of this project is to familiarise foreign children with the language and culture of Luxembourg. This innovative education programme is still optional for communes during the 1998-99 period and is being introduced as a pilot project under the supervision of the Ministry of National Education.
MEXICO
Introduction The difficult economic situation that Mexico has been experiencing since the December 1994 crisis has prevented any narrowing of wage and income differentials with the United States. Both authorised and unauthorised emigration to the United States are therefore continuing (see Table II.26) The two countries have endeavoured to act jointly to control the flows, combat illegal immigration and labour trafficking and promote the integration of immigrant populations. The application since 1994 of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is encouraging increased movements of American and Canadian business people to Mexico. Mexico is having to cope with immigration flows of refugees and undocumented workers from Central America, which are as yet not properly identified or controlled.
OECD 1999
175
Emigration For several decades the principal destination of Mexican migrants has been the United States. In 1996, it was estimated that between 7 and 7.3 million Mexicans were living in the United States, of whom approximately 2.3 million were undocumented. In 1996-97, migrant workers in the United States were almost exclusively male; their average age was a little over 30. More than half had jobs in Mexico before emigrating and came from urban areas. One worker in two was not in possession of a work permit at the time of entering the country. From a study entitled the Zapata Canyon Project, which was conducted over a period of ten years and was based on personal interviews with prospective emigrants in the main border areas, it can be seen that flow of undocumented migrants to the United States is not diminishing. The study put forward two possible explanations for this persistence: that the host country lacks the resources needed to restrict such undocumented migration or that it has instead a special interest in maintaining this form of migration. American demand for undocumented Mexican labour is permanent and quite strong as regards low skilled workers. In 1998, more than one-third of undocumented Mexican workers were employed in agriculture, a quarter in the construction sector, nearly 15% in industry and almost as many in domestic services (see Table II.27). Immigration Traditionally a country of emigration, Mexico is now receiving a growing number of immigrants, most of them from other Central American countries. Immigration flows (including movements of tourists and temporary visitors) have been increasing steadily since the early 1990s, recorded inflows reaching some 10.5 million in 1997. (Outgoing movements, on the other hand, totalled over 8.5 million.) Although these flows reflect the intensity and steady growth of cross-border population movements, they do not reflect the reality of foreign migration to Mexico. Subtracting from these the inflows of tourists, entries of foreigners numbered approximately 480 000 in 1997. Of these, 46 000 were foreigners with the status of permanent resident, approximately 27 000 were immigrants wishing to settle in Mexico, 158 000 were temporary visitors, 85 000 were foreigners in transit and 113 000 were United States and Canadian nationals taking advantage of the provisions of NAFTA. In order to counter the increase in undocumented immigration flows, the Mexican authorities are seeking to tighten border controls. They are also carrying out forced departures and are turning back some would-be entrants. In 1997, some 86 000 people were expelled for illegal residence in Mexico, or were refused entry because they had no identity papers. Most of the foreigners concerned were from Central America (Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador in particular). Temporary entries of business persons in the context of NAFTA In the context of NAFTA, Mexico has since 1994 had a specific document (FMN) to be completed by professionals and business people entering from the United States and Canada. Nearly 113 000 entries were recorded under this heading in 1997, compared with 91 000 in 1996 and 64 000 in 1995. The majority were male and, because of the geographical proximity of the United States and the intensity of trade in goods and services between the two countries, most of them were American nationals. Business people predominated in the entries under this
OECD 1999
Table II.26. Mexican emigration to the United States, 1911-19971

Thousands
Period Numbers
Of which: immigrants who beneted from the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)
1911-20 1921-30 1931-40 1941-50 1951-60 1961-70 1971-80 1981-90 1991-96 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
1.
219.0 459.3 22.3 60.6 299.8 453.9 640.3 1 655.8 1 800.7 405.7 680.2 947.9 214.1 126.6 111.4 90.0 163.7 146.9
962.7 1 042.3 339.2 623.5 894.9 122.5 17.5 4.4 3.0 3.6 ..
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, 1997 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, forthcoming.
176
Mexico
heading, followed by scientific and medical specialists, company transferees and, finally, traders and investors. In 1996 and 1997, more than half were engineers, architects, manufacturers and businessmen. Refugees With the participation of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the Mexican Commission for assistance to refugees has given humanitarian aid as well as assistance for education and health purposes to Guatemalan refugees in Mexico. More than 39 000 of them have returned to Guatemala, but 25 000 remain in the 113 camps set up in the states of Chiapas, Campeche and Quintana Roo. Most of these refugees were born in Mexico and are descendants of the first wave of refugees. In response to the wishes of the majority of them to stay in Mexico, the General Population Law was amended in 1996 creating the status of asimilado (assimilated immigrant). This enables them to settle and take up employment or engage in business. In August 1996, a programme for the settlement of migrants was introduced in order to promote the integration of Guatemalan refugees living in the states of Campeche, Quintana Roo and Chiapas. Under this programme, official documents are issued to these refugees allowing them to travel freely within Mexico, take up employment or engage in business and, possibly, settle in another state. The programme also allows them to apply for Mexican nationality. With the help of the European Community and the UNHCR, the government has also drawn up development programmes for the states of Campeche and Quintana Roo, where the refugee camps are situated. The camps will be considered legally as towns and incorporated in Mexicos municipal and state jurisdictions. This means that the Guatemalans who decide to stay in Mexico will be able to settle there and become owners of the land they work. The three thousand refugee families living in Chiapas were given three choices: voluntary
Table II.27.
Socio-economic characteristics of undocumented Mexican immigrants to the United States, 1988, 1990, 1996-1998
Percentages
1988 1990 1996 1997 1998
Sex Men Women Age Less than 20 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 and over Level of education Less than elementary Elementary Secondary More than secondary No answer Characteristics of last job in Mexico Farm work Job in a city Unemployed No answer Have you already had a job in the United States? Yes No No answer
Source:
85.6 14.4 18.7 31.4 22.9 27.0 38.8 25.3 23.7 12.1 0.1 27.5 52.9 19.2 0.4 46.6 52.9 0.5
86.1 13.9 17.8 32.4 28.0 21.8 23.6 34.5 31.2 10.6 0.1 28.3 54.0 17.7 0.6 44.2 55.4 0.4
97.4 2.6 9.0 26.6 34.5 29.8 17.6 42.7 34.1 5.6 0.1 37.4 58.0 4.5 0.1 49.3 50.7
97.4 2.6 9.0 22.8 32.6 35.6 11.2 45.9 37.6 6.2 0.1 35.6 60.7 3.6 0.1 46.0 53.9 0.1
96.0 4.0 8.4 21.0 33.2 37.4 11.5 45.9 36.5 6.0 0.1 38.0 58.0 3.9 0.1 42.6 57.4
177
Project Zapata Canyon. Survey of ows of undocumented Mexican immigrants as they cross the border with the United States. El Colegio de la Frontera Norte.
OECD 1999
repatriation, integration where they are or settlement in another Mexican state. Most of the families have opted for the third choice. Policy developments The object of Mexicos migration policy is to control and facilitate migration flows, draw up and apply measures that are consistent with the countrys international commitments and in compliance with human rights, and guarantee Mexicos interests by both strengthening its security and fostering the kind of migration that will benefit the country. Mexico has introduced a number of humanitarian measures, such as the creation of groups responsible for protecting migrants, the setting up of consultations procedures with neighbouring Central American countries, the amendment of the General Population Law with the object of facilitating family reunion and the strengthening of the Paisano programme for return migrants. Mexico has facilitated the entry or settlement of certain categories of migrant. In 1997, permanent resident status was granted to nearly 3 000 persons, an increase of almost 50% on the previous year. Entry into Mexico was facilitated for business people from 33 countries, including the United States and Canada, as well as Bolivia, Colombia, Costa Rica and Venezuela. Entry conditions for nationals of certain Central and Eastern European countries, such as the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia have also been simplified. Information programmes have been set up for temporary agricultural workers and for border residents of Guatemala and Belize. In July 1998, the countries party to the Tuxtla Dialogue and the Consultation Mechanism agreed to promote the gradual simplification of migration procedures in order to facilitate the movement of persons. Mexico announced at the time a series of measures aimed at nationals of Central American countries. These included having travel agencies issue the forms to be completed by tourists, registering tourists and business people for a period of five or ten years (which will simplify entry procedures for subsequent visits) and providing information for carriers and travel agencies and also for students. As part of the dialogue between Mexico and the United States on migration questions, which was institutionalised by the Binational Commission, a programme was set up to facilitate the removal to the border of undocumented Mexicans. In 1997, nearly 880 000 Mexicans were removed to the border, a higher figure than that of 1996. It would seem, however, that because of the unpromising prospects for economic growth over the short term, illegal migration to the United States will continue, especially if demand for unskilled labour persists in agriculture. Mexico would like to see increased dialogue and co-operation between the two countries on migration questions. It would also like these contacts to be extended to cover other issues such as development, economic integration, social and cultural ties in border areas and the functioning of binational labour markets.
NETHERLANDS
Introduction In 1998 GDP grew by a further 3.7%. This was the third consecutive year in which growth was above the annual average for the previous ten years (2.8%). The labour market situation improved and the unemployment rate declined. The fall in the number of job seekers in 1998 was the steepest recorded since 1970. Migration and settlement At the start of the 1990s the annual inflow of migrants (foreigners and Dutch nationals) was of the order of 120 000. This number fell in 1994 and 1995, rising again to nearly 110 000 in 1997. In the first six months of 1998 immigration was up slightly from the same period a year earlier. In 1997, arrivals of Dutch nationals (mostly from
OECD 1999
178
Netherlands
Chart II.11.
Migration flows and components of foreign population change, 1980-1997, Netherlands Thousands
B. Flows of asylum seekers
Requests and grants3
A.
Migration flows1
Emigration of foreigners Emigration of nationals Net migration, adjusted figures2
Nationals and foreigners Immigration of foreigners Immigration of nationals Total net migration 90 75 60 45 30 15 0 1980 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 1986 87 88 89
New requests for asylum Total grants of asylum
Total requests for asylum heard 90 75 60 45 30 15 0
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
C.
Components of foreign population change

Natural increase Naturalisation
Total change Net migration4 Statistical adjustment 90 60 30 0 -30 -60 -90 1980 83 85 87 89
1.
91
93
95
97
Data are taken from population registers, which include asylum seekers living in private households. 2. The data include net administrative corrections. 3. 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. 4. Figures have not been adjusted to include net administrative corrections. Sources: Central Bureau of Statistics; Ministry of Justice.
the Dutch West Indies) increased, while those of foreigners decreased. Entries of foreigners from the European Union, Turkey and Morocco rose again slightly. For non-EU nationals the main pathway to permanent settlement in the Netherlands is family reunion. Between 1990 and 1996 emigration flows (foreigners and Dutch nationals) rose steadily, before declining in 1997. Outflows of Dutch nationals increased until 1997, while those of foreigners have remained fairly stable throughout the 1990s (see Chart II.11). The continuing buoyancy of the Dutch economy largely explains the decrease in outflows and the increase in inflows of Dutch nationals. The positive net migration balance for foreigners (+55 000) breaks down between the traditional inflows of migrants from the European Union, Turkey, Morocco and Surinam, and inflows of an increasingly diverse range of other nationals and refugees. Arrivals from Central and Eastern European countries
OECD 1999
179
Table II.28.
Current gures on migratory ows and stocks of total population and labour force in the Netherlands
1994 1995 1996 1997 1994 1995 1996 1997
Migration ows1 Total population Inows Outows Net migration Net administrative corrections2 Adjusted total net migration gures Dutch nationals Inows Outows Net migration Foreigners Inows Outows Net migration of which: European Union Former Yugoslavia Turkey Morocco Surinam Stock of population3 Total population Total foreign population of which: Morocco Turkey Germany United Kingdom Former Yugoslavia Naturalisations Total of which: Turkey Morocco Surinam Former Yugoslavia European Union Naturalisation rate (%) Refugees and asylum seekers New requests for asylum Total requests for asylum heard Total grants of asylum Expulsions of which: asylum seekers
99.3 62.2 37.2 17.0 20.0 30.9 39.4 8.5 68.4 22.7 45.7 5.8 8.1 2.7 2.0 2.4
96.1 63.3 32.8 18.0 15.0 29.1 41.6 12.5 67.0 21.7 45.3 6.0 7.1 3.5 1.9 1.4
108.7 65.3 43.4 22.0 21.0 31.6 42.9 11.3 77.2 22.4 54.8 8.6 3.0 4.9 3.2 2.4
Labour force Total foreign employment4 109.9 % of total foreign population 62.2 47.6 Dutch nationals born in the Netherlands 17.0 Working age population 31.0 Labour force Employment 33.1 Unemployment 40.3 Dutch nationals born abroad and foreigners 7.2 Working age population 76.7 Labour force 21.9 Employment 54.8 Unemployment
216 28.5
221 30.5
218 32.1
208 30.7
9 340 9 391 9 406 9 433 5 859 5 986 6 061 6 192 5 435 5 574 5 678 5 857 423 412 383 335 1 133 1 107 1 124 1 130 608 610 620 646 484 489 509 543 123 122 111 103
10.3 Participation rates (%)5 1.2 Dutch nationals born in the Netherlands 5.4 Dutch nationals born abroad and foreigners 3.7 of which: 2.3 Turkey Morocco Other Mediterranean countries 15 421.5 15 493.9 15 567.1 15 654.2 Other European countries 757.1 725.4 679.9 678.1 Surinam Netherlands Antilles 158.7 149.8 138.7 135.7 Indonesia 182.1 154.3 127.0 114.7 Other 53.4 53.9 53.5 53.9 43.0 41.1 39.3 39.2 Unemployment rates (%)6 29.9 33.5 32.8 28.4 Dutch nationals born in the Netherlands Dutch nationals born abroad and foreigners of which: 49.5 71.4 82.7 59.8 Turkey Morocco 23.9 33.1 30.7 21.2 Other Mediterranean countries 8.1 13.5 15.6 10.5 Other European countries 5.4 4.0 4.4 3.0 Surinam 1.7 1.4 1.8 2.9 Netherlands Antilles 1.5 2.4 3.5 2.9 Indonesia 6.3 9.4 11.4 8.8 Other 52.6 51.5 19.3 31.2 13.3 29.3 50.8 18.5 40.0 14.5 22.9 75.3 23.6 51.5 16.5 34.4 .. 17.0 62.0 18.9
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
64 55 44 42 54 64 63 63 54 53 5.4 19 36 25 21 7 16 28 9 25
66 57 45 44 56 65 65 57 60 56 4.0 16 31 24 20 7 13 24 7 22
1. Data are taken from population registers, which include some asylum seekers. 2. The administrative corrections account for unreported entries and departures on the population register. 3. Data are from population registers and refer to the population on 31 December of the years indicated. Figures include administrative corrections. 4. Estimates are for 31 March and include cross-border workers, but exclude the self-employed and family workers. 5. The percentage of those in the labour force out of the total working population based on Labour Force Survey data. 6. Unemployment rates based on registered unemployment gures. Sources: Central Bureau of Statistics; Ministry of Justice; Labour force Survey.
remained stable in 1996 and 1997, with the exception of nationals of the former Yugoslavia whose number fell by half. Outward migration to those countries is still low. Net migration is assessed from population register data, which records changes of residence reported by the persons concerned. Using additional information, the Central Statistical Office then adjusts the migration data. In 1997 a downward adjustment of 17 000 was made, reflecting the fact that departures are less known and therefore recorded than arrivals. To date these corrections have been roughly of the same magnitude each year, thus having no effect on the net migration trend (see Chart II.11).
OECD 1999
180
Netherlands
Refugees and asylum seekers The number of asylum seekers rose by nearly 50% between 1996 and 1997, with about 35 000 applications filed in the latter year (see Chart II.11 and Table II.28). The increase continued in 1998, the provisional estimate of applications being in the vicinity of 45 000. In 1997, the rise in the number of asylum seekers was almost entirely due to applications from nationals of Iraq, Afghanistan and the former Yugoslavia. The Note on Return Policy published by the Ministry of Justice (3 June 1997) was doubtless influential here, since it stated that asylum seekers from Afghanistan, Bosnia, Burundi, Iraq, Liberia, Rwanda, Sudan, Somalia and Zaire would not be sent back. Asylum seekers from those countries receive a conditional stay permit. Refugee status was granted to just under 17 000 persons in 1997, which was a good deal less than the number of grants in each of the previous four years. The foreign population and naturalisation At 1 January 1998 the total population of the Netherlands was 15.7 million. Of these 1.3 million were born abroad, of whom 58% were Dutch nationals. The top five countries of origin for the foreign-born are, in descending order, Surinam, Indonesia, Turkey, Morocco and Germany (see Table II.29). The foreign population of the Netherlands declined significantly between 1 January 1994 and 1 January 1998, from nearly 780 000 to 678 000 (see Chart II.11). This was attributable to the large number of naturalisations, which more than offset the positive net migration balance and the natural increase in the foreign population. The naturalisation rate i.e. the number of naturalisations expressed as a percentage of the total foreign population at the beginning of the year was approximately 9% in 1997 (see Table II.28), which was considerably higher than in other European countries.
Table II.29. Foreign-born population by birthplace, 1 January 1998, Netherlands
of which: Dutch nationals
Birthplace Total foreign-born Thousands % of total foreign-born population
Europe Turkey Western Germany Asia Indonesia Americas Surinam Africa Morocco Oceania Total
528 172 109 290 144 286 181 236 146 5 1 346
239 88 62 203 137 250 169 94 52 3 789
45 51 56 70 95 87 94 40 36 53 59
The increase in the number of naturalisations Source: Central Bureau of Statistics. during the 1990s has been mainly due to the recognition of dual nationality since 1991. However, since 1 October 1997 retention of original nationality has been allowed only to individuals whose countries of origin do not authorise them to relinquish their nationality or who have difficulty in doing so. For the period 1995-97 the Central Statistical Office (CBS) has calculated that nearly 80% of those who obtained Dutch citizenship also kept their original nationality. Thus, of a total of 85 000 Turks and 40 000 Moroccans who became Dutch citizens, only 20 Turks and 8 Moroccans gave up their original nationality. By contrast, most Chinese, Ethiopians and Somalis have relinquished their original nationality. One of the probable reasons for their doing so is that if they did not, the Netherlands would be unable to provide them with diplomatic assistance if they returned to their countries of origin. Foreigners and the labour market Unemployment among the foreign population declined by 25% between 1997 and 1998, a steeper fall than in any other EU country. Even so, unemployment of foreign labour is still high, particularly among Turks and Moroccans. Although 70 000 foreigners were employed in 1998, the unemployment rate for foreign nationals (20%) was four times higher than that of Dutch nationals (see Table II.28). When evaluating relative labour market performance between migrants and non-migrants, the Dutch authorities divide individuals into two broad categories: those of Dutch origin, namely Dutch nationals born
OECD 1999
181
in the Netherlands, and those of non-Dutch origin, who are persons born abroad and foreign nationals born in the Netherlands. On this basis, the 1995 labour force survey shows that of the total working-age population, just under 10% are of non-Dutch origin. The participation rate for those of non-Dutch origin is 55% compared with 64% for those of Dutch origin. There are wide variations according to nationality and gender: 70% for Indonesian men to 25% for Moroccan or Turkish women. The unemployment rate for those of Dutch origin fell from 6.3% in 1996 to 5.4% in 1997; that for those of nonDutch origin fell from 18 to 16%. Only those of European or Indonesian origin have the same unemployment rates as those of Dutch origin (see Table II.28). Policy developments The principal policy developments over the past few years include: recognition of dual nationality (1991), revision of the Aliens Act (1992), new rules for family reunion (1993) and a new Act regulating the employment of foreigners (1995). More recently, the main initiatives relate to concerns about inflows of asylum seekers, measures to encourage the voluntary return of immigrants and measures to assist young persons arriving from the Dutch West Indies. Measures to control inflows of asylum seekers The growing number of asylum seekers and more especially the ever-increasing inflows from Iraq and Afghanistan is a continuing source of concern. In November 1997 the Ministry of Justice announced a number of measures including: Closer co-operation with other EU Member States (especially Germany). The appointment of special staff in embassies receiving large numbers of queries and requests for asylum. The setting up of a special task force to deal with illegal trafficking, particularly from Iraq and Afghanistan. Increased use of fingerprinting as a means of checking identity. Proposals for a change in the Aliens Act which will make it possible to declare an asylum claim unfounded if it is proved that the applicant was responsible for the destruction of proper documents. Intensification of behind-border controls, especially with regard to air travel (e.g. extension of pre-boarding checks on certain flights). The present Aliens Act will be revised in 1999, notably the section dealing with asylum seekers and especially those with no identification papers. Since 1 February 1999 asylum seekers who have deliberately destroyed their papers may be turned back within 24 hours. The number of mandatory departures from the Netherlands continues to rise, with 62 000 persons affected in 1997. However, this figure includes both deportations and government-assisted voluntary departures (23% deportations, 40% voluntary departures). The remainder consists of individuals who vanish after being ordered to leave the country. Such persons, who numbered 22 600 in 1997, account for 60% of asylum seekers. Measures to encourage voluntary return The Ministry of Development Co-operation has recently set up pilot projects designed to encourage the voluntary return of immigrants to their native lands. Both legal immigrants and rejected asylum seekers are targeted. Measures include: General assistance for the country of origin concerned. Specific programmes, for example in neighbouring countries, to finance the return and reception of refugees to their region of origin and their reception there. Specific programmes to provide financial support for the reception, accommodation, training, employment etc. of those who return to their country of origin. The support will not be given on an individual basis but has to be of benefit both to the returnees and to the community as a whole.
OECD 1999
182
Norway
To date, agreements have been concluded with Ethiopia, Eritrea and Angola. However, as of November 1997 none had been fully implemented and they have been received with mixed feelings by Dutch NGOs and refugees and asylum seekers organisations. There are also two pilot projects supporting voluntary return to Surinam. These are slightly different from the projects based in Africa. They involve payment of transport and relocation costs for the return of highly skilled Surinamese who transfer from posts in the Netherlands, and subsidised employment for highly skilled Surinamese who find government posts in Surinam. In addition, a new Act on return migration has been under discussion since April 1998. This legislation provides for a special health insurance scheme and payment of individual allowances to family members, as well as a system of visas for family members wishing to visit the Netherlands. These measures are intended for persons over 50 years of age; the age limit may be lowered to 45 in the future. EU migrants, aged over 50 especially, from Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece who came to the Netherlands in search of employment are also targeted. In November 1998 the Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of Justice proposed a number of measures in a Note on the migration of young West Indians. Some of the measures aim to discourage the migration of underprivileged young West Indians to the Netherlands, others are concerned with assisting the integration of young West Indians entering the Netherlands.
NORWAY
Introduction The Norwegian economy has grown steadily over the past six years. In 1997, strong growth was maintained, with GDP increasing by 3.7%. Growth continued in 1998, although at a slightly slower pace. Economic expansion has stimulated employment growth: over the twelve months from February 1997 unemployment fell by almost a point, bringing the rate down to 2.8%. Migration and the foreign population Immigration of foreigners increased in 1997, primarily due to entries of Swedish nationals. The number of departures of foreigners in 1997 was nearly the same as in 1996 at approximately 10 000 (see Table II.30). In 1997 net immigration of foreigners increased to just under 12 000, but again there was net emigration of Norwegian nationals, in that year approximately 1 300. At 1 January 1998, the total number of foreigners residing in Norway stood at some 158 000, ie. 3.6% of the total population (see Table II.30). Approximately two-thirds of the foreign population were European nationals, followed by Asian nationals (just under 20%), whose numbers have been falling steadily since 1994. This is mainly due to the large number of naturalisations (some 6 600), although there was a net migration gain of 3 100 Asian nationals in 1997. As a rule, foreigners may acquire Norwegian nationality after they have legally resided in the country for seven years. Naturalisation may be denied to individuals with a criminal record. There are no language requirements or financial prerequisites. During the 1980s the annual number of naturalisations ranged from 1 800 to 4 600. They averaged approximately 5 000 at the beginning of the 1990s, but have risen sharply since then, with slightly more than 12 000 persons acquiring Norwegian nationality in 1997. Of these, 13% were of Pakistani origin and 11% of Vietnamese origin. Among the main groups of immigrants that have been in Norway for more than seven years, Danes, Swedes and United States nationals rarely acquire Norwegian nationality (fewer than 2%), unlike Pakistanis, Turks and Sri Lankans.
OECD 1999
183
Table II.30.
Current gures on migratory ows and stocks of foreign population in Norway

1994 1995 1996 1997 1994 1995 1996 1997
Total population1 % of foreigners
4 348.4 4 370.0 4 392.7 4 417.6 Asylum seekers by nationality 3.8 3.7 3.6 3.6 Somalia Sri Lanka Migratory ows of foreigners by nationality Iran Inows 17.9 16.5 17.2 22.0 Poland Nordic countries 4.9 4.8 5.8 8.6 of which: Foreign population by region Sweden 1.9 2.1 2.9 4.9 Europe Denmark 1.9 1.6 1.6 1.8 Asia Other countries 12.9 11.7 11.4 13.4 Africa of which: North America Former Yugoslavia 4.0 2.3 1.2 0.8 South America United Kingdom 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.0 Others Outows Nordic countries of which: Sweden Denmark Other countries of which: Former Yugoslavia United Kingdom Net migration Nordic countries of which: Sweden Denmark Other countries of which: Former Yugoslavia United Kingdom 9.6 3.0 1.0 1.6 6.5 0.8 0.9 8.3 1.9 1.0 0.3 6.4 3.2 0.1 9.0 3.4 1.0 1.7 5.6 0.5 0.9 7.5 1.4 1.0 0.1 6.1 1.8 10.0 3.4 1.1 1.4 6.7 1.0 1.0 7.2 2.5 1.8 0.2 4.7 0.2 0.1 10.0 Acquisition of nationality, 3.9 by previous nationality Pakistan 1.7 Turkey 1.4 Former Yugoslavia 6.2 Philippines Chile 0.7 0.8 Mixed marriages % of total marriages 12.0 4.7 3.3 0.4 7.3 0.1 0.1
3.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1
1.5 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1
1.8 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.2
2.3 0.6 0.2 0.1
164.0 160.8 157.5 158.0 90.7 93.2 95.9 100.9 43.1 39.5 34.9 31.5 11.6 10.7 10.0 9.7 10.9 10.7 10.6 10.4 6.0 5.1 4.6 4.2 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.2 8.8 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.2 0.3 .. .. 11.8 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.3 0.9 2.9 13.6 12.2 1.5 0.8 0.6 0.3 0.5 3.2 13.8 12.0 1.6 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.4 3.0 12.4
1. Data on 31 December of the years indicated, taken from population registers. Sources: Statistics Norway; Directorate of Immigration.
Refugees and asylum seekers In 1997, the total number of asylum seekers stood at approximately 2 300, which is a relatively low figure compared with the levels reached in the early 1990s. Large numbers of asylum seekers started to arrive in Norway in 1985. The inflow reached its peak in 1987 at 8 600, to then broadly stabilise from 1989 to 1991 within the range of 4 000 to 5 000. However, in 1993 a large inflow, mostly from the former Yugoslavia, drove the total 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, flows of asylum seekers from the former Yugoslavia fell dramatically. Estimates for 1998 indicate a substantial increase in asylum seekers, due to large-scale arrivals of Serbs fleeing Croatia (the region of Eastern Slavonia). Albanians from Kosovo, Iraqis and Somalians comprise the other major groups of asylum seekers. Norway receives a fixed number of refugees in co-operation with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees under a resettlement quota. Between 1992 and July 1996, Norway received approximately 6 000 resettled refugees under this quota, more than half from the former Yugoslavia. For the three-year period 1995-97, Norway planned to accept 3 500 refugees for permanent settlement and for temporary protection. Persons granted collective protection are entitled to temporary work permits or residence permits, which are granted on a collective basis. They are also entitled to family reunion irrespective of their ability to provide economic support. However, those granted residence permits on humanitarian grounds must prove that they have sufficient financial means. This requirement is removed upon obtention of a permanent residence permit (after three years stay in Norway).
OECD 1999
184
Norway
Thus far, collective protection has been granted to nationals of Bosnia-Herzegovina: from 1992 to 1997 some 13 000 Bosnian refugees benefited from this protection. This measure is still in force, which means that any Bosnians requiring protection from Norway will not have their applications examined individually, but will be extended protection on a collective basis. In November 1996, the government decided that Bosnians who had been granted collective protection would not be required to return to their country of origin, but could obtain a permanent residence or work permit after four years of residence in Norway, irrespective of the situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The government decided to adopt this position because the peace process was taking much longer than had been anticipated. A comparative study carried out for the period 1995-98 assessed the local and national impact of the different policies for receiving Bosnian refugees who arrived in Nordic countries from 1992 to 1995. It also investigated the circumstances that led refugees to return voluntarily to their country of origin. The study examined the different models adopted for the reception of these refugees in Nordic countries. In Sweden and Finland, Bosnians were treated no differently from other refugees. In Denmark, the authorities thought that the situation of Bosnians was temporary and therefore postponed the normal procedure for processing asylum applications for as long as two years, during which time Bosnians were placed in refugee villages. The collective protection model adopted in Norway represents a midway solution. Migration and the labour market Economic expansion has led to a sharp increase in employment. In 1996 employment rose by 2.5% and in 1997 by 0.8%. Unemployment declined between February 1997 and February 1998, dropping from 3.7 to 2.8%. Although unemployment fell for the population as a whole, it remained higher for foreigners than for Norwegian nationals. Thus far the domestic market has largely been able to meet labour demand, but as shortages have begun to appear it has been necessary to call on foreign workers. The positive net migration balance (nationals and foreigners) in the first half of 1998 (6 750) was double that of the first half of 1997. Immigration from Nordic countries, and primarily from Sweden, was largely responsible for this increase. By 1996, the Norwegian authorities recognised that the needs of the economy could only be met by recruiting foreign workers, especially in the construction and health care sectors. Since at the same time there was high unemployment in both these sectors in Sweden, measures were implemented to promote recruitment of construction and health workers in that country. The Directorate of Labour estimates that approximately 1 000 nurses and 7 000 construction workers have been recruited from Sweden in recent years, sometimes on a temporary basis. There have also been efforts to recruit workers from Finland, as well as from other countries of the European Economic Area. The Directorate of Labour believed that it might be necessary to recruit as many as 10 000 in 1998. Those who come to Norway to work, except for nationals of the European Economic Area (EEA), must first obtain a work permit the issuance of which is conditional on either an offer of employment evidenced by an attestation from an employer or a standard service contract. According to regulations under the Immigration Act, the applicant must be either a highly skilled worker or have a special skill not available in Norway. Nationals from Nordic countries may work in Norway without a special permit, and nationals from other EEA countries are only required to have a residence permit for a stay of longer than three months. Consequently, the figures for foreign workers, which are based on the number of work permits issued, underestimate the real size of the total stock of foreign workers. Temporary work permits are issued every summer for a stay of no longer than three months to work in a seasonal job in agriculture. These permits are only valid from 15 May to 31 October. Permits are issued under an annual quota system, using a simple and rapid procedure. The quota is set annually by the Directorate of Immigration in consultation with the Directorate of Labour. For 1997, the ceiling was set at 6 800, which was 20% higher than in 1996; slightly fewer than 6 100 permits were actually issued. For 1998, the quota of seasonal workers was raised to 8 000. More than 90% of these seasonal workers are from Central and Eastern Europe, primarily from Poland. Norway has not signed any bilateral agreements for short-term labour migration.
OECD 1999
185
Unemployment among foreigners fell again, dropping to 7.1% in May 1998 from 11.5% in May 1996, but it is still much higher than the rate for Norwegian nationals, which stood at 2.2% in May 1998. All foreign groups benefited from this drop in unemployment, regardless of their continent of origin. However, foreigners from Central and Eastern Europe, Africa, Asia and Latin America are hardest hit by unemployment, while nationals of Nordic countries, Western Europe and North America have unemployment rates similar to those of Norwegians. The high unemployment rate of nationals of Central and Eastern European countries is explained in part by the size of the inflow of refugees from the former Yugoslavia in recent years. In addition, recognition of qualifications and diplomas from other countries is often difficult in Norway, and many foreigners hold jobs below what their educational level and qualifications would warrant. Since the beginning of the 1990s, various initiatives have been taken to promote the employment of immigrants and reduce the disparity between their qualifications and their work. Vocational and language training programmes have been organised for this purpose. As they have proven to be effective in reducing unemployment, it was possible to cut back the number of these programmes in 1997. In addition, the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development has carried out a three-year study monitoring the situation of immigrants in the labour market and the obstacles they face. An amendment to the Labour Standards Act prohibiting all racial discrimination in the labour market was adopted in April 1998. Illegal immigration Several amendments to the Immigration Act aimed at combating illegal immigration came into force on 10 January 1997. The prison sentence for organising the illegal entry of foreigners into Norway for financial gain was raised from a maximum of two to five years. Other measures targeted those who allow the fraudulent use of their passport or any other travel document to enable others to enter the country under a false identity, an offence punishable by a maximum of two years imprisonment. 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 1996, approximately 2 000 people were required to leave the country, some 200 more than in 1995. Although not considered to be illegal migrants or counted as such, two-thirds of the asylum seekers who arrived in Norway in 1996 had incomplete or forged travel documents. Policy developments Following adoption by Parliament, a new policy on refugees was recently implemented. Under the new policy, the instrument of collective protection will be used in the case of large-scale refugee flows and will offer temporary protection after consultation with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and the affected country. In principle, those granted collective protection will be accorded the same rights as those granted refugee status, including family reunion, the right to work and the right 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 aiming to maintain or develop the vocational and language skills of the refugees, and to the implementation of special measures for children, youths and women. The Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development, in co-operation with a number of other ministries, revised the action plan against racism and ethnic discrimination in June 1998. One of the objectives of this plan is to step up the legal assistance provided to persons who are victims of discrimination and raise awareness of racial discrimination. The plan includes measures to prevent discrimination in the labour and housing markets. It also contains measures to foster better understanding between people of different cultures by improving the training of public service employees who deal with a multicultural population. With the same objective in mind, the Government favours the active recruitment of qualified persons with an immigrant background to posts at all levels of the public sector. Other measures targeting elementary and secondary schools are aimed at promoting multicultural tolerance. The various measures of this plan are being implemented by a number of ministries.
OECD 1999
186
Poland
In 1996, the Norwegian Statistical Office conducted a study on the living conditions of individuals from the eight main immigration countries, who had resided in Norway for at least two years. The individuals surveyed were from the former Yugoslavia (not including Bosnia), Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Somalia and Chile. This survey concerned housing, family, employment, economic situation, working conditions, education, mastery of Norwegian, health care, forms of violence and discrimination experienced, social relations and leisure activities. Following the survey, the government announced that priority would be given to making neighbourhoods where immigrants live safer and to promoting greater diversity among the population there. The Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development, in co-operation with the Norwegian Research Council, initiated a research programme on international migration and ethnic relations for 1997-2001. The objective of this programme is to measure the impact of immigration on urban centres and examine the issues at stake. In 2000 the following issues are to be addressed: international migration and the development of large cities; economic segregation due to ethnic background and the development of isolated communities; general communication and various levels of interaction between minorities and the majority population; and, the development of theories and methods, in particular multidisciplinary approaches, longitudinal studies and life path analyses.
POLAND
Introduction In 1997 and 1998, GDP growth remained strong though its pace slackened a little (6.5% in 1997, and 5.9-6.2% forecast for 1998). The unemployment rate meanwhile fell for the sixth year running and has remained below 10% since July 1998. Inflation continues to abate; it currently stands at 9.5%. The 1997 parliamentary elections altered the momentum of migration policy development. In particular, the action of the Inter-Ministerial Team for Migration Affairs was to some extent put on hold. 1998 was notable for the introduction of the new Aliens Act, which clarifies the migration policy role of the different organs of government. Emigration Permanent emigration Emigration (settling abroad for one year or more) is in principle subject to registration, although in practice many emigrants do not notify their departure. Permanent emigration levels fluctuate considerably a steep drop may be followed by an equally sharp rise. Since 1990, however, the variations have been smaller than during the two previous decades. Indeed, since 1996, emigration flows appear to have stabilised, putting a halt to a brief rising trend. The 1997 figure, 20 000, is roughly the same as the quite low average recorded over the period 1990-92. Germany is still the main receiving country (over 70% in 1997). Emigration, as recorded by Polish statistics, mostly involves people who have received no more than a basic education. From 1996 to 1997, however, this class of emigrant, like that of emigrants with a post-secondary education, was down in absolute terms, whereas emigration of the two classes in between these extremes rose. Immigration Permanent immigration Permanent immigration flows (including returning Poles), after fluctuating between one and two thousand from the late 1960s to the late 1980s, steadily increased, reaching 8 400 in 1997 (see Chart II.12). Available data
OECD 1999
187
make no distinction between foreigners and returning Poles. Until 1992, inflows were made up largely of Poles who had emigrated between the mid-1970s and the late 1980s. For some years now, there have been signs that immigration comprises a fairly large proportion of foreigners coming to settle in Poland. The permanent immigration recorded since 1993, for example, is characterised by roughly equal numbers of men and women, whereas the migrants leaving Poland in the 1970s and 1980s were mostly men. Poland now records a positive migration balance with a number of countries that are not among its traditional origin countries. The new sending countries include Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Russia, Vietnam and Belarus. Going by estimates dating from 1993 of the number of new permanent residence permits issued and the number of naturalisations, a probable 40 00045 000 foreigners were living legally in Poland at the end of 1997 (excluding asylum seekers, students and work permit holders). The nationalities most represented among new permanent residence permit holders are Ukrainians, Kazakhs, Vietnamese, Russians and Belarusians (see Table II.31). The most striking rise in immigration concerned Ukrainians, Russians and Kazakhs. The increase noted with regard to certain Republics of the former USSR (Kazakhstan in particular) may be explained by the fact that persons of Polish extraction had been obliged to obtain a residency permit before applying for Polish nationality. This obligation was rescinded as from 1 January 1998, with the result that these people can now obtain Polish nationality upon entry. It is expected that these legislative changes will result in a steep decline in the number of permanent residency permits issued in 1998. The decline was already apparent in the figures for the first half of 1998. Temporary immigration
Chart II.12. Permanent migratory flows in Poland,1 1960-1997 Thousands

Inflows of permanent residents Outflows of permanent residents 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1960 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
1.
Persons who entered Poland (including returning Polish emigrants) and registered in the Central Population Register (PESEL) after obtaining a permanent residence permit. Not all children accompanying immigrants are registered. Outflows only cover departures of permanent residents registered in the Central Population Register. Source: Central Statistical Office.
In 1997, Poland hosted 5 400 foreign students. In addition, nearly 17 500 non-permanent foreign residents were granted work permits. There are no estimates available of how many foreigners stay in Poland for more than a year on a temporary residence permit issued for reasons other than education or work. Labour migration Polish workers abroad The Ministry of Labour and Social Policy estimates that about 230 000 Poles found employment abroad in 1997 as a result of inter-governmental agreements. Nearly 200 000 of them performed seasonal work in Germany. The programme was set up in 1989 to promote inter-governmental co-operation with the main Central and Eastern European countries. The stock of workers recruited by Germany, Poles for the most part, has continued to expand since 1995. It may be deduced that they satisfy a structural demand. Other countries, such as the Czech Republic, are taking in growing numbers of Polish contract workers, although their numbers are much lower than those mentioned above. The key factor in the recruitment of these workers is the proximity of the German and Czech borders. It is to be noted that the Polish workers hired in Germany do not usually come from the poorest parts of Poland, nor from those most affected by unemployment (the centre and the East). This is somewhat in contradiction with the intention expressed by the two countries when they signed the agreement: to further economic development and thereby attenuate regional inequalities.
188
OECD 1999
Poland
Table II.31.
Permanent immigration and emigration, 1994-1997, Poland

Thousands
1994 1995 1996 1997 1994 1995 1996 1997
Permanent immigration by region or country of origin1 Europe Germany Ukraine Other Europe Americas United States Canada Other America Other regions Total of which: Women Permanent residence permits issued by nationality2 Ukraine Kazakhstan Vietnam Russian Federation Belarus Other countries Total
1.
4.5 1.8 .. 2.6 1.6 1.2 0.3 0.1 0.8 6.9 3.3
4.9 2.0 .. 2.9 2.4 1.4 1.0 0.1 0.9 8.1 3.8
5.2 2.2 0.5 2.5 1.9 1.3 0.5 0.1 1.1 8.2 4.0
5.3 2.1 0.8 2.5 1.7 1.2 0.4 0.1 1.4 8.4 4.1
Permanent emigration by region or country of destination3 Europe Germany Other Europe Americas United States Canada Other regions Total of which: Women
21.2 18.9 2.3 4.2 2.8 1.5 0.5 25.9 10.7
21.0 18.2 2.8 4.9 3.2 1.7 0.5 26.3 13.0
17.0 14.8 2.2 3.9 2.5 1.3 0.4 21.3 10.4
16.3 14.2 2.1 3.6 2.2 1.3 0.3 20.2 10.0
0.5 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.1 1.4 2.5
0.6 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 1.5 3.1
0.6 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 1.2 2.8
1.0 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.3 1.6 4.1
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. 2. Data on permanent residence permits issued are not linked with data from the Central Population Register and therefore are not comparable. 3. Only departures of permanent residents registered in the Central Population Register are included. Sources: Central Statistical Ofce; Ofce for Migration and Refugee Affairs.
Foreign workers in Poland Given the extent of secondary employment among the whole population, it is not easy to form an accurate idea of the volume and nature of foreign employment in Poland. Prudence is therefore needed in interpreting the only available statistics, those on work permits, since employers and workers, in order to avoid expensive and complicated formalities, often do not apply for them. The substantial increase in work permits issued in 1997 (17 500 as against 12 500 the previous year) may be explained partly by the abolition of the easily obtained business visas which, in certain cases, could replace work permits. Work permit holders hail from many countries. They are, for the most part, employed in skilled jobs. Almost 40% of new permit holders work in trade and catering (the increase being due to the abolition of business visas), one-fifth work in industry and transportation and one-tenth in education. Nearly 15% of all permits were issued to Ukrainians, 12% to Vietnamese, and 6 to 8% each to Belarusian, United Kingdom, Russian and German nationals. More than half live in and around Warsaw. Certain nationalities are more strongly represented in particular sectors the Chinese and Vietnamese in trade, the British, Ukrainians and Germans in education. The spread of nationalities in industry and transportation, on the other hand, is fairly even. Documented foreign labour still tends to be strongly polarised according to occupational category. The great majority of work permit holders are highly qualified white-collar workers (managers, experts, consultants, teachers, etc.). The proportion of unskilled workers has declined and now accounts for only 5% of the total. Undocumented workers The Ministry of Labour and Social Policy surmises that each year anywhere between 100 000 and 150 000 foreigners take up work illegally in Poland. For many of them (most Africans and Asians, for example,
OECD 1999
189
some of whom are regularly returned to Poland after being intercepted at the German border), it is a matter of finding illegal work until they can resume their journey towards the West. For others, Poland is a destination for engaging in often well-organised smuggling activities. An investigation conducted in both Ukraine and Poland found that the Ukrainians main activity was buying goods for resale in Ukraine but that meanwhile they often did all sorts of odd jobs in the black economy. Refugees and asylum seekers Since 1994, inflows of asylum seekers and refugees have increased. In 1997, over 3 500 people nearly four times more than in 1995 applied for refugee status. Sri Lankans were the most numerous, followed by Afghans, Armenians and Pakistanis, in that order. This recent trend (although preliminary figures for 1998 suggest a decline) is closely linked to the trend in illegal immigration. Practically all recent applicants have applied for asylum in one of the three following situations after being intercepted by the Border Guard while attempting to cross the border illegally; after being detained by the police for not having valid papers; after being expelled from Germany by virtue of a readmission agreement. It should be noted that many applicants vanish as soon as they are released from custody. Illegal migration and transit migration Illegal immigration Three statistical sources give an idea of the incidence and national composition of illegal immigration Border Guard figures on the numbers caught while trying to cross the border, the number of foreigners expelled by decision of the Polish district authorities, and data on foreigners accepted or expelled pursuant to readmission agreements. In 1997, the number of people intercepted while attempting to cross into Poland fell for the second year running. Of the 10 500 persons caught by the Border Guard in 1997, 40% were Asians, 23% Romanians or from another Balkan country, and 20% from a former Soviet Republic. In 1997, 4 800 foreigners were returned to Poland under readmission agreements. Readmission decisions affected 1 400 foreigners in the first half of 1998. In 1997, district authorities decreed 5 200 expulsions; the corresponding figure for the first half of 1998 was 2 100 (most being Ukrainians, Romanians and Bulgarians). Transit migration Poland has become one of the main transit countries for migrants heading towards Western Europe. Two major international routes seem to pass through Poland. One begins from the Indian sub-continent (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka), western Asia (Armenia, Iran, Iraq and Turkey) or certain African countries (Ethiopia, Liberia, Nigeria, Somalia and Sudan). The second starts from various places in Armenia, Moldava, Macedonia, Romania and Turkey. Policy developments The new Aliens Act The Aliens Act, which had been awaiting a decision since September 1995, was finally passed by Parliament in June 1997 and took effect at the end of December. The new Act fully replaces the 1963 Aliens Act. The old regulations, together with all its related decrees, were too broad and sketchy. Their shortcomings included uncertainty as to which Ministry was responsible for migration policy, lack of clearly-defined principles governing the issue (or withdrawal) of permanent residence permits, improper rules on expulsion, detention and refusal of entry, and lack of legal justification for establishing registers of aliens.
190
The new Act sets out clear and consistent criteria for the admission of foreigners (refugees included) and their stay in Poland. More particularly, it enables permission to be given to foreigners to stay for a determined
OECD 1999
Portugal
period or to settle permanently. It also defines the terms for such residence, its time limits and the rights and obligations of an alien while in Poland (for further details, see Trends in International Migration, OECD, 1998). Other developments The action taken by the Prime Minister in September 1997 to constitute an inter-ministerial team for improving co-ordination on migration affairs in Poland was less than a success. The dispute between the Ministry of the Interior and the Government Centre for Strategic Studies over stronger border controls was one illustration of this. Visa arrangements were reintroduced for countries that had not signed readmission agreements with Poland. The main countries concerned were Belarusia and Russia. Nationals of certain countries are now required to obtain invitations from permanent residents. The Government Centre for Strategic Studies pointed out that these restrictions risked slowing the non-permanent migration of small traders, who are an important source of foreign currency. Poland did not conclude any new international agreements in 1998. It was possibly more concerned with preparing its accession to the European Union. With that perspective in view, the political authorities devoted attention to two questions: i) What should be the status of Lithuanians and Ukrainians who, at present, do not require a visa for staying in Poland? ii) Should there be a transition period during which Polish workers would not have free access to the labour markets of the other EU countries?
PORTUGAL
Introduction At 31 December 1997, Portugals total resident population stood at just under 10 million. The Portuguese authorities estimate the number of Portuguese living abroad at 4.6 million. Portugal is one of the few OECD countries that has for a long time implemented a policy for facilitating the integration of its citizens abroad. There was a net migration gain of 15 000 people in 1997, up from 1996 (10 000). The Alentejo was the only Portuguese region that experienced both a natural decrease in its population and a net migration loss. On the other hand, the population of the Algarve rose sharply, mainly because its net migration gain was the highest in Portugal. 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. Departure statistics after 1988 are not comparable, since the type of passport on which the earlier data were based was abolished at that time. The free movement of Portuguese nationals within the European Union (EU) as of 1992 does not seem to have produced any significant upturn in permanent emigration to Member countries. Since 1993 the National Statistical Institute has been conducting a sample survey to estimate outflows. According to this survey, approximately 38 000 Portuguese nationals emigrated in 1997, 15 000 more than in 1996 (see Table II.32). In 1997, two thirds of Portuguese emigrants went to Germany, France and Switzerland. The major sectors employing temporary migrants are agriculture, the hotel industry and construction, all of which experience strong seasonal and cyclical fluctuations in their labour demand. On the whole, alongside the increase in temporary emigration, there has been a slowdown in permanent emigration over the last decade. The trend for Portuguese migrants to return home, which started in the 1980s, continues. In 1997 there were almost than 15 000 returns, 70% of which were from EU countries, mostly Germany and France. The Portuguese community abroad totalled about 4.6 million, of whom more than a quarter are in Brazil. The data from embassies and consulates show that some 30% of Portuguese residing abroad in 1997 lived in
OECD 1999
191
Table II.32.
Current gures on migratory ows and stocks of total population and labour force in Portugal
1994 1995 1996 1997
Emigration of of which: women
nationals1
29.1 6.9 20.3 5.7 2.3 0.6 0.6 .. 3.4 157.1 85.5 13.8 57.7 72.6 41.8 24.8 10.7 7.1 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
22.6 5.9 17.4 5.0 2.5 0.7 0.6 0.7 1.8 168.3 92.4 15.5 60.3 79.2 44.9 25.9 10.9 7.5 0.1 1.5 2.2 84.4 19.8 4.8 3.4 6.8 6.7 1.1 41.8 16.6 67.8
32.8 8.8 20.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. 172.9 95.3 16.0 61.6 81.2 47.3 27.7 10.8 5.9 0.1 1.2 1.9 86.8 20.6 5.0 3.4 7.1 7.2 1.1 42.4 16.7 69.7
37.8 8.8 14.7 3.3 1.9 0.3 0.4 0.3 1.1 175.3 96.8 16.2 62.3 81.7 49.7 25.3 10.6 8.0 0.1 1.3 2.2 87.9 21.3 5.1 3.5 7.2 7.4 1.1 42.4 17.0 70.6
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 Foreign population2 By region of residence Region of Lisboa Region of Setubal Other regions By group of nationality Africa Europe South America North America Other regions Acquisition of Portuguese nationality Mixed marriages % of total marriages Foreign labour force3 By main industry division Agriculture, forestry, shing Mining and quarrying Manufacturing Electricity, gas and water supply Construction Retail, hotels and restaurants Other4 By professional status Self-employed Wage earners
1. 2. 3.
Results of a special survey (INE). Figures include all foreigners who hold a valid residence permit (including those who beneted from the 1992-1993 and 1996 regularisation programmes). Workers who hold a valid residence permit (including the unemployed). Data include workers who beneted from the 1992-1993 and 1996 regularisation programmes. 4. 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.
Europe (26% in the EU). After Brazil, the other major countries of residence are France, followed by the United States, Canada, Switzerland, Germany and Luxembourg. Portuguese constitute one of the largest expatriate groups living inside the EU (some one million). Remittances from Portuguese emigrants remain very high, equivalent in 1996 to nearly 4% of GDP. Immigration and the resident foreign population
192
Between 1996 and 1997 the foreign population rose by nearly 1.4% (an increase of 2 400), compared with a 0.3% increase in the total population. According to a survey by the National Statistical Institute, nearly
OECD 1999
Portugal
3 300 immigrants made their first application for a permanent residence permit in 1997, 1 700 fewer than in 1995 (see Table II.32). Over half of these people are thought to have entered Portugal for the first time in 1995. Most of the new holders of residence permits are concentrated in the Lisbon area, the Tagus valley and the Algarve. Overall, nationals of OECD Member countries account for nearly 60% of these new residents. The other immigrants come mainly from Brazil (14%) and from Portuguese-speaking African countries (6% for Cape Verde and the same percentage for Angola). In 1997 approximately 175 000 foreigners were legally resident in Portugal, or 1.8% of the total population (see Table II.32). Men (58%) outnumbered women. Over half of the foreigners lived in the area (distrito) of Lisbon. Almost 13% lived in the Faro area, followed by Setubal (9.2%) and Porto (6.1%), while Bragana had the lowest percentage of foreigners (0.1%). By nationality, Cape Verde nationals are the most numerous (nearly 40 000), followed by Brazilians (20 000) and Angolans (16 300). There are nearly 59 000 foreign nationals from OECD countries (75% from the European Union), who account for one-third of the total foreign population. In 1997, some 7 900 children were born of a foreign mother and/or father in Portugal, accounting for approximately 7% of total births (113 000). Portuguese law has allowed dual nationality since 1981, but the annual number of naturalisations remains low. Mixed marriages accounted for just over 2% of all marriages in 1997. The majority were between Portuguese women and foreign men. These Portuguese women mainly married Brazilians, Germans, Venezuelans and Cape Verde nationals. The foreign wives of Portuguese men were mainly from Brazil, Cape Verde and Angola. Refugees and asylum seekers Having experienced an exceptional increase in the flow of asylum seekers in 1993 (about 2 000 people), with Romanians accounting for nearly two thirds of the total and Angolans for 20%, applications fell sharply thereafter. Foreigners and the labour market Since May 1998 the new Employment of Foreigners Act has allowed legally resident foreigners to work in Portugal without being subject to any numerical restrictions (the previous legislation laid down that the total number of foreigners employed in firms with five or more employees could not exceed 10% of the total workforce, though this rule did 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). In December 1997 the foreign labour force totalled approximately 88 000 persons, an increase of 1 100 on the previous year. Most foreign workers are engaged in four sectors of activity: agriculture, manufacturing industry, building and civil engineering, and services. Europeans are employed mainly in scientific 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 scientific and technical professions). Over 80% of foreign workers are wage earners. Of the 17 000 entrepreneurs and self-employed workers living in Portugal, Brazilian nationals are most numerous, accounting for 15% of the total (see Table II.32). At the end of 1997 there were approximately 421 000 persons unemployed in Portugal, 58% of whom were women. Compared with 1996, the total number of unemployed persons fell, but the number of unemployed foreigners rose by over 10%. Unemployed foreigners (4 600) accounted for less than 1% of the total. Angolan nationals were most vulnerable to unemployment, for though they were only 9% of the foreign labour force they accounted for 21% of the unemployed foreigners. Policy developments Migration policy in Portugal has two facets, one applicable to the Portuguese community residing abroad and the other applicable to immigrants in Portugal. The two aspects of this policy reflect 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.
OECD 1999
193
Links with Portuguese communities abroad Portuguese nationals residing abroad are represented by directly elected members of Parliament. Across the world there are about 2 000 associations created by migrants or by their descendants. The aim of policy with regard to emigrants is to encourage political and social integration of Portuguese in the host country whilst respecting their national identity, and to maintain links with emigrant communities. Measures are therefore designed to safeguard and disseminate the Portuguese language, facilitate links between the communities, and defend the interest and rights of Portuguese migrants. To this end, numerous approaches have been developed. They include assistance for the teaching of Portuguese, grants to associations, missions and other agencies working with foreign-resident Portuguese, socio-cultural exchanges and vocational training programmes cofunded by the European Social Fund. There are other forms of aid, such as financial 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, chiefly 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. The council has 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 falsified documents. The Act of 3 March 1993 sets out the conditions for the entry, residence and departure (both voluntary and forced) of foreigners, with the goal of making all procedures clearer and more effective. This Act is currently under review. The Act of 8 August 1998 on the entry, residence and departure (both voluntary and forced) of foreigners was not limited to bringing Portuguese legislation into line with the effective exterior frontier controls required under the Schengen Agreements (signed by Portugal on 25 June 1991) and other conventions to which Portugal is a signatory. In this regard, Portugal expressed its desire that European immigration policy should not be confined solely to controlling flows, but should also include a Community-wide objective of integrating immigrant populations. For example, the Act of August 1998 reaffirmed the right of family reunion and favoured a policy of adapting immigration to the needs of the labour market, although priority would be given to foreign workers legally residing in Portugal. The new Employment of Foreigners Act of 12 May 1998 concerns foreigners authorised to reside and work in Portugal. This Act ensures equal opportunities with respect to recruitment and working conditions, regardless of national origin, and is in line with the policy upheld by the European social partners in the Florence Declaration of October 1995 on the prevention of racial discrimination and xenophobia and the promotion of equal treatment in the workplace. It is also a means of combating practices of social dumping that may affect regional integration procedures because of unfair economic competition based on the use of undocumented immigrants without social protection. 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 providing for an amnesty for illegal immigrants. The amnesty exercise was conducted between June and December 1996. Eligibility was simplified compared with the previous exercise (October 1992-March 1993), in particular concerning the foreigners economic circumstances. In addition, employers organisations, trade unions and immigrants associations were widely involved in the regularisation procedures. The initial condition to be met to qualify for regularisation was the date of entry and residence in Portugal. Applicants who were nationals of Portuguese-speaking countries had to have entered Portugal before 31 December 1995 and to have resided there since that time. Individuals who had received a prison sentence of over one year were not eligible, nor were individuals who were subject to expulsion orders. According to the available data, 35 000 applications were accepted for review and 21 800 were granted, mainly to nationals of Angola, Cape Verde, Guinea Bissau and Mozambique (see Table II.33). The officials responsible for this exercise were careful to correct one of the main difficulties
OECD 1999
194
Portugal
encountered during the previous regularisation programme, since many workers had not been able to obtain written proof of employment from their employer. This difficulty was resolved in 1996 since proof of employment could be provided by trade unions operating in the sector in which the applicant was employed or by the local authorities of their place of residence. Other non-EU foreign nationals had to have entered Portugal before 25 March 1995, when the Schengen Agreement came into force. A further condition was that applicants had to have adequate financial resources to support themselves (for example, gainful employment). Nationals of Portuguesespeaking countries were subject to the same minimum economic conditions as those required of other immigrants, except for those who had entered before 1 January 1986. Integration of immigrant populations
Table II.33. Regularisation programmes of immigrants in an illegal situation by country of origin, 1992-1993 and 1996, Portugal
Thousands
1992-1993 1996
Other measures and resolutions recently adopted in Portugal aim to facilitate the integration Total 39.2 21.8 of foreigners by guaranteeing assistance and by comSource: Ministry of the Interior. bating 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. Under this extension of local citizenship to foreign nationals residing in Portugal, nationals of Norway, Argentina and Israel have been granted the right to vote in local elections, and nationals of EU Member States, Cape Verde, Brazil, Peru and Uruguay have been given both the right to vote and to stand for office in local elections. Moreover, under the Nationality Act of 1981 Portuguese nationality can be obtained via declaration (minors, marriage), full adoption by a Portuguese national, or naturalisation (without renouncing original nationality) after at least six years residence in Portugal. The Act of 26 June 1996 grants all legal residents of Portugal, whether they are Portuguese or foreign nationals, the right to a guaranteed minimum income (which is a benefit from the non-contributory social security scheme aimed at ensuring that individuals and their families are provided with means to help meet their basic needs and progressively enable them to find employment and be integrated into society). Following a one-year experimental phase, the guaranteed minimum income system has been implemented nationwide. 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 following principal terms of reference: to co-ordinate support for immigrant integration at interministerial level; to help 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; and, to propose measures to assist immigrants and ethnic minorities. Other measures adopted in 1996 concern the improvement of housing conditions, the extension of immigrants entitlement to social security services and, the granting to immigrant associations of the right to provide assistance in criminal proceedings arising out of racially motivated and xenophobic acts and to claim damages. A directive of June 1996 authorises the creation of alternative education streams to ensure that immigrants and their children have equal access to education and academic achievement. In August of the same year, another directive made it possible to develop multiannual projects for priority education zones in order to improve the quality of education and promote innovative approaches. Some of these zones include areas with a high concentration of foreign inhabitants. A study carried out by the Secretariat of the Diocese of Lisbon on young gypsies aged 16 to 25 in the communes of Amadora, Lisbon and Loures showed that approximately 80% of them would like to
OECD 1999
Angola Cape Verde Guinea-Bissau Sao Tome and Principe Brazil China Mozambique Other
12.5 6.8 6.9 1.4 5.3 1.4 0.8 4.1
6.8 5.0 4.0 2.0 0.3 .. .. 3.7
195
receive vocational training and want their children to study for occupations (such as law, medicine, teaching and nursing) different from those traditionally carried on by gypsies, even though 90% of those interviewed had no more than a primary school education. 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 peace processes and the consolidation of emerging democracies in Africa is another aspect of co-operation policy, 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 Between 1990 and 1992 substantial numbers of Romanian citizens, both of non-Romanian and Romanian origin, left to settle permanently abroad. Current estimates of the outflow by the Romanian authorities suggest that it has fallen substantially and is stabilising at a relatively low level. Return migration and readmissions have increased during each of the last three years. However, the figure is still less than half that of estimated permanent emigration. Previous reports have underlined Romanias increasing importance as a transit destination in the East-West emigration flow, a feature linked, inter alia, to its relaxed visa regime. This continues to be a source of concern. At the end of 1996 the government signalled its intention of raising the pace of the economic reform. It announced the adoption of a restructuring programme a key feature of which would be the privatisation or liquidation of large state-owned enterprises. Even though it has been implemented more slowly than originally intended, under its impact economic activity contracted sharply in 1997; it is not expected to increase until 1999. Unemployment accelerated from the second part of 1997 reaching 10% by the end of 1998. Income inequality has become more pronounced; the signs of serious poverty and social exclusion are becoming more visible. Emigration Estimates of emigration made by the Ministry of the Interior are based on two sources: compulsory customs forms completed by those intending to leave the country on a permanent basis and data on those already abroad who apply for the renewal of their passport at a local embassy or consulate. Over the last four years the estimated total number has averaged approximately 21 000, less than one quarter of the 1990 figure. At just below 20 000, the figure for 1997 was a 7% decline on 1996. For the first half of 1998 the figure was just under 8 600. In 1993, members of ethnic minorities accounted for just over half the total outflow. This proportion has since then steadily decreased to just over 15% in 1997. Over 95% settle in OECD Member countries. There is evidence that the countries of destination are becoming more diffuse. Germany remains, however, the most popular destination. Receiving 30% of the total as estimated by the Romanian authorities, it accounted for half of those accepted by the European Union. The emigration flow to Germany as recorded by German authorities is well over twice that of the Romanian authoritiess estimate (see Chart II.13). On the other hand, the downward trend recorded by the German authorities since 1993 is much more pronounced.
OECD 1999
196
Romania
Chart II.13.
Demographic characteristics of permanent emigrants,1 1990-1997, Romania Percentages

Age groups
Women -18 18-25 26-40 40+ 100
Sex
Men 100
80
80
60
60
40
40
20
20
0 1990 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 1990 91 92 93 94 95 96 97
Ethnic groups
Romanians2 100 00 Germans Hungarians Other Germany
Destination countries
United States France Other 100
80
80
60
60
40
40
20
20
0 1990 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 1990 91 92 93 94 95 96 97
Educational attainment
Post-secondary Primary 100 00 Secondary Other Vocational
80
60
40
20 Estimates by the Romanian Ministry of the Interior. Persons having reported their intention to settle abroad. 2. Romanian nationals with no other declared ethnic affiliation. Source: Ministry of the Interior. 1.
0 1990 91 92 93 94 95 96 97
197
OECD 1999
Labour migration Excepting the relatively small volume arranged under the aegis of the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare, temporary foreign employment is registered only in the general flow of those temporarily leaving the country. That said, recent estimates have been made by the Israeli authorities of the sizeable contingent of documented and undocumented Romanian workers employed in its country. Data on individually arranged seasonal work remains sketchy. Based on an agreement between the Governments of Germany and Romania, 309 employment contracts of eighteen months duration and 4 800 contracts of three months duration were approved in 1997, respectively 30% and 9% down on 1996. The beneficiaries of the very short-term contracts are young workers aged 20-35 years in possession of a high level of education and a solid understanding of the German language. In addition, 5 000 Romanians took up seasonal work in Germany in 1997, the same number as the preceding year. Approximately 2 000 went on the same basis to Hungary and 1 000 each to Greece, Italy and Turkey. According to the Israeli Ministries of Public Security and of Labour, their States authorities have in recent years granted a total of 34 000 work permits for Romanian workers. The Ministry of Labour estimates the total number working in Israel to be about 60 000; the Ministry of Public Security suggests a figure in excess of 100 000. The number of undocumented Romanian workers is growing. It is expected to decline significantly, however, as a consequence of extended efforts on the part of the Romanian authorities to control the activities of private labour export agents. Romanian citizens as asylum seekers Since the beginning of the 1990s approximately 100 000 Romanian citizens have requested asylum in European Union member states. Although the volume of claims has fallen considerably Romania is still one ten most important sources of asylum claimants to the EU. Initially, the highest number of claims were registered in Germany; France has since taken that place with over 5 100 active claims in 1997, a 27% increase on 1996. The recognition rate for claims by Romanian citizens was less than 1% in France in 1997. It would be reasonable to suppose, therefore, that the motivating factor behind the claims is to render legitimate their residence status. Having come to the view that basic standards of human rights were being observed in Romania, the UNCHR ceased at the end of 1997 to consider Romania as a generator of refugees. Notwithstanding, the cases of Romanian citizens who submit asylum applications abroad will be individually and thoroughly analysed. Immigration A clear trend has developed whereby due in part to return migration (particularly in the case of Greek citizens) and to the fact that since 1990 there has not existed an institution with the authority to grant this status, the stock of immigrants with permanent resident status continues to decline, standing at present at around 1 400 (see Table II.34). A proposal to have this institutional deficiency remedied in the context of a new law on foreign citizens status is still awaiting approval by the Romanian Parliament. Relatively liberal regulations governing entry to the country render futile any attempt at ascertaining the total number of temporary foreign residents. They can be classified into three distinct groups: geographically mobile young Asians typically engaged in unskilled employment and market trading, both of which in the informal sector; eastern Europeans who comprise in approximately equal shares students and semi-skilled workers; and, well-educated professionals from OECD Member countries working for foreign companies or international corporations. Assuming full compliance with the Romanian Government Decision of May 1997 requiring foreign citizens to acquire work permits, they numbered at the end of that year just over 500, accounting for 60% of all permit holders. Return migration and readmissions In 1997 just over 8 400 repatriation applications were registered, an increase of almost 35% on 1996 (see Table II.34). Of particular note was the significant increase in the weight of those aged between 18 and 40 years and of those coming from the Republic of Moldova.
OECD 1999
198
Romania
Table II.34.
Current migration gures in Romania

Thousands
1994 1995 1996 1997
Immigration and settlement of foreigners Stock of persons with permanent residence status Stock of persons with temporary residence visas1 of which: Republic of Moldova Greece Turkey China Syria Stock of foreign citizens in education and training of which: Former USSR Greece Israel 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 Romanian citizens in Germany: A. Migration ows between Romania and Germany Ethnic Germans from Romania Inows of Romanian nationals Outows of Romanian nationals Asylum seekers from Romania B. Stock of people from Romania in Germany Stock of Romanian nationals Acquisitions of German nationality by former Romanians
1.8 54.1 .. .. .. .. .. 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 20.8 5.8 5.3 1.4 5.5 0.6 0.1 1.1 4.0 20.0 10.5 0.7
1.6 55.7 7.1 6.2 5.1 4.4 4.1 22.7 7.4 5.8 1.2 6.3 0.6 0.1 1.0 4.2 15.0 18.1 1.2
1.4 55.0 6.9 5.7 5.5 5.4 3.8 20.4 6.7 4.9 1.0 8.4 1.4 0.1 1.2 5.5 18.0 16.9 1.4
6.6 31.4 44.0 9.6 125.9 18.0
6.5 24.8 25.2 3.5 109.2 12.0
4.3 17.1 16.6 1.4 100.7 9.8
1.8 14.2 13.6 0.8 95.2 8.7
1. Residence permits valid for a period longer than 120 days. 2. Estimates based on the number of expulsions, the number of persons detected within Romania and at the border. Sources: Romanian Ministry of the Interior; Statistiches Bundesamt (Germany).
Students and trainees In 1997, the stock of students and trainees fell back by 10% to stand at 20 400, very close to the figures for 1993-95. The reduction was quite evenly spread across the nationalities with Greeks and Moldovians still dominating. The 1996 increase was considered as being in large part attributable to an increase in the number of scholarships awarded by the Romanian government. Refugees and asylum seekers As noted in last years report, Romania has recently introduced legislation on refugees and asylum seekers. The number of claims registered more than doubled but remains low at 1 400 principal beneficiaries. Only 80 applications for refugee status were accepted in 1997, a figure in line with previous years. Naturalisations Naturalisations remain few in number (100 in 1997). The majority (three-quarters) are obtained upon completion of three years of marriage. The remainder have been granted to company proprietors and a small
OECD 1999
199
number of employees with permanent contracts. In almost all cases naturalised foreign citizens have retained their original citizenship. Policy developments Romania is attempting to persuade the European Union to remove it from the blacklist of those states whose citizens require a visa in order to enter EU Member States. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has established an interministerial working group which meets on a regular basis to determine the measures which should be implemented at the national level in order to facilitate the obtention by Romanian citizens of visas enabling them to travel abroad. A Romanian Government Ordinance of August 1997 stipulates that passport applications can be temporarily rejected if the applicant has committed either in Romania or abroad a crime concerning national security (e.g., high treason), public order, morals (e.g., prostitution) or fundamental human rights and freedoms (e.g., murder). Passports can be withdrawn or suspended for the same reasons. In both cases, the temporary rejection or withdrawal can last from between 3 and 12 months, depending on the seriousness of the offence. A government Ordinance of August 1998 stipulates, inter alia, that Romanian diplomatic missions and consulates will issue consular passports upon request to Romanian citizens abroad (who no longer have travel documents and cannot provide proof of their identity), only upon receipt of confirmation from the Passports Department of the Ministry of Interior. In the case of repeated demands within a five year period for renewal of a passport due to its loss or robbery, the time period for issuing a new document can be prolonged by a maximum of six months whilst these statements are being verified. In such situations, the person concerned must pay a financial penalty. In order to create efficient procedures for voluntary returns and to help combat illegal migration, Romania has concluded readmission agreements with 16 European countries (Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy (in 1997), Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland) and India. A further 14 agreements of this type are currently being negotiated with European and Asian countries (Belarus, Bulgaria, China, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iran, Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, Portugal, Turkey, Ukraine and Yugoslavia). Other developments of note include: A substantial increase in the maximum fine which can be imposed on foreigners found to be staying illegally in the country. The inclusion in the draft law on foreigners status currently under consideration in Parliament of the stipulation that foreigners be forbidden to carry out activities not contained in the work permit issued to them by the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection. The adoption by Parliament in June 1998 of Law No. 123 accepting the International Organisation for Migrations constitution as set out in Venice in October 1953 and amended in May 1987.
SLOVAK REPUBLIC
Introduction Since 1994, the Slovak economy has been performing strongly, with GDP growth at between 5-7.3% each year. Good progress has also been made in labour productivity and in controlling inflation. The Slovak Republic is, however, heavily dependent on foreign trade. The structure of its exports, most of which consist of labourintensive products, could eventually hamper its development. High unemployment (compared with other central European countries) and low employment and wage growth continue to act as incentives to emigrate. The Slovak Republic must also cope with problems stemming from unequal regional development and the ethnic diversity of the population. The South-east part of the country is suffering most from the dismantling of the steel and defence industries and from low-yield farming.
OECD 1999
200
Slovak Republic
Table II.35.
Current migration gures, Slovak Republic

1994 1995 1996 1997
Inows of permanent residents Arrivals (excluding those from Czech Republic) Arrivals from Czech Republic Outows of permanent residents Departures (excluding those to Czech Republic)1 Departures to the Czech Republic2 Net migration Residence permits newly granted by category Long-term residence permits Permanent residence permits Family reunication Other Inows of asylum seekers Illegal migrants caught at the border Holders of permanent or long-term residence permit, by country of origin3 Czech Republic Ukraine Poland Former Yugoslavia Other Total Work permit holders, by country of origin4 Ukraine Poland United States Other Total Estimates of Czech workers5 Slovak citizens abroad Slovak workers in the Czech Republic % of total foreign workers in the Czech Republic Slovak citizens in Hungary % of total registered foreigners in Hungary Slovak workers in Austria % of total foreign workers in Austria
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
4.9 1.8 3.1 4.1 0.1 4.1 0.8 3.1 3.3 2.9 0.3 0.3 1.9 2.5 2.1 2.1 1.6 8.5 16.9 0.5 0.4 0.2 1.6 2.7 1.2 39.2 54.4 3.4 2.5 1.8 0.7
4.6 3.1 1.5 4.1 0.2 3.8 0.5 3.7 3.0 2.7 0.3 0.3 2.7 4.3 2.6 2.3 1.9 10.7 21.9 0.4 0.3 0.2 1.8 2.7 1.2 59.3 53.0 3.5 2.5 2.8 1.4
2.5 1.5 1.0 3.6 0.1 3.5 1.1 3.5 1.9 1.5 0.4 0.4 3.3 5.1 3.0 2.5 2.0 11.6 24.1 0.6 0.5 0.4 1.8 3.3 1.5 72.2 50.4 3.7 2.6 3.7 1.4
2.0 1.5 0.6 .. .. .. .. 4.1 2.0 1.6 0.4 0.6 2.8 5.8 3.5 2.8 2.0 10.7 24.8 0.7 0.6 0.3 2.2 3.8 1.7 69.7 53.3 3.7 2.6 4.0 1.6
The outow is underreported because people leaving the country are requested but not required to report their departure. Changes of permanent residence in the Czech Republic. The data are issued by the Czech Statistical Ofce. The data refer to the stock of permanent and long-term residents as of 31 December of the years indicated. The data refer to the stock of work permit holders as of 31 December of the years indicated. Under a bilateral agreement signed by the Czech and Slovak Republics in 1992, nationals of each Republic have free access to both labour markets. Data on Czech workers are monitored by the National Labour Ofce of the Slovak Republic. Sources: Ministry of Labour and the National Labour Ofce of the Slovak Republic; Czech Statistical Ofce.
The Slovak Republic does not attract many foreign workers. Many of those who do come are from countries with similar (e.g. Poland) or lower (Ukraine and Russia) living standards. The trickle of immigration is not offsetting the decline in the natural population growth rate, which fell from 4.8 per 1 000 in 1990 to 1.3 per 1 000 in 1997. Moreover, the migration balance of permanent residents has been negative since 1996 (see Table II.35). Emigration and Slovak nationals abroad The main countries hosting Slovak nationals are the Czech Republic, Austria, Germany and Hungary. Since the break-up of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic (CSFR), the number of Slovak workers in the Czech Republic has risen constantly although it dipped slightly in 1997 owing to deteriorating labour market conditions to 69 700 (see
OECD 1999
201
Table II.35). They account for nearly half the foreign labour there. In Austria, about 4 000 Slovaks (some 2% of the total labour force) hold work permits. In Germany, almost 6 000 seasonal workers of Slovak origin have been recruited annually since 1993. After the Poles, they are the second largest national group among the seasonal workers. The most sizeable migrant outflows to the Czech Republic were concentrated over the period 1992-1994. When the CSFR was divided in two on 1 January 1993, Czech law did not allow Slovaks working in Czech territory to have double nationality. Many of them, in order to obtain Czech nationality, registered as permanent residents of the Czech Republic. This formality showed up in Czech Republic statistics as a large migrant inflow from the Slovak Republic. Since 1994, Czech sources point to a considerable decline in flows of permanent migrants from the Slovak Republic, although they remain much higher than the flows of Czech citizens coming to settle in the Slovak Republic. Immigration Owing to the unreliability of the available sources, it is not possible to determine the exact size of migration flows. Since the immigration monitoring system is in the process of being overhauled, the data collected by the National Statistics Institute and police services are still very patchy. Trends in the number of residence permits issued long-term (for work purposes) or permanent (generally for family reunion) reveal a slight increase in the foreign population since 1993, although this presence remains very small. The number of long-term permits issued rose from 2 000 in 1993 to over 4 000 in 1997. Over the same period, the number of permanent permits granted wavered between 1 000 and 3 000. Most foreigners come from neighbouring or nearby countries, namely the Czech Republic, Ukraine, Poland, Hungary, or the former Yugoslavia. At the end of 1997, these five countries together accounted for two-thirds of the foreign resident population (holders of permanent or long-term permits) (see Table II.35). In 1997, nearly 10 000 foreigners held long-term permits, mostly for the purposes of work (6 700) or studies (1 600), while almost 17 000 held permanent residence permits granted primarily for family reunion reasons (see Table II.35). Refugees and asylum seekers Flows of asylum seekers, which were negligible in 1993, have grown a little since then, reaching 645 in 1997. As from that year, the criteria for awarding refugee status were tightened. As a result, the Slovak Republic received only 100 applications for asylum in the first half of 1998. Until June 1997, the Slovak Republic also took in a few war refugees, who were housed in humanitarian centres. These centres have since been closed. Illegal and transit immigration Nearly 10 000 migrants were expelled or turned back at the border in 1996 and 1997. The Slovak Republic is a transit country. Migrants usually enter via the borders with Hungary or Ukraine and then try to reach the Czech Republic, Austria or Poland. The Slovak police have intensified their border controls over the past three years and adopted sterner measures towards undocumented foreigners. Foreign population and ethnic minorities For historical reasons, the ethnic composition of the Slovak Republic population is varied. In the last census, over 10% of residents said they were of Hungarian origin, 1.4% of Gypsy stock and 1% Czech. The Hungarian minority is concentrated in the Hungarian and Ukrainian border regions, whereas the gypsies are scattered over the territory though are more frequently found in the countrys eastern areas. The political weight of the Hungarian minority is considerable at both local and national levels. It also possesses a large press group. The Gypsy minority has problems in integrating into Slovak society. Its level of education is lower than that of the rest of society and it is more vulnerable to unemployment. The success of the active policies targeted at this group is hampered by a certain hostility on the part of the rest of the population and problems of delinquency. Employment of foreigners
202
Any foreigner wishing to exercise an occupation in the Slovak Republic must with the exception of permanent residents, refugees, Czech nationals, and other foreigners employed within the context of official interOECD 1999
Slovak Republic
national agreements be in possession of a work permit. Since 1997, foreigners able to prove that they of Slovak origin (going back three generations) are also entitled to work without a permit. The number of foreign work permit holders has varied between 2 700 and 3 800 since 1994. Over half of them live in or around Bratislava. Ukrainian, Polish, US and UK nationals are the most numerous (see Table II.35). Almost a third are employed by foreign companies. The number of Czech workers, who are not required to have a work permit, may be deduced from the declarations sent by employers to the labour offices. They number approximately 1 700. Policy developments The new Act concerning the employment of foreigners in the Slovak Republic and of Slovak nationals employed abroad with Ministry of Labour assistance took effect on 1 January 1997. Bilateral agreements have been signed with Germany, the Czech Republic, Poland, the Russian Federation, Ukraine, Vietnam and Switzerland (see Table II.36). These bilateral agreements, with the exception of the one concluded with the Czech Republic which allows free labour market access to Czech and Slovak nationals, usually provide for the reciprocal hosting of a fixed number of workers for a limited period. Negotiations are under way with Hungary, Austria and Romania.
Table II.36.
Partner country
Bilateral agreements on the employment of foreigners concluded by the Slovak Republic

Date of signature Duration of the contract Quota Reciprocity Description
Czech Republic
October 1992
Yes
Free access to labour market without work permit Residence permits delivered on the basis of conrmation of employment by the employer Employment of seasonal workers in Germany in case that no domestic workers are available Contract labour for skilled Slovak workers aged 18 to 40 Employees of Slovak rms providing services in Germany on the basis of trade contracts between Slovak and German entities Several contracts are possible : long term, short term (up to 3 months) or training (up to 1 month for students) Seasonal workers Contract workers Employment based on trade Contract workers aged 18 to 30 Seasonal workers Contract workers Employment based on trade Trainees
203
Finland Germany
October 1998 March 1991
Up to 3 months per year 12 to 18 months Up to 3 years
Yes
3 000 per month No (revised annually) 700 per year No (revised annually) 1 500 per year No approximately
March 1996 April 1996
Luxembourg Poland
May 1998 June 1992
Variable according to the job 6 months maximum 1 year maximum (renewable) 2 years maximum (renewable)
No
Yes Yes
Russian Federation
February 1995
150 per year 150 per year 1 200 per year 100 per year 300 per year 200 per year 1 800 per year
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Switzerland Ukraine
December 1995 12 to 26 months February 1995 Up to 6 months 12 to 18 months 2 to 4 years Variable
Vietnam
Source:
January 1994
50 during 1993-96 No
Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family.
OECD 1999
SPAIN
Introduction Registering a 3.8% increase in GDP in 1998, Spain experienced strong growth for a fifth consecutive year. Despite sustained employment growth, however, unemployment remains high (18%). In 1996, the key developments in Spanish migration policy were the regularisation programme for undocumented foreigners and the application of the Schengen Agreements. In 1997, for the first time since the mid-1980s, there was a rise in the emigration of Spanish workers. Returns of immigrants of Spanish nationality or origin rose for the second consecutive year, no doubt due to assistance measures taken in this regard. The number of residence permits issued also increased, as did the stock of foreigners and foreign workers. Spanish emigration and return flows According to the records of the Directorate-General for Migration, the number of Spanish workers emigrating has decreased appreciably since 1995 (see Table II.37). Emigration to non-European countries account for more than 40% of total outflows. They are, in the main, workers from Andalusia who emigrate on a temporary basis to France, Belgium and Switzerland). The number of Spaniards returning to Spain increased for the second consecutive year. Thus, in 1997 the number of individuals whose names were struck from the lists at consulates rose to 27 500 as compared to 20 600 in 1995. Nearly two-thirds of the returns recorded concerned individuals previously residing in European countries, primarily Switzerland, the United Kingdom, Germany and France. Emigrants returning from the Americas came mainly from Venezuela, the United States and Argentina. Immigration and foreign population The categories of residence permits (not required for EU nationals) were revised in 1995. Category D residence permits grant the right of settlement in Spain, while categories A, B and C only authorise a short-term stay. The figures available on the number of permits issued give only an approximate indication of inflows since EU nationals are not counted. If all permit categories are taken into account, their number rose sharply in 1997 (530 000 new authorisations compared with 380 000 the previous year). Permits allowing establishment account for approximately 9% of these authorisations, and their number increased substantially, from 37 700 in 1996 to 47 000 in 1997. Trends for this type of inflow are determined more by changes in the policy adopted by the government (the regularisation programme, the quota for workers) than by the business cycle or migration pressures in the main sending countries. At the end of 1997, more than 600 000 foreigners held residence permits, of whom nearly 60% were either nationals of an EU country or relatives of EU nationals (this figure does not include permits valid for less than six months and those granted to students). At this date, the foreign population accounted for 1.5% of the total population. The breakdown of foreigners by region and country of origin shifted somewhat as a result of the regularisation programme for undocumented foreigners (non-EU nationals). There was an increase in the proportion of foreigners from Central and Eastern European countries (in particular Poles, Romanians, Russians, Bulgarians and Bosnians) and from Africa (nationals of Mali and Nigeria, Algeria and Morocco). Thus, in 1997 for the first time the proportion of African immigrants was higher than that of Americans. In 1997 Moroccan immigrants were the largest single group (111 100), which grew at a particularly high rate, followed by nationals of the United Kingdom (68 000) and Germany (50 000). There were some 38 000 Portuguese and 34 000 French nationals. The number of EU nationals was stable in 1997 and their share of the foreign population was slightly more than 40%. Among the Latin American nationals, the number of those from Argentina fell, while numbers from the Andean region (Peru, Colombia) and Cuba rose. Lastly, there was a dramatic increase in the number of Chinese nationals.
OECD 1999
204
Spain
Table II.37.
Current gures on migratory ows and stocks of total population and labour force in Spain
Thousands
1994 1995 1996 1997 1994 1995 1996 1997
Outows of nationals of which: to a European country Returns of nationals Stock of foreign By region of origin Europe Africa America Asia Oceania Stateless Not specied By region of residence Madrid Barcelona Alicante Other residents1
12.1 6.6 20.4
14.4 9.1 18.5
9.0 8.1 26.6
461.4 499.8 539.0 238.5 82.6 103.3 35.7 0.8 0.3 93.7 65.1 38.8 263.9 254.5 95.8 108.9 38.5 0.9 0.3 0.9 93.0 78.0 39.5 289.4 273.3 98.8 121.3 43.4 0.9 0.4 0.8 111.1 84.5 42.7 300.7
Acquisition and recovery of Spanish nationality Applications for acquiring Spanish nationality Grants of Spanish nationality (excluding persons recovering their Spanish nationality)
1.
10.9 7.8
12.7 6.8
.. 8.4
. . Total work permits . . of which: women By industry division .. Agriculture Industry 609.8 Building Services 289.1 Not specied 142.8 By region of origin 127.0 Africa 49.1 Central and South America 0.9 Asia 1.0 Europe (except EU)3 0.8 North America Oceania and other 116.0 By type of permit 90.7 Long term work permits 42.6 Employees 360.5 Self employed One year work permit Employees Self employed Other4 .. Stock of foreign workers5 10.3
granted2
88.6 100.3 126.4 25.3 29.5 39.7 18.7 6.9 9.4 50.6 3.1 49.5 20.2 11.0 6.1 1.7 0.2 6.6 2.3 68.2 9.6 1.9 18.9 7.5 10.4 57.2 6.3 57.4 22.7 11.8 6.6 1.6 0.2 4.6 2.0 83.3 8.5 2.0 26.0 8.6 12.2 72.7 6.9 70.6 30.2 15.8 8.0 1.6 0.2 29.6 4.8 81.1 7.0 3.9
84.2 31.0 17.7 5.6 7.0 51.9 2.0 42.7 22.5 12.0 5.7 1.1 0.2 22.3 2.5 48.7 2.9 7.8
121.8 139.0 166.5 176.0
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 and include permits delivered following the 1996 regularisation programme. 2. Total permits issued, including seasonal and cross-border workers and renewals of permits. Provisional gures for 1997. 3. Since 1 January 1992, the nationals of the European Union do not need a work permit. 4. Seasonal and cross-border workers. 5. Data are for 31 December of each year and are counts of valid work permits. Workers from the EU are not included. Data include work permits delivered following the 1996 regularisation programme. Provisional data for 1997. Sources: General Directorate on Migration; Ministry of Labour and Social Security; Ministry of Justice.
At the end of 1997, nearly one out of two foreigners lived in Madrid, Barcelona, Alicante or Malaga. The first two cities are major economic hubs, while the last two are mainly tourist centres. But the Mediterranean coast (from Gerona to Malaga) and the Canary and Balearic Islands are the regions with the highest concentrations of foreigners. The geographic breakdown of foreigners locations changed somewhat with the regularisation programme, and Madrid, Almeria, Tarragona and Valencia were the cities that recorded the largest increase in the proportion of foreigners in their total populations. In 1997 the proportion of women in the foreign population was 48.5%. But the breakdown by continent of origin is very uneven, for although women account for much the larger share of the Latin American community (this is particularly true of women from the Dominican Republic and Colombia), they are a minority among immigrants from Africa (especially from Senegal, Algeria, Gambia and Morocco) and Pakistan. The regularisation programme led to a higher proportion of women among African immigrants and also among Latin Americans. The percentage of men in the African community dropped from 74% in 1993 to 68% in 1997 and in the Latin American community from 42% to 37%. There was little change in the proportion of women among European and Asian immigrants, which were 50 and 48% respectively. Eight out of ten foreign nationals are aged between 15 and 64. The age distribution varies according to the continent of origin. The proportion of children aged under 5 is highest for Africans and nationals of Eastern European countries, while the share of persons over 65 is above average for nationals of the EU and the Americas (not including Spanish-speaking countries). The breakdown by nationality shows that Moroccans and Chinese have
OECD 1999
205
the highest proportion of children under the age of 15, while there is a particularly large share of people over the age of 65 among nationals of the United Kingdom (25%) and Germany (13%). Asylum seekers After dropping sharply in 1995 (5 700 applications for asylum compared with 12 000 the previous year), the number of asylum seekers has levelled off at around 5 000 yearly. The more restrictive measures that came into force in mid-1994 no doubt lie behind this trend. In 1997 applicants came mainly from Romania (30% of the total, more than half of whom belonged to the gypsy minority) and to a lesser extent from Nigeria, Liberia, Cuba and Algeria. Nearly 70% of the applications filed in 1997 were immediately rejected, and this rate is rising sharply. Moreover, during that year only 150 persons were granted refugee status. Since 1995 the acceptance rate of requests for asylum (calculated on the basis of applications filed and applications accepted in a given year) has dropped sharply and stood at approximately 2.7% in 1997. Naturalisations For the second consecutive year, the number of individuals acquiring Spanish nationality increased (approximately 10 300 compared to 6 800 in 1995). Approximately two thirds of them were from South American countries. Argentina, Peru and the Dominican Republic remain the three principle countries of origin of those naturalised. Naturalisation of individuals of Asian origin (the Philippines) rose sharply, as did that of Moroccan nationals. Foreigners and the labour market In 1997 the total labour force grew by 1.1%, while the foreign labour force, measured on the basis of the change in the stock of workers with a valid work permit, rose by 5.7%. In the sectors in which foreign workers are concentrated, the trend in total employment varied, being downward in domestic services and agriculture and upward in construction and hotels and catering. But in these sectors the trend in the number of foreign workers does not always match the trend in the sectors total employment (for example, the largest increase in the number of foreign workers was in agriculture and domestic services). When this is the case, the variations (negative or positive) in foreign employment are more marked than for total employment. In 1997 some 176 000 valid work permits were held by foreigners (compared with 166 500 in 1996). These included permits for seasonal and cross-border workers, new permits and renewals. After following a downward trend since 1991, the number of permits rose by 20% in 1996 because of the regularisation programme carried out that year and by nearly 6% in 1997. Since 1992 EU nationals are no longer required to have work permits and are therefore not included in these statistics. Of the 176 000 foreigners holding a work permit in 1997 (or whose permit was renewed), over half came from Africa (primarily from Morocco) and over a quarter from Latin America (Peru and the Dominican Republic). Among the nationals of Asian countries, the Chinese and Filipinos were the most numerous, and Poles were the largest group from non-EU European countries. Since 1996 a new system has been in operation and a permanent work permit has been created. It allows workers to engage in a paid or self-employed activity for an indeterminate time, requiring only that the permit be renewed every five years. A study of work permits by category shows that the share of long-term permits has been rising since the beginning of the 1990s. In 1997, 56% of work permit holders held a permit valid for at least 3 years (compared to 34% in 1993). This percentage is slightly lower for women (51%), no doubt because on average their establishment in Spain has been more recent. Impact of the 1996 regularisation programme on the structure of the labour force The amnesty for undocumented immigrants decided in 1996 was carried out over a five-month period, between April and August of that year. It gave some foreigners without papers the possibility of obtaining either a work and residence permit, or a residence permit only, depending on the individual case. The results now available show that a substantial proportion of those who benefited from the programme (some 20 000 people)
OECD 1999
206
Sweden
had previously held a permit. These were individuals who had entered Spain legally, mostly during the period 1986-91, but were now undocumented because their work permits had not been renewed. An increasing feminisation of the foreign labour force can be observed, in particular since the 1996 regularisation programme. Another effect of this programme was the increase in the share of the foreign labour force employed in agriculture, which seems to indicate that demand is greater than the annual quota in this sector. In 1997 the share of African and East European workers increased, with a particularly sharp rise in the number of workers from Morocco, Romania and the former Yugoslavia. As for Latin America, the largest increases were for Cuba and Ecuador, while the number of workers from Argentina, the Dominican Republic, Chile and Bolivia fell. The proportion of self-employed workers remained stable (at approximately 18%). It would appear that the number of self-employed workers was overestimated in 1997, since under the 1996 regularisation programme it was necessary to have a job offer from an employer to obtain a work permit for paid employment. To circumvent this difficulty, a number of workers eligible for regularisation applied as self-employed persons. The trend in the number of foreign workers was not identical across all regions. In Madrid their number fell in absolute terms, while in Barcelona it rose. The provinces of Almeria and Murcia had the largest increase in foreign workers. Policy developments Spain has strengthened its relations with Morocco, which now allows the readmission of undocumented immigrants apprehended at the southern border. Additional police and civil guards have also been stationed at Melilla and Ceuta. The number of Algerian and sub-Saharan nationals allowed entry to this area has been increased. A procedure was established in July 1997 specifically for nationals who entered via Ceuta or Melilla, who can be issued with a special residence and work permit. Readmission agreements have been signed with Romania (April 1996) and Bulgaria (December 1996). The General Electoral System Act was amended in May 1997 to enable all EU citizens residing in Spain to vote or run for office in municipal elections. A clause in the legislation provides non-EU foreign residents the same rights, subject to reciprocity.
SWEDEN
Introduction At 1 January 1998, the total population of Sweden stood at 8.8 million, 6% of whom were foreigners. Unemployment ceased rising in 1993, the Swedish economy having begun to grow again. The beneficial effects of recently introduced active measures to boost the labour market were already noticeable by 1998. The unemployment rate at 1 January 1999 was estimated at 6.2%, down from 8% in 1993. Migration movements and changes in the foreign population Over the past ten years, emigration flows have remained relatively stable but immigration flows have fluctuated significantly. In 1997 net migration was positive at 18 100. Movements between Sweden and the Nordic countries indicated that outflows from Sweden exceeded inflows, whereas arrivals from the former Yugoslavia, Iraq, Iran and Somalia increased, accounting for much of the net migration gain. In 1993 and 1994 inflows of foreigners increased significantly. After peaking in 1994 (75 000), they declined sharply (see Table II.38) to just under 33 400 in 1997. These fluctuations were largely due to the arrival of nationals of the former Yugoslavia, with 42 000 entries in 1994, compared with only 7 000 the following year. Outflows
OECD 1999
207
Table II.38.
Current gures on migratory ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Sweden
1994 1995 1996 1997 1994 1995 1996 1997
Total population1 % of foreign population Stock of foreign population1 Nordic countries Finland Norway Denmark Other countries of which: Former Yugoslavia Iran Iraq Inows of foreigners by nationality or region of origin2 Nordic countries Finland Norway Denmark Other countries of which: Former Yugoslavia Iraq Net migration of foreigners by nationality2 Nordic countries Finland Norway Denmark Other countries of which: Former Yugoslavia
8 816.4 8 837.5 8 844.5 8 847.6 Number of residence permits 6.1 6.0 6.0 5.9 by category of admission3 Family reunication 537.4 531.8 526.6 522.0 Refugees 166.4 163.7 160.8 162.2 EEA-agreement 106.7 104.9 103.1 101.3 Foreign students 33.0 32.3 31.7 31.0 Adopted children 26.7 26.5 26.0 25.4 Employment 371.0 368.1 365.8 359.8 Asylum seekers 40.4 38.4 36.6 33.6 of which: 32.7 29.3 27.2 26.2 Iraq 19.0 21.3 22.8 24.8 Former Yugoslavia 74.8 6.2 2.8 1.6 1.8 68.6 41.5 3.5 59.0 0.4 0.2 0.8 0.2 59.4 40.8 36.1 6.3 2.8 1.7 1.8 29.8 7.1 2.3 21.2 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.2 21.4 6.9 29.3 5.6 2.6 1.5 1.4 23.8 2.0 2.1 14.9 1.0 0.2 0.5 0.2 15.8 1.8 33.4 5.3 2.8 1.5 1.0 28.1 Persons with foreign background4 Foreign-born Swedish citizens Foreigners Born in Sweden Swedish citizens5 Foreigners
79.1 26.0 44.9 6.0 1.1 0.9 0.1 18.6 1.7 10.6
32.4 19.7 5.6 4.7 1.5 0.8 0.2 9.0 1.8 2.3
31.7 18.8 4.8 5.2 1.5 1.1 0.3 5.8 1.6 1.0
36.6 18.9 9.6 4.6 2.4 0.7 0.4 9.6 3.1 3.0
1 598.5 1 630.1 1 656.6 1 683.7 922.1 936.0 943.8 954.2 477.9 497.3 510.6 579.2 444.2 438.7 433.2 375.0 676.5 694.0 712.8 729.0 583.2 613.8 632.3 646.0 93.2 80.2 80.5 83.0 213.0 91.0 122.0 35.1 6.4 3.0 2.7 23.0 6.4 17.4 220.0 91.0 130.0 32.0 3.6 2.1 2.8 23.5 6.4 17.7 218.0 90.0 128.0 25.6 2.4 2.0 2.0 19.1 6.2 17.2 220.0 87.0 133.0 28.9 6.1 1.9 1.4 19.5 .. ..
5.7 Stock of foreign labour6 3.7 Nordic nationals Non-nordic nationals 18.1 Acquisition of nationality 1.1 by country of former nationality 0.2 Fomer Yugoslavia 0.6 Finland 0.4 Turkey 19.3 Other countries 4.4 Mixed marriages % of total marriages
Data are from population registers and refer to the population on 31 December of the years indicated. 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. 3. Residence permits are not required for Nordic citizens. 4. Foreign background, rst or second generation immigrant only. 5. Young persons (up to 17) with at least one parent born abroad. 6. Annual average from the Labour Force Survey. Sources: Swedish Immigration Board; Statistics Sweden.
1. 2.
of foreigners have ranged from 11 000 to 16 000 since the late 1980s. In 1997 over 45% of these departures concerned Nordic country nationals. Although net migration is positive, the resident foreign population has been declining steadily since 1994. This is largely because the annual number of naturalisations has exceeded the net migration of foreigners. At 1 January 1998, some 522 000 foreigners were resident in Sweden (just under 6% of the total population). Finns accounted for 20% of the foreign population, followed by nationals from the former Yugoslavia (6%), and Norwegians, Iranians, Danes, Iraqis and Turks (just under 4% each). With the exception of Iraqis, the number of immigrants from all of these countries has declined over the past few years. The overall contribution of immigration to Swedens total population can be evaluated by adding to the stock of foreigners resident in the country the stock of individuals born abroad and children with at least one parent born abroad. After eliminating any double counting, the figure for 1997 amounted to around 1.7 million, meaning that in Sweden one person in five is of immigrant origin. Of the 954 000 people born abroad but resident in Sweden, over half are Swedish citizens. These are people who have acquired Swedish nationality or have at least one Swedish parent.
OECD 1999
208
Sweden
The number of naturalisations, which had been declining steadily since 1993, rose between 1996 and 1997. Of 29 000 naturalisations in 1997, nationals of the former Yugoslavia accounted for over 20%, followed by Finns and Turks, with 7 and 5% respectively. Foreigners, other than Nordic country nationals, must have a residence permit in order to reside in Sweden. Since the late 1980s, the number of residence permits delivered has risen significantly. The two categories to have benefited from this increase are immigrants entering for the purpose of family reunion and refugees. The annual number of permits issued for family reunion has been around 20 000 since the early 1990s, with the exception of 1994 (26 000). That year, almost 45 000 refugees obtained a residence permit compared with under 5 000 in 1996, and just under 10 000 in 1997. In 1997, a total of 36 600 residence permits was issued. Over threequarters of these were issued to immigrants entering for the purpose of family reunion (18 900) and to refugees (9 600). The remainder, i.e. 4 600 permits, went to nationals from the European Economic Area (see Table II.38). Refugees and asylum seekers Applications for asylum in 1997 were up on the figure for 1996 (9 700, compared with 5 800). This increase was largely due to the growing number of requests by citizens from Iraq and the former Yugoslavia. In 1998 the upward trend continued, with applications numbering around 13 000. Since the early 1990s, the number of asylum seekers has fluctuated significantly, peaking in 1992 with 84 000 applications. These changes were due to the political situation in the applicants countries of origin, but also to the introduction of visas for nationals of Bosnia and Herzegovina to enter Sweden as of June 1993. Similar measures were taken in the same year for nationals of Serbia-Montenegro and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and in 1994 (although these measures were later abolished) for people from Haiti, Ivory Coast, Gambia, Niger, Togo and Uganda. The decline in the number of applications since 1992 is largely due to the sharp drop in applications by nationals of the former Yugoslavia, which fell from 69 400 in 1992 to barely 1 000 in 1996. Sweden has other forms of refugee status than that defined under the Geneva Convention, and the requirements are less stringent. However, the terms de facto or war-resister disappeared in 1997 from the terminology used to define refugee status (see below). Following a government decision in April 1994, some 20 000 Kosovo Albanians who had entered Sweden as asylum seekers before 1 January 1993 were granted permanent resident permits on humanitarian grounds. In 1997, 10 000 residence permits were granted to refugees. Almost two thirds were granted on humanitarian grounds, 14% under the Geneva Convention, 12% under refugee quotas and 8% to persons in need of assistance. Foreigners and the labour market There were 220 000 foreign workers in the labour force in Sweden, or some 5% of the overall total, at 1 January 1998. Finnish citizens were the most numerous, accounting for around one-quarter of the total labour force, followed by nationals from the former Yugoslavia (15%) and in decreasing order of importance, by Norwegians, Danes and Iranians (this latter 5%). With just over 400 permanent resident permits issued to workers in 1997, immigration specifically to enter the labour market remained marginal. The said permits are restricted to highly skilled individuals recruited in industry, self-employed workers and those in the professions. Of the 4 600 nationals of the European Economic Area who were given permanent resident permits in 1997, some 2 000 have entered the Swedish labour market. They did not have to apply for a work permit. However, they did have to obtain permission to reside in the country, but this is given almost automatically and serves to count the number of people in this category entering the country. There are also temporary work permits, which are not recorded in the annual migration statistics. These are easier to obtain than permanent permits. On the other hand, there are fewer statistics available on the annual number of temporary permits delivered, since many different authorities are involved. The County Labour Boards issue seasonal permits, whereas the Immigration Board, in consultation with the National Labour Market Administration, issues other types of temporary permit. These short-stay permits go mostly to seasonal workers. In 1996 some 8 400 temporary permits were issued, mostly in the horticultural sector.
OECD 1999
209
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; integration policy became the responsibility of the Ministry of the Interior. An amendment to the Aliens Act regarding refugees came into force in January 1997. It defined refugee status more flexibly than the 1951 Geneva Convention. Individuals may be recognised as refugees even if their country is not one of the so-called unsafe countries. Refugees are foreigners who are outside the country of their nationality and are at risk of being persecuted in their country because of their race, nationality, membership of a social or religious group or political opinions. This definition applies whether the refugees are afraid of being persecuted by their government, or whether the latter is unable to provide adequate protection from persecution. The Act also covers stateless persons. In September 1990 Sweden ratified the United Nations Convention on Childrens Rights. This Convention has not been incorporated into Swedish legislation, but the government announced that the legislation on foreigners was in compliance with the UN Convention on Childrens Rights, and that only a few clarifications remained to be made. An important provision was included, requiring that the health, development and interest of the child be considered. As a result, the legal authorities must take the presence of children into account when issuing a residence permit on humanitarian grounds. The measures applying to children in the Aliens Act, which previously concerned persons under the age of 16, now concern those under the age of 18. In September 1997 the government submitted a bill to Parliament entitled Sweden, the Future and the Plural Society from Immigration Policy to Integration Policy. The objectives of this policy are to ensure equal rights and opportunities for all, regardless of ethnic or cultural origin, and to promote social cohesion and development in an atmosphere of tolerance and mutual respect.
SWITZERLAND
Introduction After experiencing recession in 1996, the Swiss economy registered a 0.7% increase in GDP in 1997. However, unemployment rose from 4.7 to 5.2%. Migration and changes in the foreign population The downward trend in inflows of foreign nationals that began in 1993 continued in 1997 (just over 70 000 arrivals, compared with slightly under 74 500 in 1996, see Table II.39); the number of departures declined. The number of foreigners entering Switzerland in order to work accounted for less than one-third of total inflows for that year, marking a clear decline. The decrease in inflows of nationals from the former Yugoslavia (still the most numerous group, however), a trend that began in 1994, continued in 1997. The same was true of most of the other main countries of origin. Inflows from Germany remained at the same level as in 1996, whereas Portugals ranking in the list of sending countries fell for a fourth consecutive year. Inflows from Turkey and Spain also declined. Departures of foreign nationals were down on 1996, with Italians heading the list (15.6%), followed by Portuguese (13.7%), Germans (9.2%) and Spanish (9%). Positive net migration, i.e. the difference between immigration and emigration, has been steadily declining since 1992 (see Table II.39). In 1997, net migration of Italians, Spanish and Portuguese was negative for the second consecutive year. Conversely, net migration was positive for the French, Turks, Germans and nationals of the former Yugoslavia.
OECD 1999
210
Switzerland
Table II.39.
Current gures on the components of total population change, on migratory ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force in Switzerland
1994 1995 1996 1997 1994 1995 1996 1997
Population on 31 December of the years indicated % of foreigners Components of foreign population change1 Net migration1 Natural increase Acquisitions of Swiss nationality Other2 Migration ows of foreigners3 Inows by main nationality3 Former Yugoslavia Germany Italy France Portugal Other countries Outows by main nationality3 Italy Portugal Former Yugoslavia Germany France Other countries Net migration by main Former Yugoslavia Germany France Portugal Italy Other countries Asylum seekers Acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality Italy Former Yugoslavia Turkey France Other countries
1. 2. 3.
7 019.0 7 062.0 7 085.0 7 094.0 18.6 18.9 19.0 19.0 39.8 39.4 14.2 13.8 91.7 25.3 8.7 6.9 5.0 8.6 37.2 64.2 9.9 7.5 8.0 6.2 3.5 29.2 27.5 17.3 2.5 1.5 1.1 3.0 8.0 16.1 13.8 3.3 1.8 1.0 0.9 6.8 30.5 26.8 13.3 16.8 7.2 87.9 22.3 8.6 6.7 5.0 7.6 37.7 67.5 10.3 7.4 8.7 6.6 3.8 30.6 20.4 13.6 2.0 1.2 0.2 3.6 7.0 17.0 16.8 4.4 2.5 1.2 0.9 7.9 7.0 12.0 14.1 19.4 0.2 74.3 14.1 8.7 5.4 5.0 5.5 35.7 67.7 10.8 7.9 9.0 6.2 3.7 30.1 6.6 5.1 2.4 1.3 2.3 5.4 5.6 18.0 19.4 5.2 2.8 1.4 1.0 8.9 3.2 9.3 13.4 19.2 0.3
Foreign population By main nationality1 Italy Former Yugoslavia Portugal Germany Spain France Other countries
1 300.1 1 330.6 1 337.6 1 340.8 364.0 358.9 350.3 342.3 272.4 294.2 305.0 313.5 128.6 134.8 137.1 136.3 89.1 90.9 92.7 94.7 103.7 101.4 97.7 94.0 52.7 53.6 54.3 55.0 289.5 296.7 300.5 305.0 911.6 319.0 895.7 319.1 869.7 313.6 847.4 309.4
nationality3
Foreign workers4 of which: Women 70.1 Inows by status of residence % of resident workers 12.8 8.5 % of cross-border workers 5.0 4.8 Foreign resident workers 4.0 By main nationality1 35.0 Italy Former Yugoslavia 63.4 Portugal 9.9 Germany 8.7 Spain 7.2 Others 5.9 3.5 By major industry division 28.2 Agriculture, forestry Extractive and manufacturing 6.7 industries 5.6 Building 2.6 Trade 1.3 Hotel, restaurants 4.7 Other services 4.9 6.8 Cross-border workers by nationality France (% of the total) 24.0 Italy (% of the total) Germany (% of the total) Others (% of the total) 19.2 5.0 3.0 1.8 1.0 8.4
81.2 16.7
740.3 224.7 133.0 78.8 55.7 66.6 181.5 13.4 129.2 96.0 88.3 78.6 334.7 151.9 48.6 24.4 20.6 6.4
81.3 16.9
728.7 214.3 134.6 80.5 56.3 63.5 179.5 14.8 123.9 94.2 91.7 81.3 322.7 151.0 49.0 24.2 20.6 6.2
81.5 16.9
709.1 202.5 136.2 79.3 56.7 59.8 174.6 14.5 117.4 87.4 90.6 80.4 318.9 147.0 49.5 23.4 21.1 6.0
81.7 16.7
692.8 189.5 138.3 65.2 57.3 54.6 187.9 15.5 112.1 80.5 89.5 80.0 315.1 142.0 50.2 23.0 21.0 5.8
Data cover only foreigners with annual or settlement permits and include conversions of seasonal work permits into annual or settlement permits. The introduction of a new data processing system explain the peculiarly high gure for 1995. Data include only foreigners who obtained an annual or settlement permit during the indicated year. Conversions of seasonal work permits into annual or settlement permits are not included. 4. Figures cover foreign workers with settlement, annual, cross-border and seasonal permits. Source: Ofce fed eral des etrangers.
A breakdown by age reveals, as in previous years, that net migration was positive for the under 20 and 20-39 age groups. This indicates that migration is, for the time being, helping to slow down the ageing of the Swiss population. At 31 December 1997, the resident foreign population stood at 1 341 000 (by April 1998 the figure was reported to have grown by some 3 500) and accounted for 19% of the total population (see Table II.39). Holders of one-year residence permits accounted for 27% of the foreign population residing in Switzerland in 1997. Over 80% had lived in Switzerland for over five years. Italians still comprise the majority of foreign residents, but their numbers have been declining steadily since 1974; they fell again in 1997. Nationals of the former Yugoslavia accounted for just under a quarter of the total foreign resident population, an increase of almost 3% on 1996. Portuguese nationals accounted for 10%, Spanish for 7%, French for 4% and Austrians for 2%.
OECD 1999
211
After rising in 1996, the number of people acquiring Swiss nationality levelled off in 1997 at just under 19 200.This figure is equivalent to almost 1.5% of the foreign population residing permanently in the country at end-December 1997. The majority of those acquiring Swiss nationality were from EU/EFTA countries (43% of the total), other European countries (32%), followed by Asian and Arab countries. Of EU/EFTA nationals acquiring Swiss nationality, Italians headed the list, followed by French and Germans. Refugees and asylum seekers Almost 24 000 applications for asylum were made in 1997, one-third more than in 1996. The upward trend continued in 1998 with 40 000 applications registered. Over a third of the applications in 1998 were from citizens of the former Yugoslavia, Sri Lanka, Turkey, Bosnia and Somalia. The number of applications in abeyance in 1997 rose to over 17 000, mainly owing to the increase in the number of applications from persons originating from Kosovo. Refugee status was granted in only 11% of all adjudicated cases. Acceptance rates varied widely by nationality. The rate was 3% for citizens of Sri Lanka, 30% for those of Bosnia and Herzegovina and 86% for those from Vietnam. Almost 24 000 were granted refugee status in 1997, an increase of 4% on 1996. Employment of foreigners At the end of 1997, having fallen for the third consecutive year, the number of foreign workers stood at less than 850 000 (see Table II.39). Almost two-thirds of the foreign labour force were settled immigrants, a fifth held one-year permits, 17% were cross-border workers and 1.5% seasonal workers (this type of work being at its least available in December). The participation rate for the resident foreign population was almost 52% in 1997 and varied according to nationality: 42% for Turks, for instance, and 65% for Austrians. On average over 1997, foreign nationals accounted for almost one quarter of the total labour force. The proportion of foreigners in the total unemployed (almost 47% in December 1997) is much higher than the proportion of foreigners in the total labour force. As in previous years a breakdown of the foreign labour force by gender reveals that men (63%) are far more numerous than women (37%). Numbers have fallen for most nationalities, with the exception of those from the former Yugoslavia. Foreigners are employed mainly in commerce, banking and insurance (21%), metalworking and machine-tools (17%), the hotel and catering industry (12%) and, finally, building and civil engineering (11%). The hotel and catering industry, education, healthcare, commerce and metalworking together employ 55% of new immigrant workers. The number of seasonal workers arriving in Switzerland in 1997 was down 25% on 1996, to just below 47 000. The sharp decline in conversions of seasonal permits to one-year permits continued in 1997. In line with the decision taken by the Federal Council in 1994 to restrict the conversion of seasonal permits to EU/EFTA nationals, the seasonal workers most affected by the decrease are those from the former Yugoslavia (4% were granted conversions in 1997, compared with 41% in 1996). In 1997, some 60% of all seasonal permit conversions were granted to Portuguese nationals. In August 1997, seasonal workers accounted for 3.5% of all foreign labour. This figure, which was down on 1996, is attributable to the economic slowdown in the construction and catering industries, which had hitherto employed large numbers of seasonal workers. Due to continued economic stagnation the number of cross-border workers declined in 1997, confirming the trend first recorded in 1991. Unemployment is higher in the border cantons, in particular Geneva and Ticino, than in other regions. Policy developments Developments in Switzerlands migration policy in 1997 were made within a climate of conflicting political pressures. On the one hand, policy developments in this were contingent on the bilateral agreements at that time in the course of negotiation with the European Union on the free movement of persons. On the other, a popular initiative submitted in 1995 for referendum by the year 2000 aims at limiting the proportion of foreignOECD 1999
212
Turkey
ers to 18% of the total population. Yet the very sharp rise in asylum applications in 1998, due mainly to the worsening situation in the former Yugoslavia and the fact that Switzerland is not a party to the Dublin Convention on Applications for Asylum, to some extent calls this latter objective into question. A broad debate was launched in 1993 on the drawing up of a Migration Act; in this regard Switzerlands admission and integration policies were selected as priority areas. In 1996 a group of experts was asked to put forward proposals for a new migration policy; it submitted its final report in August 1997. The experts felt that a framework act on migration should be ruled out because of the legal, legislative and political problems it would cause. At the same time, they identified five priority areas, namely admission policy, integration policy, expulsion and repatriation policy, foreign policy with regard to migration, and information and communications policy. On the subject of admissions, the experts recommended replacing the three-circle model with a binary one distinguishing only between EEA countries and the rest of the world. Such a model envisages the gradual introduction of freedom of movement for nationals of countries in the first circle, and a strict quota system for the others. The independent experts recommend greater commitment to social integration on the part of the Confederation. The Federal Commission for Foreigners (CFE) has carried out a consultation procedure, as part of the preparations for a report on Switzerlands future policy on integration, and its findings highlight the need to establish and co-ordinate stronger structures aimed at taking practical steps to promote integration, and to make sufficient funding available. The bilateral negotiations between Switzerland and the European Union continued throughout 1997 and 1998. They were concluded in 1999 with the signature of an agrement in Luxembourg on 21 June. The contracting parties had reached an agreement on the gradual introduction of the free movement of persons. The Federal Council unanimously approved the report by the group of experts on a new migration policy for Switzerland. The proposal to modify the three-circle model was incorporated into the full revision of the federal law on the residence and settlement of foreigners, initiated in early 1998. A full revision of the Order limiting the number of foreigners (OLE) is underway which is expected to lead to the suppression of the status of seasonal worker and the facilitation of foreigners family reunion as well as their geographic and professional mobility. A new law on the right to asylum, approved in June 1999 created a status of war refugee which will give the right to temporary asylum on Swiss territory.
TURKEY
Introduction Since the early 1980s, Turkey has undertaken far-reaching changes to its economy supported by strong growth (6% a year on average over the period 1980-97) and fuelled by the dynamic expansion of the industrial sector and services. The gradual opening up of the Turkish economy to the outside has played an important role in these changes, and has picked up speed following the entry into force on 31 December 1995 of the Customs Union Agreement between Turkey and the European Community. After the financial crisis of 1994, the economy has enjoyed strong growth (more than 7% in 1996 and 1997) stimulated by a rapid recovery in investments due in part to the new opportunities created by the Customs Union and the opening up of the CEECs and the former Soviet Union. Exports of manufactures to the European Union, the countries of Eastern Europe and Russia have grown quickly. In 1998, the rate of growth fell to 2.8% and the forecasts for the year 2000 are lower still (2%). In spite of the changes made, the Turkish economy continues to show recurrent weaknesses: a large and inefficient agricultural sector, a very small financial sector, chronic monetary instability and very high inflation. From end-1995 to end-1997, annual inflation (consumer prices) exceeded 80% on average. In 1998, inflation fell slightly; by April 1999 it was below 65% and could be around 50% in 1999.
OECD 1999
213
The government in place since mid-1997 has begun a stabilisation programme aimed at bringing inflation down to less than 10% by the end of 2000. Other objectives of the programme are to restructure the budget, introduce the reforms required to consolidate public finances, particularly as regards social security, and accelerate the process of privatisation. Population, employment and unemployment The population of Turkey is a little over 62 million. The working age population, which includes all persons aged 12 and over, is estimated at a little under 47 million. The female participation rate remains low (43% in rural areas, but less than 16% in towns). Retirement occurs at a relatively young age. A little over half the labour force is covered by the social security system. Nearly 30% of jobs are in the public sector. From some 20 million in 1993, the labour force rose to 22.5 million in 1997, nearly half of whom were employed in the agricultural sector. Of these, almost 60% were unpaid family members. Despite a substantial fall in real wages, unemployment, which stood at 8% after the 1994 crisis has fallen only slightly; it was just below 7% in 1998. Unemployment among young educated people is severe (30%). Given that there exists no unemployment benefit system and that family workers and the self-employed constitute a large proportion of the active population, an estimate of under-employment is as important as that of unemployment. The under-employment rate was estimated at a little over 6% in October 1997. Population growth (1.6% per annum), its demographic structure (a third of the population is below 14 years of age) and a likely rise in the participation rate point to a rapid increase in the labour force in the years to come, which risks leading to a worsening of the general employment situation. Emigration and trends of the Turkish population abroad Figures relating to the Turkish population living abroad are compiled from the records of the host countries and of the overseas representatives of the Ministries of Labour and Social Security and of Foreign Affairs. Differences in definitions, in coverage and in time-frame give rise to marked variations. Moreover, the figures are for legal migrants only. The number of Turks living abroad continues to increase and was estimated at a little over 3.45 million in 1998, representing 5.3% of Turkeys total resident population. The number of Turkish workers employed abroad fell, however, equivalent to 5.5% of Turkeys total labour force in 1998. Unemployment among Turkish immigrants Unemployment affects mostly Turks living in European Union countries and is significantly higher not only than the rate for nationals but also that of other migrants despite association agreements signed in 1996 between the European Community and Turkey giving Turkish workers priority for job vacancies not filled by workers from the EU. The principal factors accounting for this phenomenon are poor command of the host countrys language, insufficient formal education, the lack of occupational and technical training, difficulties in integrating into the host society, health problems and the ageing of the active Turkish population. Emigration of Turkish workers In 1997, the annual emigration of Turkish workers organised by the Turkish Employment Office concerned nearly 33 500 individuals, 12% down on 1996 (see Table II.40). This figure seems relatively low compared to the number of candidates for emigration recorded on the waiting list which amounted to more than 600 000 persons in October 1998, demonstrating the strong propensity of the Turkish population to emigrate. The number of Turkish workers recruited in the CIS countries, the Gulf states and Libya fell between 1996 and 1997. Saudi Arabia now takes less than 15% of all Turkish workers dispatched by the Public Employment Office and accounts for only 10% of the total number of Turkish workers living abroad. Given that this country appears to have completed the bulk of its infrastructure construction, this trend is set to continue. The Russian Federation remains the principal importer of Turkish labour. However, the market for sub-contracted labour appears to have stopped growing. Moreover, Turkish sub-contractors are faced with stiff competition from the
OECD 1999
214
Turkey
member countries of the CIS which are suffering severe unemployment following the recent waves of privatisation. The annual flow of Turkish workers to the European Union fell from more than 2 600 1996 to nearly 1 900 in 1997, 1 800 of which were to Germany. A Prime Ministerial Regulation dated 16 February 1998 set up two committees with the task of considering the difficulties of Turks living abroad. The main purpose of the Supreme Committee for nationals living abroad, comprising the Prime Minister, the Minister of State responsible for migrations and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, is to formulate the policies required to resolve the difficulties facing Turkish emigrants in host countries, to take decisions in response to their requests, and to draft proposals for the adoption of appropriate legislation. The Co-ordinating Committee for nationals living abroad is composed of 46 representatives of Turkish communities established in twelve different countries. Its main task is to identify the problems facing Turks living abroad and to recommend solutions to the Supreme Committee. Naturalisations
Table II.40. Number of Turkish workers sent abroad by the National Employment and Placement Ofce, by country or region of destination, 1994-1997, Turkey
Thousands
1994 1995 1996 1997
New Independent States Saudi Arabia Israel EU1 Germany Libya United States Cyprus Kuwait Australia Romania Other countries Total
1.
41.8 13.1 .. 2.1 .. 1.9 .. 0.1 0.1 0.1 .. 2.1 61.1
35.8 14.5 3.1 2.6 .. 1.8 0.3 .. 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.6 59.5
25.9 5.6 3.7 2.6 2.4 2.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.3 40.7
17.0 7.7 4.3 1.9 1.8 1.8 0.3 0.1 0.3 33.3
Many host countries have restrictive and changing Source: Ministry of Labour and Social Security, General Directorate of Workers Abroad. legislation rendering naturalisation difficult. Sometimes, as in Germany, this legislation requires migrants to renounce their nationality of origin. This did not encourage Turkish nationals abroad to apply for naturalisation, for this renunciation would have stripped them of the right to own property in Turkey. Moreover, males were not permitted to renounce Turkish nationality without having first performed military service. Two amendments to Turkish law on nationality were made in 1995 making it easier for Turkish emigrants to acquire the nationality of their country of residence. The first created a special foreign nationality, allowing Turkish emigrants to retain their rights and property in Turkey. The second amendment allowed males under 20 years of age to renounce Turkish nationality before having completed their military service. In recent years, some host countries have made it easier for foreigners to obtain their nationality. For example in Germany, an initial relaxation adopted in 1993, coupled with the amendments to the Turkish legislation, led to an increase in naturalisation applications. The reform of the German Nationality Code, adopted in 1999, introducing certain principles of jus soli, could have similar consequences in the months to come. Return migration Return migration by Turkish emigrants is relatively low. For example, over the period 1984-95, fewer than 11 500 Turks left France for good in order to return to Turkey. There are many reasons why Turks choose to remain in host countries. Their families have usually joined them abroad, second and third-generation children speak the language of the host country fluently, and health services are more highly developed than in Turkey. Moreover, Turks wishing to return home risk finding it difficult to re-adapt, particularly so given the limited opportunities offered by the present structure of the Turkish labour market. Immigration in Turkey Although Turkey is not generally considered as a destination country, political upheaval in neighbouring countries (Bulgaria, the former Soviet Union, the former Yugoslavia, Iraq and Iran, for example) coupled with stricter immigration controls in other West European countries, has led a growing number of migrants to settle there. Foreigners working in Turkey are legally obliged to obtain an individual residence permit. However, since
OECD 1999
From 1995 on, the data also include the other countries of the Economic European Area.
215
their number remains all but negligible (just under 16 500) this requirement is not rigorously enforced. Slightly less than half originate from the EEA and North America. They are generally highly skilled and typically accompany inward direct investments. By contrast, those originating from the CIS, the CEECs, the Middle East and Africa, who together account for 40% of foreigners working in Turkey, tend to be much less qualified. Turkey is also a transit country for many illegal immigrants, mainly from Asia and Northern Iraq. Until now, it has refused to conclude readmission agreements with European Union Member States, on constitutional grounds. This position makes border controls particularly difficult and uncertain. Nevertheless, Turkey recently introduced a new passport system in line with the standards of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), and optical-scanner passport controls.
UNITED KINGDOM
Introduction In 1998 the UK economy posted GDP growth in excess of 2.5% for a fifth consecutive year; average annual growth over this period exceeded 3%. Although employment growth has decelerated somewhat from the almost 2% recorded in 1997 the labour market remains tight. Unemployment, having fallen below 7% in 1997, its lowest level since 1980, continued to decline in 1998. Companies have been reporting recruitment difficulties, especially for skilled workers in the service sector. The response of migration inflows in 1997 to this strong economic performance was positive. Although outflows recorded by the International Passenger Survey were the highest since 1991 the inflows attained a historically high level; the net gain was the second highest since 1979 (see Chart II.14). As in previous years, a net loss of British citizens was more than made up for by a net gain in the number of non-British citizens. Settlement also continued at a fairly high level, the number in 1997 being the second highest figure since 1991. The stock of foreign nationals living in the United Kingdom rose strongly as did the number in the labour force, the latter to over a million. Applications for asylum continue to rise. Recent trends in the flow pattern Net flows of non-UK nationals have been positive throughout the 1980s and thus far through the 1990s. The flow pattern has broadly reflected changes in economic conditions with a lag of some 12-18 months. The amplitude of fluctuation has been rather less than that of British citizens. A disaggregation of the flow data into European Union (excluding Ireland whose citizens share with those of the United Kingdom a Common Travel Area) and nonEU citizens reveals that the former, having fluctuated between 5 and 15 000 during the 1980s (with the exception of 1986), have increased sharply since 1994 to reach 29 000 in 1997 (see Table II.41). During the 1980s and through to 1992 the net flows of non-EU citizens fluctuated to a greater extent around a core value of approximately 40 000 since which time they have increased year on year to 65 000 in 1997, the highest recorded in this data series. The balance of immigration is very much in favour of those not in employment, the implication being that the bulk of recorded net migration gain consists of people who are not going to make a direct economic impact on the UK labour market. That said, the data clearly indicate that the foreign members of the labour force are on average more skilled than their UK counterparts. Moreover, this disparity has been increasing. Reflecting the operation of the work permit system, non-EU foreign nationals are particularly likely to be highly skilled. Enforcement and deportation Some 14 300 illegal entrants persons who entered the country using false papers or clandestinely were detected in 1997. This compares with 7 500 in 1994, 10 400 in 1995 and 14 500 in 1996 and thus halts the strong upward trend of recent years. One reason for this is that increasingly effective detection procedures have
OECD 1999
216
United Kingdom
Chart II.14.
Immigration flows to the United Kingdom, 1987-1997 Thousands

B. Number of asylum seekers5
Main regions of origin
A. Inflows of foreigners according to the different available sources

IPS
1
IPS, adjusted figures Home Office data4
Acceptances for settlement Asylum requests3 250
Europe
Africa
Asia 30 25 20
200
150 15 100 10 50 5 0 1987 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 1987 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97
C.
Inflows of foreign workers

Labour Force Survey
Work permits6
International Passenger Survey Department of Social Security7 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1987 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 1. 2. Data are from the International Passenger Survey (IPS). Data from the IPS adjusted to include some asylum seekers, short-term visitors who are subsequently granted an extension of stay for other reasons (study, marriage for example). 3. Including accompanying dependents. 4. Passengers admitted to the United Kingdom, excluding European Economic Area nationals. Data exclude visitors, passengers in transit or returning on limited leave or who previously settled. Students and au pair girls are also excluded. 5. Excluding dependents. 6. 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. 7. Data are based on the issue of a national insurance card to all new workers. Sources: International Passenger Survey; Home Office.
reduced the possibilities for illegal entry. The number of persons removed as illegal entrants, including those who left voluntarily following the initiation of enforcement action, increased by almost one third to 4 500. Settlement Settlement, in the context of migration in the United Kingdom, refers to the acquisition of permanent residence status. Most of the individuals acquiring permanent residence status have already resided in the United Kingdom for a considerable period of time (typically four years continuously) in order to fulfil qualifying periods of residence. In 1997 almost 80% were accepted on the basis of family ties with other UK residents. Those accepted on the basis of having held a work permit accounted for less than 5%. As in recent years, the majority of those granted settlement in 1997 were young, with almost three quarters of those accepted aged under 35. Only 3% were aged 60 and over. Those from the Indian subcontinent continued
OECD 1999
217
to be generally younger with about 85% of acceptances under 35, though there was a relatively higher proportion from that source aged 60 and over, reflecting acceptances of elderly relatives. Citizenship and naturalisation Although the number of applications for British citizenship has grown at an average annual rate of 11% over the last five years, to reach 65 000 in 1997, the numbers accepted have been drifting downwards. Around 37 000 were granted citizenship in 1997, a 14% fall on the previous year; nearly 5 000 applications were refused (see Table II.41). That the number of applications decided decreased in 1997 was due to the high levels of applications received and the number of progress enquiries they generated which diverted staff from processing applications. Immigration and the labour market The Labour Force Survey is the only source of data permitting a breakdown by nationality of the stock of foreign population and workforce in the United Kingdom. The survey includes all United Kingdom and foreign citizens, but the relatively small size of the sample (one sample interviewee is weighted up to approximately 300 people) means that disaggregation by nationality and migrant characteristics cannot be detailed. Stocks of foreign nationals During the period 1992-96 stocks of foreign nationals in the United Kingdom fluctuated around the 2 million mark. The total in 1998 was just over 2.2 million, an almost 7% increase on 1997. The rise in the previous year had been just less than 5%. The number of foreign nationals working in the United Kingdom fluctuated between 850 and 900 000 from 1993 to 1996, since when it has risen strongly, to exceed one million for the first time in 1998 (3.9% of the total in employment). Irish workers accounted for just under half of all EU workers. Their numbers having remained steady over the past five years the proportion of foreign workers from the EU has been declining, the 1998 figure being just below 44%. Age distribution of foreign workers The youthful nature of newly entering foreign workers continues to be apparent. Department of Social Security figures for 1996/7 show that almost 85% were under 35, virtually the same as in the previous four years. The EU continues to be especially important as a source of young workers with over nine in ten aged below 35, and just over half in the 18-24 age bracket. Those from the rest of Europe and from non-European countries tend to be older, again a pattern that has been constant throughout the 1990s. These data suggest that freedom of movement within the Union continues to allow substantial numbers of young people to enter the United Kingdom from the rest of the EU in order to work. In all probability most of them do so on a temporary basis. Work permits Applications for work permits are made by the employer on behalf of the non-EEA potential employee in order to fill a specific post. (Since 1994, EEA nationals have not required a work permit.) During 1997 there were just over 72 000 applications (including those for first permission, extension or change of employment and training), a 17% rise on the preceding year. The total number of issues was slightly over 54 000, a 13% increase on 1996, including 7 700 extensions and 2 500 changes of employment, both of which were small reductions on the previous year. Thus, the increase in issues has been in fresh additions to the foreign workforce. An analysis of the occupations for which the permits have been accorded reveals that the work permit system is mainly operating to bring in, on a long-term basis, the highly skilled. The rise in the number of long-term work permits holders over last few years is consistent with an increased demand for skills as the UK economy emerged strongly from recession and went into a period of sustained growth. The data also suggest that deregulation in the UK labour market has opened it up to labour from outside the EEA.
OECD 1999
218
OECD 1999
Net migration Non-British citizens of which: EU Non-EU British citizens
Table II.41. Current gures on migratory ows and stocks of total population and labour force in the United Kingdom
Thousands
1994 1995 1996 1997 1994 1995 1996 1997
Migration ows1 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
253 135 29 106 118 191 83 22 61 108 62 52 7 45 10 55.0 4.6 7.9 11.9 14.1 2.6 9.2 2.9 1.8 7.7 43.4 3.9 57 169 55 126 2 032
246 155 41 114 91 192 74 20 54 118 54 81 21 60 27 55.6 4.2 8.2 12.0 14.5 2.9 8.8 3.5 1.6 6.4 44.9 4.3 57 406 55 442 1 948
272 168 54 114 104 216 77 24 53 139 56 91 30 61 35 61.7 7.5 8.5 13.0 13.6 4.8 9.5 3.5 1.4 6.7 48.6 6.5 57 624 55 680 1 934
285 188 61 127 97 225 94 32 62 131 60 94 29 65 34 58.7 7.7 7.8 13.2 13.1 4.2 8.4 3.1 1.3 7.6 46.2 4.9 57 870 55 796 2 066
Total grants of citizenship in the United Kingdom by previous country or region of nationality Europe European Economic Area Other European countries Americas Africa Indian sub-continent Middle East Other Asian countries Oceania Other countries Grants of citizenship in Hong Kong, China 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 Total stock of employment3 Total population Total number of British citizens Total number of foreign nationals
44.0 5.2 2.1 3.1 4.5 7.9 11.3 4.3 5.1 1.5 4.2 5.9 32.8 5.4 17.0 9.5 1.0 10.2 22.6 13.2 5.1 46.0 65.7 125.8 30.1 12.9 13.4 3.8 25 278 24 411 864
40.5 4.6 1.8 2.9 4.1 7.9 9.9 3.5 4.8 1.7 3.9 25.7 44.0 7.1 22.5 13.0 1.4 14.4 29.6 16.0 5.0 51.0 77.0 133.9 35.5 15.6 15.5 4.4 25 699 24 835 862
43.1 4.7 1.7 2.9 4.3 9.2 10.8 3.5 5.2 1.5 3.9 5.5 29.6 6.5 11.3 10.0 1.8 12.4 17.2 21.4 5.4 50.0 89.0 145.9 37.7 16.8 16.9 4.0 25 962 25 095 865
37.0 4.3 1.5 2.8 3.5 8.0 8.5 2.8 4.1 1.4 4.3 3.4 32.5 9.1 9.5 10.9 2.9 16.6 15.9 19.9 6.5 59.0 79.0 130.3 42.4 19.0 18.7 4.7 26 446 25 497 949
Acceptances for settlement By region of origin Europe (excluding EU)2 Americas Africa Indian Sub-Continent Middle East Remainder of Asia Oceania Other By category of acceptance Accepted in own right Spouses and dependents Other Stock of total population3 Total population Total number of British citizens Total number of foreign nationals
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. Data for 1997 are provisional. 2. An acceptance of settlement is not required for EU citizens. 3. Data are from the national Labour Force Survey. Figures for total population include citizens for whom nationality is not stated. Sources: International Passenger Survey; Home Ofce Statistical Bulletin; Control of Immigration Statistics; National Labour Force Survey.
United Kingdom
219
The major countries of origin are other advanced industrial countries, with which the United Kingdom has developed a network of expertise exchange. The United States and Japan continue to dominate the list of longterm work permit issues, as they have for many years: the United States has consistently accounted for more than a quarter (31% in both 1996 and 1997), with Japan in second place (just under 11% in 1997 issues, down from 13% in 1996). For most other countries, the number of long-term work permit issues has been no more than a few hundred. The work permit system is characterised by a turnover of labour, though for a substantial minority it results in a grant of the right of settlement. Based on a comparison between the number of permit holders granted settlement and the number of long-term work permits issued four years previously since 1985, the propensity of work permit holders to settle permanently is one quarter. Seasonal workers The United Kingdom has one seasonal worker scheme, in agriculture. The origins of the scheme go back to the period after the Second World War when Displaced Persons were employed as seasonal agricultural labourers. Systematic data on the present scheme have only been collected since 1992, however. All new recruits must be students in full time education abroad, and aged between 18 and 25. The period of work is of a maximum of 3 months and should not extend beyond 30 November. The total number recruited each year is governed by a quota, currently set at 10 000, though the actual number is normally below this level. That said, the scheme has been growing in importance with the number of workers admitted rising from less than 3 600 in 1992 to just under 9 300 in 1997. Almost 98% of those admitted are from Central and Eastern Europe. In 1997 Poland accounted for almost 40% of the total. The majority are male, though their proportion has been falling, from 67% in 1992 to 54% in 1997. Corporate transfers In 1997/98, the average number of people working abroad a year before the time of the Labour Force Survey was 80 000, up from the average of 66 000 in 1996/97 and 61 000 in 1995/96. Of these about 33 000 (40.5%) worked for the same employer at both times and may therefore be assumed to be corporate transferees. The majority (20 000) were foreign nationals. The numbers of corporate transferees for 1997 and 1998 are considerably higher than in the years before and represent a substantial reversal of a fluctuating but generally slow downward trend from the mid-1980s. It is not clear whether the recent increases are random statistical fluctuations caused by the sampling or represent a significant change in corporate relocation practices. Working Holiday Makers Commonwealth citizens aged between 17 and 27 wishing to work in the United Kingdom for limited periods do not require a work permit. Their employment is allowed under the working holidaymakers scheme. Annual numbers employed under this scheme have risen from 23 200 in 1990 to 33 300 in 1997, with a peak of 36 000 in 1995. Source countries are dominated by the Old Commonwealth, with Australians the largest group, accounting for 54% since 1990. New Zealand has accounted for a further 25% and Canada seven. The number of South Africans grew rapidly following the introduction of black majority rule. Having shot up from three in 1993 to over 2 300 in 1994 they have since then continued to account for over 20% of those employed under the scheme. As these people are in the United Kingdom to both work and take a holiday it is not possible to know how many of them will be working at any one time. Although data providing a regional breakdown of where they go to are not available, it may reasonably be expected that London and other major tourist centres would employ the bulk of them. Asylum The basis for granting refugee status continues to be the 1951 UN Convention and the 1967 Protocol. Applicants who do not fully meet the Convention criteria, but for whom it would be unreasonable to enforce their return to their home country, may be granted exceptional leave to remain (ELR) status, renewable annually. From time to time there are special refugee programmes, normally involving people already recognised as ConOECD 1999
220
United Kingdom
vention refugees, in response to particular problems. These people (such as the 25 000 South East Asian refugees, mainly Vietnamese, accepted for settlement since 1979) are not normally included in the statistics of asylum applications and decisions. Neither do the figures include certain cases who were allowed to remain on an exceptional basis, without applying for asylum, because of the situation in the country of origin, for instance particularly vulnerable individuals from the former Yugoslavia and their dependants received in the United Kingdom under arrangements announced on 30 November 1992 and 6 August 1995. Applications in 1997 Having fallen back sharply in 1996 following the introduction in February of that year of restrictions on asylum seekers eligibility for social security benefits, in 1997 the number of applications (including dependants) rose again, by 4 500 to 41 500. In 1998 the number increased by almost 40%, the figure of 57 700 being the highest since 1991. As in previous years, the majority of asylum applications in 1997 were made from within the United Kingdom by people who had already entered in some other capacity. However, the proportion (around 50%) was well down on that for the two previous years (65 and 55% in 1995 and 1996), falling further to 48% during the first nine months of 1998. These falls are assumed to be the consequence of the aforementioned benefit restrictions and also the imposition of visa regimes. Decisions in 1997 The number of initial decisions made on asylum applications in 1997, excluding dependants, was 36 000, a decrease of 7% on 1996 but nearly 25% higher than in 1995. This is the second highest number of decisions made in a single year and can be mainly attributed to the implementation of two measures. First, the expansion of the Asylum Directorates short procedure introduced in 15 May 1995. This has succeeded in reducing the intervals between application and interview and between interview and decision. The majority of decisions are now taken within four or five weeks of the asylum interview. Second, the Spend to Save initiative introduced in 1996 with the aim of reducing the backlogs of asylum cases at both the initial decision and the appeals stage of the asylum system continues to have an effect. Policy developments The major policy initiative since the last report has been publication by the Home Office in July 1998 of a White Paper on immigration and asylum policy entitled Fairer, Faster and Firmer A Modern Approach to Immigration and Asylum. Covering that part of immigration and asylum control and management that is in the remit of the Home Office it proposes an integrated approach devoted to modernising and streamlining the immigration and asylum control system as a whole. Operations and decision making are to be made better informed, more open and speedier. The White Paper does not deal with the economic and labour market dimension to UK immigration and emigration. It is not clear that this omission is because the regulations on labour migration are perceived to be perfectly adapted and, therefore, new policy measures are not required, or whether the Home Office does not consider the labour market implications of migration to be part of its remit. Proposals The key proposals outlined in the paper include: making available additional resources for dealing with the backlog of asylum applications; reducing the number of avenues of appeal; putting firms which advise immigrants and potential immigrants under statutory control; limiting the availability of legal aid; and, supporting the conclusion of work on the Eurodac Convention to establish across the EU a computerised central database of fingerprints of asylum seekers and certain illegal immigrants. In addition, asylum-seekers are to be given assistance in the form of food and clothing coupons rather than money. Similarly, accommodation is to be provided rather than paid for and this will be done on a no choice basis, the object being to avoid concentrations of applicants in particular areas.
OECD 1999
221
As a complement to the aforementioned proposals the government announced in December 1997 that asylum requests received prior to 1993 would be accepted provided that the applicant does not have a criminal record, while in the case of those received between July 1993 and December 1995, the decision would be favourable if family ties had been created in the United Kingdom. Other policy initiatives In March 1998 it was announced that embarkation controls were largely ineffective and would cease, to be replaced by an intelligence and target-led operation, involving a partnership between enforcement agencies, carriers and port authorities. In response to claims that the Eurostar train service from Belgium was being used to bring inadequately documented passengers into the United Kingdom, the Carriers Liability legislation was extended to the train operator in April 1998 for the route between Brussels and London. For reasons relating to French domestic legislation it has not been possible to extend the relevant order to the route from Paris. Following reports that hundreds of illegal immigrants had recently entered the country hidden in lorries the government announced in December 1998 that in order to encourage lorry drivers to be more vigilant it intended to extend carriers liability to haulage companies.
UNITED STATES
Introduction After a sharp increase in 1996, the number of immigrants receiving legal permanent residence status fell back in 1997 to around 800 000, a fall of 13% from the previous year. Annual immigration in 1997 represented just 0.3% of the total population. This lower level of immigration is only temporary and, in fact, is somewhat misleading because there is an increasing backlog of persons awaiting a decision on their application to adjust their status to that of immigrant (435 000 at the end of fiscal year 1996 to 699 000 a year later). These applicants, most of whom will obtain permanent residence status, are either temporary residents in the United States or there illegally. Migration and settlement Permanent immigration In the United States, an immigrant is defined as a person who has been admitted for legal permanent residence. The number of immigrants in a given 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. Their proportion of total immigration was over 50% in 1997. Family migration is the main component of permanent immigration. In 1997 this category accounted for over two-thirds of immigration. Other entries were under programmes to admit refugees (14%), to recruit workers (11%) or to diversify countries sending immigrants to the United States (6%). Over the last three years a number of factors accounted for the relatively high level of permanent immigration, first and foremost the rise in family immigration and in employment-based immigration. Other factors also contributed to the increase. First of these is section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) which, during the three fiscal years from 1995 to 1997, allowed certain illegal residents to apply for immigrant status from within United States territory. The second factor is an indirect consequence of the legalisation programme under the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act: nearly 2.7 million individuals obtained permanent immigrant status via this programme. Many of these have subsequently acquired United States citizenship which allows them to apply for the immigration of immediate family members without being subject to the annual ceiling that is placed on the
OECD 1999
222
United States
immigration flow of family members of permanent immigrants. Immigration of this type therefore showed a marked increase over 1995. In the future, it should account for an increasingly large proportion of total immigration. After a sharp increase in 1996, the level of permanent immigration fell back in 1997 due to delays in processing applications for permanent status (see above) and lower quotas affecting some family immigration. Some of the latter inflows (but not immigration of spouses and children of American citizens) are subject to numerical limits, set annually. In 1995 the quota for employment-based immigration was not fully taken up, and the remaining visas were transferred to family immigration in 1996. In that year the ceilings for that category were particularly high (311 800). In 1997 no transfer was made and the ceiling was lower (226 000). Family reunion Family reunion is the predominant source of US immigration, accounting for two-thirds of immigration into the United States in 1997. In volume terms, both components of family reunion i) immediate family members of US citizens and ii) more distant relatives of American citizens and immediate family members of immigrants admitted under a preference system developed in a similar fashion. However, immediate family members of United States citizens are not numerically limited whereas the more distant relatives admitted under the preference system are limited. Furthermore, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996 increased the income level required of persons serving as guarantors for family members. Henceforth, the level required is at least 120% of the poverty threshold. This measure is likely to reduce the number of sponsored immigrants. Employment-based immigration Since 1992, the year in which the 1990 Immigration Act (IMMACT 90) came into force, 140 000 employmentbased visas have been made available each year, although usage almost always falls below. Immigrants coming to work in the United States represent about 5% of total immigration. Their spouses and children account for another 6% for a total of 11% admitted under the employment-based preference system (see Table II.42). Refugees and asylum seekers Under United States rules, a person fleeing persecution is either a refugee or an asylum seeker, depending on where he/she is at the time of the application: asylum seekers are already present in the country or at the border, whereas refugees are outside the United States. United States legislation provides that refugees may obtain immigrant status after a one-year stay in the country which, for any given year, means a time-lag between the number of refugees entering the country and those granted immigrant status. Refugee and asylum seekers granted immigrant status fell in 1997, to 112 200, or 14% of all permanent immigrants. Immigrants allowed to settle permanently under the programme to increase the diversity of countries sending immigrants to the United States There has been a succession of these programmes in recent years. The current one took effect in fiscal 1995 and operates like a lottery. Under the programme, 50 000 permanent visas are now granted every year to nationals of countries which do not send many immigrants to the United States. In 1997 those benefiting from this programme accounted for only 6.2% of total inflows. However, this programme generates huge interest: 3.4 million applications were submitted for the allocation of permits in 1999. Of the individuals selected, approximately 42% and 38% are from Europe and Africa respectively. Breakdown by region and country of origin The region comprising North America, the Caribbean and Central America provided the largest number of immigrants. This was followed by Asia. Over the last ten years, nationals from Asian countries have accounted for a relatively stable proportion of total immigrants (around 35%). Europe (with an increase in immigration from the former Soviet Union, Poland and recently ex-Yugoslavia) is another important region.
OECD 1999
223
Table II.42.
Employment-based immigration, by preference, scal years 1994-1997, United States

Thousands
1994 1995 1996 1997
Total, employment 1st preference Aliens with extraordinary ability Outstanding professors or researchers Multinational executives or managers Spouses and children of 1st preference Total, employment 2nd preference Members of the professions holding advanced degrees or persons of exceptional ability Spouses and children of 2nd preference Total, employment 3rd preference Skilled workers Baccalaureate holders Spouses and children of the above Chinese Student Protection Act Other workers (unskilled workers) Spouses and children of unskilled workers Total, employment 4th preference Special immigrants Spouses and children of 4th preference Total, employment 5th preference Employment creation, not targeted area Spouses and children Employment creation, targeted area Spouses and children Total, employment preferences, principals Total, employment preferences, dependents Total, employment preferences % of total permanent settlers
Source:
21.1 1.3 1.8 5.0 13.0 14.4 6.8 7.6 77.0 10.1 7.7 28.4 21.3 4.1 5.3 10.4 4.6 5.8 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 62.7 60.6 123.3 15.3
17.3 1.2 1.6 3.9 10.6 10.5 5.0 5.5 50.2 9.1 5.8 23.3 4.2 3.6 4.2 6.7 2.9 3.8 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 37.4 47.9 85.3 11.8
27.5 2.1 2.6 6.4 16.5 18.5 8.9 9.6 62.8 16.0 5.5 29.0 0.4 6.0 5.8 7.8 3.5 4.4 0.9 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.3 51.6 65.9 117.5 12.8
21.8 1.7 2.1 5.3 12.7 17.1 8.4 8.7 42.6 10.6 4.0 19.2 0.1 4.0 4.7 7.8 3.7 4.1 1.4 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.7 40.3 50.3 90.6 11.3
US Department of Justice, 1997 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, forthcoming.
Mexico remained the leading country of origin of immigrants entering the United States (over 18% of total inflows). The four other major sending countries were the Philippines, China, Vietnam and India. Immigrants on waiting lists Waiting lists apply to those immigrants entering under the preference system, which covers both workers and more distant family members. The number of applicants meeting the required conditions often exceeds the ceilings laid down by law for each category. Thus, in January 1997 there were 3.6 million individuals on the waiting list. Most of those waiting are applicants sponsored by a family member, particularly the brothers and sisters of US citizens (1.5 million), and the spouses and unmarried children under 21 of permanent residents (more than a million in total). The waiting lists for most professional categories, from whatever country, have been absorbed or greatly reduced due to the increase in quotas from 54 000 to 140 000 (including accompanying family members), pursuant to the Immigration Act of 1990. Generally, the only sizeable backlog is that for unskilled workers and their families, who are subject to an annual numerical limitation of 10 000. Refugees and asylum seekers
224
Refugees and asylum seekers have been a subject of concern in the United States largely because of largescale arrivals of Asians and Cubans in the past. In September 1994 an agreement was concluded between the
OECD 1999
United States
United States and Cuba under which the US guaranteed that a minimum of 20 000 Cubans would be authorised to immigrate legally every year, although specific conditions were laid down as to the selection of candidates. The admission of refugees to the United States is subject to an overall ceiling subdivided into five regions. The annual ceiling is set by the President after consulting Congress, but may be re-evaluated to take account of particular circumstances. In fact, every year, admissions are lower than the ceilings laid down. In 1997 around 70 000 refugees were admitted to the United States whereas the ceiling was set at 78 000 (provisional data for 1998 are 76 500 admissions, against a ceiling of 83 000). Since 1992 the ceiling has been decreased regularly (except in 1998), and is 78 000 in 1999. There have been several new developments regarding asylum seekers in the last three years. First of all, the number of staff dealing with asylum requests has been doubled. Then, in January 1995, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) adopted new provisions concerning the processing of pending applications. A more efficient integrated processing system has been introduced, and links between work authorisation and the asylum process have been removed. Work authorisation is no longer given until asylum is granted or until a claim has remained pending for 180 days. Since asylum reform came into effect in January 1995, the backlog of applications has fallen considerably (360 000 at 30 September 1998). During 1997 some 35 000 new asylum requests were filed. Temporary migration The number of temporary migrants, called non-immigrants, is increasing slightly every year. It stood at 25 million in 1996 (including 19 million tourists). The number of temporary migrants obtaining visas which allow them to enter the labour market is also rising. Many temporary visa holders stay in the country for more than a year and can, in some cases, remain for much longer periods for example, up to 6 years for H-1B professionals. There are no quotas for most visa categories. The largest groups of temporary workers are treaty traders and investors together with their dependants, H-1B professionals and intra-company transferees (see Table II.43). Illegal migration Illegal immigrants are foreigners who either enter the United States illegally or are admitted legally for a temporary period and fail to depart or violate other terms of their temporary visa. The length of stay of illegal immigrants varies enormously: some do not remain in the United States for more than a year, while others settle permanently. The undocumented population was estimated to be 5 million in October 1996. Mexico remains the leading source country (about 55%); others include the countries of Central America and the Caribbean, Canada and Poland. In recent years there has been an increase in the awareness of temporary migrants staying illegally in the United States beyond the expiry date of their visa. According to INS estimates, around 40% of illegal immigrants in 1996 were visa overstayers. This new awareness highlights the need for increased attention in the issuance of temporary visas, particularly to nationals of countries with high overstay rates. Foreign-born population Since January 1994, the monthly Current Population Survey (CPS) of US households by the Bureau of the Census has included, as part of its regular questionnaire, questions on the place of origin, nationality, year of immigration and parental place of origin. In 1998, according to this survey, the foreign-born population was estimated at 26.3 million, or nearly 10% of the total. In 1980 the corresponding figure was 14.1 million, just under 6% of the total population. Between 1970 and 1990 important changes took place in the geographical origin of the foreign-born: in 1970, nearly 60% had been born in Europe, compared to 22% in 1990. Central America and Mexico today account for the largest numbers of foreign-born, and the numbers from Asia now also exceed those from Europe. The foreign-born have played a growing role in the US labour force over the last twenty years. According to CPS data, the foreign-born accounted for 12% of the labour force in 1998, compared to 5% in 1970 and 9.3% in 1990.
OECD 1999
225
Table II.43.
Non-immigrants1 admitted by class of admission, scal years 1994-1996, United States

Thousands
1994 1995 1996
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 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 workers2 Spouses and children of NAFTA professionals Spouses and children of intracompany transferees Representatives of foreign information media and dependents Exchange visitors Spouses and children of exchange visitors Fiance(es) of US citizens Children of ance(es) NATO ofcials, their spouses and children Unknown Total
1.
105.3 3 164.1 17 154.8 330.9 386.2 7.8 33.7 74.7 450.0 6.1 105.9 13.2 15.7 3.1 24.8 5.0 1.5 28.1 1.5 6.0 98.2 141.0 43.2 6.0 56.0 27.7 216.6 42.6 8.1 0.8 9.1 0.9 22 118.7
103.6 3 275.3 17 611.5 320.3 356.6 7.6 31.3 72.0 464.6 6.5 117.6 11.4 14.2 2.8 23.9 6.0 1.8 28.4 1.4 6.7 112.1 131.8 46.4 7.2 61.6 24.2 201.1 39.3 7.8 0.8 8.6 0.8 22 640.5
118.2 3 770.3 19 109.9 325.5 418.1 8.8 32.5 79.5 533.5 2.0 144.5 9.6 14.3 3.0 27.0 7.2 2.1 33.6 2.1 9.0 140.5 138.6 53.6 7.7 73.3 33.6 215.5 41.3 9.0 1.0 10.9 0.3 24 842.5
Non-immigrants are visitors, persons in transit or persons granted temporary residence permits. Data may be over estimated as they include multiple entries by the same person over time. 2. Excluding spouses and children of NAFTA professionals and intracompany transferees. Source: US Department of Justice, 1996 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
Naturalisations The number of naturalisations doubled first between 1992 and 1995 (240 000 to 488 000) and then a second time during 1996, to reach more than one million. The figures are expected to be around 600 000 for 1997 and 475 000 for 1998. Several reasons may explain the sudden increase in 1996: More persons are eligible to become citizens due to high recent immigration levels and the legalisation of 2.7 million aliens under IRCA. 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. Recently passed legislation denies legal immigrants access to many federally funded social programmes, thus increasing the incentive to become a United States citizen (part of this legislation was repealed in 1997, see below).
OECD 1999
226
United States
The introduction, in August 1995, of a Citizenship USA programme aimed at simplifying procedures for acquiring US nationality led to a surge in the number of naturalisations during 1996. Any legal immigrant is entitled to become a US citizen if he meets the main conditions required. He must be at least 18 years old, have entered the United States legally and resided there for at least five years. He must, through tests, prove that he knows the English language and history and political institutions of the United States. Naturalisation rates, as a proportion of immigrants having acquired US citizenship through naturalisation, vary enormously among different immigrant groups. Refugees, young adults, especially if unmarried upon entering the United States, or immigrants from distant parts of the world often have high naturalisation rates. For example among immigrants admitted in 1982 and acquiring citizenship by 1995, Taiwanese, Vietnamese, Filipinos and immigrants from the former Soviet Union have naturalisation rates above 60%, compared with some 13% for Canadians and 14% for Mexicans. Mexico remains, nevertheless, the leading country of origin of naturalised citizens: in 1996, Mexicans accounted for nearly 25% of all naturalised citizens. Policy developments One of the major policy developments that took place in 1997 was the restoration of immigrant eligibility for certain public benefits. The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 restored Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Medicaid eligibility for legal immigrants who were receiving these benefits when the 1996 Welfare Reform Bill was passed on 22 August 1996. Also, legal immigrants who were residing in the United States on 22 August 1996 retain access to SSI and Medicaid benefits if they become disabled. However, the Welfare Acts bar on food stamps for most legal immigrants was not lifted. Nonetheless, 1998 legislation restored this benefit for those elderly, disabled, or under age 18 who were present in the country when the 1996 Welfare Reform Bill was passed. In addition, an amendment passed in October 1998 made 12 000 immigrants eligible to retain SSI and Medicaid benefits. Whether or not the United States needs to recruit immigrant workers with advanced high-tech skills has been the subject of much controversy. President Clinton secured an increase in the quota ceilings for temporary workers holding H-1B visas, which cover the activities mentioned above and other speciality occupations (American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act, October 1998). The annual quota has been set at 115 000 for 1999 and 2000, and 107 500 for 2001. The ceiling for 2002 is 65 000, similar to that of 1992-98. Businesses which in the past have applied to recruit large numbers of H-1B workers, and firms which have abused the legislation in force (because, for instance, immigrant workers took the places of US citizens who were wrongfully laid off, or remuneration was on a lower scale than for other employees) will be more strictly monitored. These businesses will have to attest on the Labor Condition Application that they have not laid off US workers and that they have taken steps to recruit US workers. In 1997, some Nicaraguan and Cuban nationals who had been resident for at least two years qualified for a legalisation programme under the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act. Other nationals of El Salvador, Guatemala, the former Soviet Union and some East European countries were allowed to apply for suspension of deportation under the more lenient rules that existed before the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. Haitians were not covered by these programmes. But in 1998, some 50 000 Haitians residing in the United States since December 1995 or earlier, and who had applied for asylum or had held a residence permit until that date, were eligible for another legalisation programme (Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act). Last, a three-year programme was approved for Irish nationals resident in Northern Ireland or in distressed areas of the Irish Republic (areas with high unemployment or rising delinquency) to work temporarily in the United States. An annual quota of 4 000 Q-2 visas is available for Irish nationals under age 35, to develop their occupational skills. The number of Q-2 visas issued each year is deducted from the annual quota for H-2B visas. Two proposals did not secure Congressional approval. The first would have split the INS into two parts, one dealing with enforcement and the other with services. The second failed proposal was to establish another agricultural guestworker programme.
OECD 1999
227
Part III*
CLANDESTINE IMMIGRATION: ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL ISSUES1

Introduction Considered over a long period of time (since the 1970s), and against a backdrop of otherwise moderate growth in international migration (Tapinos and Delaunay, 1998), the increase in the variety of forms of clandestine residence and the growing length of stay of clandestine immigrants have had the effect of virtually reducing the debate on immigration policy to one on the issue of clandestine immigration. The curbing of illegal inflows and of foreigners irregularity with regard to residence and employment has become one of the priorities of migration policy. This policy orientation is now common to all the countries of Europe, particularly the new countries of immigration in the south (i.e. Italy, Spain, Greece and Portugal), as well as to North America, although the United States and Canada are still open to regular immigration. To examine the economic and political challenges deriving from clandestine migration is to investigate whether clandestine migration possesses specific features as compared to regular migration. It is from such a perspective that this paper considers the problems of measurement, the economic dimension and control policies. A. 1. ILLEGAL MIGRATION Illegal migration: a multi-faceted concept the regulations governing access to the labour market. By definition, clandestine immigration eludes registration and statistical coverage. The first difficulty confronting one is that of how to define and measure clandestine immigration. Convention No. 143 adopted by the 1975 ILO Conference defines clandestine or illegal migration movements as those where migrants find themselves during their journey, on arrival or during their period of residence and employment [in] conditions contravening relevant international multilateral or bilateral instruments or agreements, or national laws or regulations (Moulier Boutang, Garson and Silberman, 1986). This definition places the stress on the diverse aspects of irregularity: entry, residence in the host country and the undertaking of an occupation. In a world without restrictions on entering or leaving a country, illegal immigration would be a concept without reference. Unless there simultaneously exists both restrictions and a degree of tolerance illegal immigration cannot take place. It is a manifestation of an imbalance between the effectively unlimited supply of candidates for emigration and the limitations placed by recipient countries on the acceptance of new entrants. In countries like the United States and Canada which remain essentially open to immigration, illegal immigration is an alternative entry procedure for those who do not meet the required criteria, for those who would have to wait longer than they would wish in order to obtain an immigrants visa, as well as for those for whom unauthorised immigration is less expensive. Where opportunities for entering and staying in a country are limited, as in Europe at the present time, illegal entry is, excepting being the subject of a family
The extent of States sovereignty defines the scope of clandestine migration flows. The clandestine nature of such migration is defined by reference to the rules of law (and their shortcomings), the restrictions on entering and leaving a country, and
* This special chapter was written by Mr. Georges Tapinos, Professor, Institut dtudes politiques de Paris, Consultant to the OECD Secretariat. The views expressed are those of the author and do not commit either the Organisation or the national authorities.
229
OECD 1999
reunion application or applying for asylum, the only option available to candidates for migration. In the cases of both types of country, once there exists a statutory maximum length of stay, whether this depends on the type of visa (e.g. for tourists, students and temporary workers) or whether indeed there is any obligation to have a visa at all, overstaying2 places the person concerned outside the law. This fundamental distinction is easier to draw in the United States where there exists at entry a statutory dividing line between immigrants and nonimmigrants, and where the statistical system estimates the number of non-immigrants by counting those who do not amend their status after entry, whose departure from the country is not registered, and who are assumed to be still in the country after the expiry date of their visa. In European countries, where no such distinction is made on entry, overstaying usually occurs when an immigrant is turned down after applying for the obtention or renewal of a residence permit. This situation, the reflection of rules governing legal residence, can result not only from wilfulness on the part of migrants but also from the ambiguity or incoherence of the rules themselves. For example, in countries like Italy and Spain where there have been frequent regularisation programmes and where a permit obtained at the time of a regularisation exercise is normally limited to a period of one year, with the possibility (non-automatic) for it to be renewed, repeated regularisations of the same people have been observed. By contrast, in the United States, those who benefited from the amnesty law of 1986 [the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)] obtained permits enabling them to remain in the country until they met conditions for the obtention of a permanent residence permit (Green Card). Illegal immigration also has a time dimension as it can be defined by length of stay. From the immigrants point of view, illegality may represent either a temporary phase in the migration cycle (as was the case in France during the 1960s where there existed the possibility for illegal immigrants to be regularised) or a permanent state (in the absence of regularisation or when regularisation is exceptional and non-renewable which is what American regularisation in 1986 and the regularisation programmes recently undertaken in European countries are assumed to be). This distinction also holds from the point of view of the recipient country, which may be either a country of first entry or one where the immigrant intends to settle permanently. In this regard,
the situation develops over time. When Spain and Italy, emigration countries par excellence, began to accept immigrants at a time when traditional European immigration countries were closing their borders to immigration, the authorities in these countries liked to think they were countries of first entry. By the late 1980s and early 1990s, it had become clear that these countries had in turn become settlement countries with a significant number of clandestine immigrants. The examination of clandestinity cannot be reduced to the clandestine migrant himself. The analysis of the phenomenon and the formulation of policies to combat it should look at the whole length of the chain of clandestinity, which brings into play a series of agents: the migrant, the intermediary who facilitates his passage or placement, the company for whom the migrant works and, according to the case, the principal contractor. One is therefore confronted by a wide array of complex situations and circuits which range from the arrangement of the meeting between the clandestine immigrant and the employer through to far-reaching and powerful organisations which control a veritable trade in labour. In America, workers from Mexico or Central America endeavour to cross the border with the help of a smuggler, who might also arrange their obtention of employment. Elsewhere, nationals of sub-Saharan Africa enter Algeria by aeroplane, continue their journey by land through to the Spanish enclave of Melilla in Morocco in the hope of being transported to Spain at the time of a regularisation programme. The organisations involved in smuggling operations can be of considerable scale. In the United States, the INS dismantled in 1998 an organisation which had arranged the passage to the United States of approximately 10 000 people; in November of the same year two million fake identification papers were seized in Los Angeles (INS, March 1999). The clandestine chain sometimes goes further back than the migrant himself. For example, the Moroccan youths who are known to have entered Europe were not, as one might have supposed, unoccupied youths who had taken the initiative to emigrate clandestinely, rather they had been sent by their parents who had elected to take advantage of their childrens minority which, in Europe, protects them against expulsion. This extreme heterogeneity should rule out judgements on this phenomenon made on purely humanitarian or, conversely, purely criminal bases. These distinctions have considerable implications for the measurement and characterisation of
OECD 1999
230
Clandestine Immigration: Economic and Political Issues
illegal migrants, the economic impact of illegal migration, administrative effectiveness and the aspect of control policy. 2. Measurement methods
Estimating the number of people in an irregular situation is inherently problematic. Account must be taken not only of the legal system of immigration, the system of statistical observation and mechanisms involved in undocumented living, but also, given that such estimates rely to varying degrees on survey evidence, of the perception that the clandestine migrants have of the acceptance of their clandestinity by the local population and of the nature of the risks that they are taking. In that it concerns the measurement of an unobservable event, the measurement of irregular migration runs into well-known problems. The difficulties are particularly severe in the case of clandestine migration for whilst measurement in this field can only be indirect, the absence of regularities in the phenomena that might be linked to this form of migration limits the usefulness of indirect methods. Indeed, the classic demographic distinction between direct and indirect methods is hard to sustain. Strictly speaking, one rarely has direct observations at ones disposal. At best, observations are incomplete; in every case complementary information is required which is itself often estimated for the phenomenon to be satisfactorily understood. Figures for apprehensions in border regions, for example, have to be adjusted to take account of the number of times that individual migrants attempt to cross. Figures derived from regularisation programmes need to be amended to take account of those excluded for failing to meet the criteria (particularly those relating to the date of arrival, the obligation to remain in the country continuously, and the presentation of a work permit). Similarly, surveys that focus directly on the clandestine population (snowball sampling or the Delphi technique) which presume to identify from the outset people who are known to be in an irregular situation contain substantial biases. Measurements made in the frontier zones of sending countries before migrants cross the frontier (cf. the Mexican COLEF survey) constitute an exception. It is important first of all to know what one is measuring. Is it numbers (stocks) or movements (flows)? Is it workers or the whole of the population? To measure clandestine entries, is to attempt to assess
OECD 1999
the volume of the flows of people entering the country without the required legal administrative documentation, whether they cross the frontier with false papers or at a point that is not controlled. By contrast, irregularity in respect of those who reside concerns stocks which comprise both the net cumulative flows of people who have entered without authorisation and are not regularised, and those who have entered clandestinely but have lost their right of residence and are still in the country. It should also be considered as essential, in so far as the employment status of those in an irregular situation will also, logically, be irregular too, to attempt to measure the number of foreigners in irregular employment. Defining the groups in these ways allows one to distinguish the possible estimates, those of: clandestine entrants (inflow of illegal migrants over a given period), clandestine residence (the total foreign population residing in the country illegally at a given moment) and clandestine workers (the number of clandestine workers in employment at a given moment). Chart III.1. summarises the different entry, residence and employment situations in which foreign migrants can find themselves. It is possible to identify six categories of clandestinity: A. Migrants who have entered the country legally with a legal residence permit, but who are working illegally either because the job is not declared or because their residence permit does not allow them to work. B. Migrants who have entered the country legally, who are living in the country illegally (either because their work permits are invalid or have expired, or because they do not have residence permits), and who are working illegally. It is assumed that a migrant without a residence permit cannot work legally under the legislation in force. C. The same category as above, but covering inactive migrants. D. Migrants who have entered the country clandestinely, who have no residence permit, and who are working illegally. E. The same category as above, but covering inactive migrants. F. Migrants who have entered the country clandestinely, who have a residence permit (e.g. following regularisation, or by variation in their status through marriage) and are working illegally.
231
232
Chart III.1. Presentation of the various situations in which foreign migrants can find themselves
ENTRIES
ENTRY
Administratively legal (papers in order)
Illegal false identity papers clandestine passage absence of inspection
RESIDENCE
Legal residence (residence permit in order)
Illegal residence invalid or out-of-date residence permit lack of residence permit
Illegal residence (lack of residence permit)
Legal residence Regularisation Adjustment of residence status (through marriage...)
EMPLOYMENT
Inactive population
Legal employment (work permit in order)
Illegal employment undeclared activity the residence permit does not allow to work A
Inactive population C
Illegal employment (undeclared activity) B
Illegal employment (undeclared activity) D
Inactive population E
Illegal employment undeclared activity the residence permit does not allow to work F
Inactive population
Legal employment (work permit in order)
OECD 1999
The problem is how to go from administrative statistics, which are marked by characteristics specific to each country, to a method of measuring the phenomenon.3 Most methods rely on data from the recipient country, and they are based on two kinds of logic with the estimate of the stock of clandestine immigrants made either by comparing statistics on entry and modifications to status with data relating to stocks, or by using comprehensive registers of demographic events such as births and deaths. Methods of estimating the clandestine population were first developed and applied in the United States. Direct calculation, through comparing entry statistics and modifications to status from INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) data, permitted the inference of the number of visa overstayers. To this component of the stock of clandestine immigrants should be added clandestine entrants (entries without inspection) estimated by means of an indirect procedure (Warren, 1994). Residual estimating is based on census data. From the total foreign-born population counted at the time of the census, 1990 say, and the theoretical legal foreign-born population estimated for the same point in time from INS figures, an estimate of the population of clandestine immigrants picked-up by the census can be obtained by subtracting one from the other. To be of analytical interest, the censuses would have had to have counted a high proportion of the illegal migrants (Clark, Passel, Zimmermann and Fix, 1995). Mention should also be made of estimates of clandestine entries arrived at by adjusting the number of arrests on the basis of the likelihood of being apprehended at the United States-Mexico border (Espenshade, 1995). In Europe, measurement of clandestine migration has been attempted only relatively recently. The wide range of methods contemplated and used is a reflection of the similarly wide range of statistical observation systems employed but is above all testament to the exploratory nature of these first attempts. Tables III.1 and III.2 summarise the results of comparative research carried out by Eurostat in some ten European countries; its objectives were to compile a register of methods used in the various countries and to suggest viable procedures in the light of the kind of data available (Delaunay and Tapinos, 1998). In practice, the measurement is based on direct observation of the individual in a an irregular situation or considered likely to be so, either at the moment of his crossing the border (for example data on apprehensions and forced departures), during his
OECD 1999
residence (for example, from regularisations and refusals of asylum). Such information constitutes the basis for only an imperfect measure. This is why recourse to indirect estimation methods is necessary. Estimates based on the population of sending countries are really an application of classical expected-population and gender ratio methods integrating additional information derived from data from immigration countries. The expected population method involves a comparison between expected and observed stocks broken down by age and gender in two successive censuses. Starting from the population distribution on that date (t), and allowing for deaths and births registered or estimated during the period (t, t + k), the difference between the population actually observed and that extrapolated in (t + k) gives an estimate of the sending countrys net migration during the inter-census period. Evaluating clandestine migration involves comparing this net migration estimate with variations in stocks (or in net migration) registered world-wide for nationals of these countries which necessitates knowledge of the stocks in recipient countries of the nationals of the country concerned. Such a method is appropriate only under the hypothesis that the nationals of the country concerned migrate to a very small number of countries. The second method focuses on the high proportion of men among clandestine migrants; this is observed by default in gender ratios (women appear to be in a majority) of populations counted in sending countries. An estimate of those missing is then possible if one knows the ratios of men among those remaining and among all nationals registered both in their own countries and abroad. These indirect methods are not reliable. A small weakness in one of the links of the estimating chain (e.g. in census coverage, or in measuring the death rate) can easily lead to a substantial variation in the measure of clandestinity. Furthermore, they only provide an overall estimate of the number nationals who are living abroad; their distribution by recipient country would remain unknown. In so far as clandestine immigrants work in the hidden economy, it will be possible to consider an estimate of clandestine immigration as a by-product of a measurement of the hidden economy,4 defined as those activities which evade payment of tax and social security contributions. This approach has two limitations: firstly, with a few exceptions, clandestine migrant workers account for only a small proportion
233
Table III.1.
Typology of the methods used to estimate clandestinity
Direct measures
Administrative statistics
Statistics on refusals
Visas/entries Political asylum Residence and work permits Entry/border Stay Work or job Mass Exceptionnal Delphi method
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Infractions
Regularisations Without sample
Surveys
With sample
Snowball technique At the time of the regularisation On employment On mobility/border flows Biographical Expected populations Pairing of files Sex-ratio Common law crimes Births and deaths Statistics on school attendance Social/health benefits National data
Comparison of sources
Indirect estimates
Inferences from secondary events
Work statistics
Source:
Delaunay, Tapinos, 1998.
of those clandestinely employed; secondly, the methods used to measure the hidden economy reflect concerns linked to taxation and national statistics (e.g. the amount of, and growth in, GDP), and are not directly concerned with the legal status of migrant workers. Moreover, in the hidden economy the dividing line between clandestine employment and registered employment tends to be very difficult to draw (see below). The most elaborate attempts to estimate the number of clandestine foreigners by measuring the hidden economy have been made in Italy. They have relied on observed divergences in the national accounts between declared added value and estimates of added value based on average productivity throughout a given sector and anomalies observed in changes in participation rates. Three concluding remarks on these measurement methods: It is not possible to place on the same plane, on the one hand, the innumerable guestimates (guess estimates) that tend rather to reflect the feeling of anxiety (or the need to give reassurance) that their authors feel with regard to clandestine immigration and, on the other hand, the difficult and imperfect
attempts, conducted in conformity with the procedures of scientific research, to arrive at a statistical measurement. Most certainly, there is no guarantee that the measurements arrived at on the latter basis will more closely correspond to reality than those based on the former approach. However, that their method of calculation, the field covered, the hypotheses used and statistical biases are all explicit does present a considerable advantage. Such an approach, in offering the possibility of subjecting to comparison the results obtained through a variety of statistical methods, is the sole means of coming close to an accurate estimate. The issue is not so much the number of clandestine immigrants but rather the characteristics and the mechanisms of the reproduction of clandestinity: these give real meaning to the estimate of the stock obtained. The stock of clandestine immigrants results from the difference between their inflow and outflow and depends therefore on the average length of time spent in the state of clandestinity. It is of some importance to know the relative extents to which a change in the stock of clandestine immigrants is due to a change in inflows and a change in the average duration of clandestine stay.5
OECD 1999
234
Table III.2. Tested or concieved methods to estimate clandestinity

United Kingdom
Netherlands
Visa refusals Entry refusals Entry/Exit Passenger cards Apprehensions at border Biographical inquiries Surveys on flows Breaches of residence regulations Refusals of residence permits Refusals of political asylum Regularisations Common law crimes Residence Comparison of sources Deaths and births Expected populations Sex-ratio School, social assistance Delphi Method Surveys by stage National data Work Employment infraction Surveys on irregular employment
Methods being applied Collaborators' proposals
1 1 4 14 13 5 3 2 8 18 16 19 15 17 21 10 11 22 6 12
Irregular migration is by definition a breach of immigration law, and we have long pretended that it was an exceptional phenomenon. This allowed us to believe that we were dealing with a problem to which we had to find a solution. This confusion between normative and positive had the effect of concealing the need to put in place a statistical apparatus that would provide for both measurement and the carrying out of longitudinal surveys with a view to understanding the mechanisms of migration and the characteristics of clandestine migrants. Clandestine immigration is not an exceptional, non-renewable event. It is an inevitable phenomenon, one that is likely to grow as globalisation, economic transition and inter-ethnic conflict continue. B. THE ECONOMIC IMPACT
gal labour immigration linked to the foreign workers legal status? In the standard model of the labour market, the incidence of immigration, legal or illegal, depends on the nature of the migration process and the degree to which immigrants and nationals complement or substitute one another. In this way, one may contrast the situation according to which immigration derives from an economy-wide or sectoral labour shortage and may therefore be seen as endogenous, with that where immigration is exogenous and likely to engender competition with the pre-existing domestic labour supply. Under this latter hypothesis, which standard labour market theory assumes to be the case, the equilibrium wage falls; the quantitative impact on the employment of nationals depends on the (downward) elasticity in the supply of nationals labour compared with the (upward) elasticity of employers total labour demand. A significant displacement effect is only observed where a lower equilibrium wage rate leads to a substantial with-
Is there an economic dimension that is specific to illegal migration as compared to legal migration? To what extent are the economic implications of illeOECD 1999
Portugal
Belgium
Europe
Method
Switzerland
Czeck Rep.
Greece
France
Italy
235
drawal by nationals from the labour market without a significant increase in labour demand. The empirical scope of such a prediction is dependent on the extent to which we can determine the elasticity of the various segments of the workforces labour supply (e.g. with regard to age, gender, marital status and skills) and the nature of changes in labour supply (e.g. variations in participation rates, hours worked, etc.). Another school of thought sees labour market segmentation as a key factor underlying the resort to immigrant workers. Layard, Nickell and Jackman (1991) suggest, given the differing characteristics of jobs in the primary and secondary sectors, that a fall in wage rates in the primary sector causes labour demand to rise, whereas a fall in wage rates in the secondary sector causes labour supply to fall. This could be expected to have a positive impact on the employment of foreigners in the latter sector. Could the anticipated effects be extended to irregular immigration? The highlighting of an effect that is specific to irregular immigration or irregular employment would necessitate an examination of the behaviour of labour supply and demand and the institutional variables that influence it (in particular the existence of an informal sector) and the specific impact of illegal immigration at a macroeconomic level with regard to resource allocation, distribution and taxation. 1. The behaviour of labour supply and demand
costs, plentiful information on wages, and competition between employers), there was no difference between the working hours of legal and illegal workers. From this, the author concluded that preferences in respect of working hours are independent of a workers legal status. The advantages of illegal migration tend to be on the employers side. In that the migrants illegal status vis--vis his residence or employment places him in a situation of marked dependence rendering him more willing to accept a very low wage, often below the legal minimum, the employer might expect to benefit. The threat of being caught weighing on the migrant is for the employer a source of protection against being penalised himself. And conversely, legal residence status combined with semi-clandestine employment status can represent for the employer an advantage in so far as they allow a part of the work undertaken by the migrant to go undeclared or for the migrant to be considered as an independent worker. The monograph recently published by Iskander (1999) on the garment fabrication sector in Paris and the Parisian suburbs shows that employers preference for one or the other of these situations depends on whether the firms strategy is oriented more towards producing a quality product or to the minimisation of wages. There exists for the employer, leaving aside the cost of sanctions against unauthorised employment (this issue is examined below), three reasons for preferring clandestine foreign workers: differences in pay, differences in social charges, and flexibility in the production process. For the employer to benefit from lower labour costs, undocumented migrants have to accept wages below the current market rate. Taking into account differentials in pay, standards of living and job opportunities in the sending and host countries, both legal and illegal migrants normally have a lower reserve wage. Do clandestine migrants have a lower reserve wage than documented migrants? On the one hand, those embarking on clandestine emigration have to evaluate the expected costs of their illegality; these mainly comprise the cost of entering the country (e.g. the likelihood of being arrested in the course of each attempted entry, the average number of attempts made before a successful entry, brokerage fees) and similarly the expected cost of being penalised for taking up clandestine employment. On the other hand, the threat of being caught coupled with the desire, perhaps obligation, to pay back rapidly the monies spent on entering the country limit the incentive for prolonging job-search
OECD 1999
236
For the migrant, there can be advantages in clandestine employment, but illegality is rarely the result of choice.6 When a regularisation exercise is in progress, the eagerness of most people who meet the criteria to file an application shows that illegal workers have a marked preference for legal status.7 However, the argument that clandestine workers (who are assumed to be more interested in financial gain than in working conditions) are prepared to accept longer working hours needs qualification. In an attempt to isolate the sole impact of incentives and constraints on working hours, Dunn (1960) sought to assess the extent to which pay rates match the marginal rate of substitution between income and leisure. To that end, he compared the results obtained from three samples distinguished by the existence and amount of bonuses linked to long working hours and the fixed costs linked to obtaining employment. It appeared that in agriculture, the economic sector that comes closest to the hypothesis of economic theory (i.e. the absence of overtime bonuses, low fixed job-obtention
efforts. Clandestine immigrants are therefore inclined to accept a lower rate of pay than nationals and regular immigrants of the same skill category. As far as social charges and non-wage costs are concerned, ceteris paribus, the advantage for employers in hiring undocumented workers increases in line with the proportion of labour costs that would otherwise be accounted for by mandatory deductions and conformity with health and safety regulations. In this context, we might talk of a welfare magnet, but in a quite different sense from how it is normally understood. Moreover, given the precariousness of his situation and weak negotiating power, clandestine status also renders him more susceptible to discriminatory practices. 2. Undocumented migrant workers and the hidden economy
that demand a rapid response to variations in demand and changing tastes.8 These atypical jobs are performed by different categories of the labour force: young school-leavers and students, women looking for a second job, home helps, and foreigners in a precarious situation (whether regular or otherwise in terms of residence status) are the most commonly employed on such a basis.9 Irregularly employed foreigners constitute one of the elements of the hidden economy; they are not the cause of its existence. However, the existence of a hidden economy that is broadly tolerated by society as a whole makes the recruitment of unauthorised migrants more likely, particularly as networks of migrants make it easier to hire undocumented workers in this sector.10 However, though the recourse to clandestine foreign labour can regarded as an element of a flexibility strategy, were precariousness to be extended to other segments of the labour force the relative advantage of hiring clandestine foreign labour would diminish (Iskander, 1999). Clandestine employment is also observed among sole traders (such as door-to-door salesmen and people who sell goods in underground railway stations). In such cases, clandestinity can be both a necessity and a choice for immigrants.11 It would appear that these activities are more the consequence of an exogenous inflow than a response to a demand for labour in the host country. That said, it cannot be denied in that the African products sold by Senegalese street-sellers in Italy are in fact produced locally within the informal sector. There is an interrelationship between declared and undeclared employment, that reflects both the prohibition/tolerance dialectic of control policy and the complementarily/substitutability debate on the labour market. Whether it involves legal activities that breach tax and employment legislation or illegal activities (e.g. the sale of prohibited goods), the informal sector develops from the formal sector in the same way as immigration is a consequence of the existence of a system of legal immigration. The informal sector results from institutional rigidities in the formal sector (e.g. tax regulations and working time rules) and could not thrive unless tolerated by society. 3. Impact on the labour market. Empirical results
The structure of the labour market and the hidden economy constitute for both the employer and the worker the critical element in their decision making processes. It is by no means true to say that the hidden economy and clandestine foreign employment cover one and the same domain, but equally they are not unrelated given that the hidden economy is the only way for foreigners in an illegal situation and with no work permits to enter the labour market. Clandestine work by foreigners is the point at which two domains converge: on one side, irregular migration (which is located within the dynamic of international migration) and, on the other, the hidden economy (which is linked to changes in the labour market, but cannot be simply reduced to the work of foreigners in an irregular situation) (MoulierBoutang, 1991). For clandestine foreign workers, these two domains are superimposed upon one another. Work carried out by foreigners in an irregular situation is therefore located in the overall dynamic of the labour market, independent of the dynamics of international migration. The emergence of a hidden economy is part of a complex process of labour market hierarchisation and the bypassing regulations directed at responding to competition through achieving greater flexibility in production and pay. It is also accompanied by formal desalarisation and frequent movement from employee status to non-employee status (from salaried employment to self-employment, for example in the building industry), and the activation of community (i.e. family, ethnic and political) links in employment relations. These strategies for managing work are particularly important in highly seasonal jobs
OECD 1999
To what extent does the employment of clandestine immigrants affect the employment and wages of nationals and legal immigrants? What differences in wages are observed between nationals,
237
legal migrants and illegal migrants? For otherwise identical individuals, are these differences the outcome of market adjustments or an expression of discriminatory practices? Ten years of scholarly debate on the subject in the United States from the end of the 1970s through to the end of the 1980s have highlighted the problems one encounters when one attempts to isolate the specific effect of migrants legal status and the difficulties one meets when attempting to reconcile apparently contradictory results. One requires, in fact, data which allow one to take into account self selection effects (age, sex, marital status, education, time spent in the United States, social capital, etc.), the self selection of those who return and also unobservable events (for example, attitude towards risk). The kind of data that we have at our disposal rarely allow us to exploit the sophisticated statistical techniques that might eliminate these biases. The research undertaken by Massey (1987) on four Mexican communities observed the United States and in Mexico is exemplary in this regard. It shows that the resulting status of inequality does not of itself lead to a lower wage but does exert an indirect influence in the sense that it is associated with interrupted periods of residence and to shorter total periods of stay. Experience in the United States is consequently limited and the workers tend to be confined to badly paid jobs, factors which have the effect of diminishing wages, be the persons legal or illegal. One of the earliest studies in the United States on the relative impact of illegal and legal immigrants on the wages of nationals shows that illegal migrants have a smaller negative impact (Bean, Lowell and Taylor, 1988). The explanation for this outcome may lie in the fact that most legal immigrants enter the country irrespective of labour market conditions in the United States, whereas illegal migrants respond more to an endogenous demand for labour in that country. Other studies concluded that the results obtained should be subject to some qualification. On the whole, the results are not clear-cut, and the impact, if there is one, is moderate. In Europe, in the absence of appropriate data the results have been more fragmentory and contrasted.12 In addition to the methodological problems already mentioned, these divergences may be explained by the heterogeneity of the forms of illegal migration, differing contexts, as well as by the differing dynamics underlying the process of unauthorised migration. In France during the 1960s, for example, when regularisation programmes were frequent,
enterprises had a two-tier strategy whereby they directly recruited irregular workers who were already in the country whilst at the same time, as an insurance mechanism for times when they might find themselves unable to recruit such labour, they also went through legal procedures to hire migrant workers (Tapinos, 1973). For migrants, too, it was a short-cut compared with the legal recruitment system; it enabled them to cut down their waiting time and, in some cases, even the cost of migration. Illegal immigrants would accept the first job they were offered, and usually at the lowest rates of pay. As soon as they were regularised, they had little difficulty, at a time of substantial industrial growth and labour shortages, in finding jobs that were sometimes better paid than those of the legal immigrants who continued to accept minimum wage rates. The impact of a migrants legal status can also be measured indirectly by looking at how migrants wages have changed following their regularisation. Figures are generally lacking, and where they exist they come from cross-country surveys that contain biases and are therefore difficult to interpret. An exception to this has been the exploitation of two American surveys, the Legalised Population Survey (LPS) and the Current Population Survey (CPS) which incorporate a longitudinal follow-up (Tienda & Singer, 1995). This analysis seeks to break down salary variation since regularisation into what can be attributed to characteristics at entry that are specific to illegal workers (e.g. younger, more likely to come from non-English-speaking countries, lower standard of education, a shorter period of residence in the United States), and to factors that may have influenced increases in their wage in the United States (e.g. education, command of English, professional experience, changes in the labour market, entry cohort, the first sector of activity, economic indicators in the geographical area of activity, and changes in the economic situation in the United States). Results point to a substantial rise in the wage of workers following regularisation, correlated with the year of entry and the duration of residence, with major variations according to country of origin. 4. The macroeconomic impact, distribution and taxation
238
What, then, is the total macroeconomic impact specifically attributable to the employment of illegal foreign labour on distribution and taxation. AccordOECD 1999
ing to standard economic theory, immigration reduces the equilibrium wage, increases total employment (i.e. nationals and immigrant workers) and alters the distribution of income between labour and capital. The greater the fall in wages rates due to immigration, the higher is the surplus and return on capital investment. Do variations in the amount of surplus and its distribution depend on the legal status of the migrant workers? Insofar as the effects of illegal immigration are linked to a reduction in labour costs and the equilibrium wage rate, illegal immigration, by offering the possibility of labour costs lower than would be the case under legal migration, has ceteris paribus a more pronounced positive effect on GDP than legal migration. However, it is also important to take account of the characteristics of migrants, their skills, the sectors and branches in which they are employed, the conditions of supply and demand for nationals, and the time horizon in question. For example, Djajic presents an open economy model with full employment in two sectors: unskilled workers, both nationals and unauthorised migrants, are employed in branches whose product is an input for branches where only nationals are employed. The effects on wages and flexibility in a sector brought about by the employment of undocumented workers increase the total product and per capita product for the workforce as a whole. In the long term, the employment of illegal foreign workers may promote the acquisition of skills and the upward mobility of the domestic labour force, and thereby raise incomes for society as a whole (Djajic, 1997). However, results are linked to migrants skill levels and to their exclusive concentration in a branch or sector, rather than to their illegal status. A structure of this type provides an equally good description of both legal and illegal migration in Europe during the 1960s and early 1970s (Lutz, 1963; Tapinos, 1973). By contrast, given the current situation in Europe, particularly in southern Europe where the labour supply and unemployment are both high, substantial non-wage labour costs in the formal sector and the shortage of capital can lead to a displacement of capital and workers towards the low-cost informal sector. This is an undesirable consequence in the long term (DellAringa and Neri, 1989). It is a hypothesis that needs checking; the detailed sectoral analyses required for this have yet to be carried out (cf. Venturini, 1997). The most sensitive area concerns the effects of undocumented migration on the most disadvanOECD 1999
taged workers in society. Insofar as immigration increases the total product, specific groups affected by immigration could receive compensation. The minimum wage and other forms of guaranteed income seek to meet this redistributive objective for the most disadvantaged. However, such measures can themselves encourage illegal immigration. The argument is not that undocumented migrants are attracted by the welfare magnet, but rather that by raising the reserve wage of nationals, welfare-state policies increase the return for employers on the use of illegal immigrant workers and, to a lesser extent, on the use of legal immigrant workers. It is precisely considerations of this type that are adduced in support of restrictive policies. However, restrictions on legal and illegal immigration that aim to protect the least skilled groups on the labour market have to be compared in an open economy with effects on the same groups that would result from an equivalent increase in labour-intensive imports. Potential migrants unable to leave their countries would specialise in the production and export of labour-intensive products; the employment and earnings of unskilled workers in what would otherwise have been immigration countries would thereby be affected. The fear of a crowding-out effect on nationals and legal migrants is reinforced when illegal immigration occurs during situations of rising unemployment. According to a neo-classical approach, an increase in unemployment would be analysed as a further voluntary withdrawal by nationals and legal immigrants from the labour market, their reserve wages being higher than the now lower equilibrium wage brought about by the employment of illegal foreign workers. Though what exactly voluntary unemployment and reserve wage mean in such a model is, to say the least, somewhat ambiguous, particularly in an open economy with the possibility of temporary labour migration. Let us imagine a large inflow of undocumented foreigners ready to accept jobs at a wage 50% below the market rate a movement that could lead to a massive withdrawal of nationals from the labour market. To consider these nationals as voluntarily unemployed because their reserve wage is too high would be to render the notion of a reserve wage meaningless. The reserve wage is established in relation to certain expectations that workers have with regard to their standard of living taking into account time and place, to use the academic definition of the right price. Migrants are prepared to accept wages which,
239
given the constraint of an irreducible level consumption in the country where the jobs are, provide a standard of living desired for family members who stayed behind through remittances that increase in value with improvements in the terms of trade. The reserve wages of residents of immigration countries and of potential migrants are associated with different reference spaces and life styles. Differentials may explain why people resort to unauthorised immigration, but they also pose the problem of an inter-personal comparison of utilities. The question of labour market competition needs to be examined together with concerns for the fiscal impact of illegal immigration. This brings us back to an examination of the extent to which deductions and benefits are linked to territoriality, nationality and regularity in respect of residence. In terms of taxation, whatever calculation technique is used to itemise the expenditures and resources put into immigration as a whole (it is a calculation that cannot be simply reduced to a crosssectional analysis, and has aroused a debate notable for its extremely divergent positions), the fiscal impact of unauthorised foreign workers and their families is generally positive as far as the national budget is concerned: illegal migrants pay indirect taxes in the same way as all other consumers and although they avoid paying income tax their revenues are generally such that the loss to the public exchequer cannot be significant and is unlikely to exceed what they obtain in return, given that their use of community services tends to be even lower than their incomes. The only real cost linked to irregularity is for services the use of which is not determined by the legality of residence status; these mainly concern the education of children of illegal immigrants. As far as social protection is concerned, contributions and entitlements are linked to regularity in respect of residence and work. On the hypothesis that regular migrants realise a net gain from the social protection system, a relative increase in the proportion of illegal immigrants in the immigrant population who do not contribute but do not draw benefits either actually reduces the cost of the system. On the hypothesis that the contributions of regular migrants are greater than the benefits they receive, which is usually the case, a similar relative increase in the proportion of illegal immigrants represents a loss to the system. Whichever of these hypotheses is retained, the claim that the money that illegal migrants take out of the social protection system is
the determining factor behind their decision to migrate should be treated with caution. There is, however, an argument in favour of reallocating resources between the various administrative tiers in order to pay for higher charges at the local level. The research by McCarthy and Vernez (1997) that reports on the results of surveys conducted by the Rand Corporation in California can be cited as an example. According to United States law, illegal immigrants are not eligible for certain assistance programmes, although they do qualify for education and for food programmes. Children qualify for assistance in the same way as all children born in the United States. In fact, the drawing of social benefits depends more on migrants socio-economic status rather than on their legal status. However, it is noteworthy that: a) hospitalisation is higher among children born in the United States of illegal immigrants; b) many illegal immigrants qualify for access to certain social programmes (e.g. AFDC, food stamps and Medicaid) insofar as their children born in the United States are eligible or one of the parents has the status of legal immigrant; and, c) illegal immigrants tend not to apply for reduced tax liability. The final element to be considered in this calculation is the cost of control, which can indeed be very high. Entry control seeks to counter a wide range of illegal activities including drug trafficking and terrorism. Not all the costs incurred in entry control can be attributed to illegal migration. Moreover, the specific cost of applying laws (e.g. frontier controls, the imposition of penalties on employers, and the investigation and sending back of foreigners lacking the proper documents) are an integral part of general immigration policy and as such is the price to be paid for operating a legal migration regime unless, that is, we were to imagine a totally open-frontier system. In other words, for illegal immigration to represent a fiscal burden, it would have to be assumed that the cost of control (properly adjusted) exceeded the positive net balance of fiscal revenues less social expenditures attributable to it. That is a highly unlikely outcome given the extent of illegal immigrations positive impact on GDP. In conclusion, in order for the phenomenon of clandestine immigration to be comprehended it is essential that its economic dimension be taken into account. It would appear however that economic analyses of the labour market have not identified and incorporated within its models the specific features of clandestine immigration. This explains why the majority of the studies of illegal immigration, in
OECD 1999
240
particular to the Unites States, analyse the employment of illegal immigrants as if it were coterminous with that of unskilled legal immigrants. The difference in the economic incidence of illegal and legal immigration appear then as a matter of degree rather than of nature C. COMBATING CLANDESTINE IMMIGRATION
of foreign labour aims to limit clandestine inflows and residence; the main justification for the control of flows is to protect the domestic workforce from unfair competition thought to come from the clandestine employment of foreign labour. To these two administrative activities, we must add free trade and co-operation policies that seek to reduce the propensity to emigrate. 1. Frontier control and controlling the length of stay
Before turning to an examination of the administrative effectiveness of controls, the questions of the legitimacy of restrictions on movement and settlement and their economic efficiency, from both the world and national point of view, naturally pose themselves. With regard to economic efficiency, as defined by some criterion of world or national welfare, there are arguments in favour of both an open frontier and a control policy. Using very restrictive hypotheses, particularly an otherwise fixed national supply of labour, it is possible to demonstrate that total world welfare would increase were all frontiers opened up (Hamilton and Whalley, 1984). At a national level, one may more realistically say that, for the recipient country, immigration has distributive and free rider effects in that it allows new entrants to benefit from the past accumulation of capital and technological progress, the cost of which has been borne by previous generations. However, looking over the long term, there are too many non-measurable parameters. That is why immigration policies are usually founded on short-term economic arguments, or on arguments of political philosophy that have nothing to do with the issue of economic impact. In this regard, two observations can be made. First, in a democratic society, whilst the regulation of inflows and the definition and implementation of rules for accepting new members of the community are seen as forming part of the legitimate attributes of a nation-state, the issue of sending immigrants back against their will is much more problematic. There is an asymmetry here which, for the individual, recalls the asymmetry between the right to leave ones country and the absence of an equivalent right to enter another. Liberal societies have also made a commitment not to close their frontiers to refugees and asylum seekers. What, then, in these conditions, are the options for the State? The combating of clandestine immigration is effected by measures that attempt to control inflows and length of stay, and curb the clandestine employment of foreign labour. These two elements are closely linked: curbing the clandestine employment
OECD 1999
To measure the effectiveness of administrative measures requires that the policys objective has been clearly defined. If the objective is to reduce illegal immigration and settlement in the country, are the entry restrictions efficient, do they represent the best option? To answer this question, we need to take account not only of the direct effects on inflows, but also of the effects on net migration. However, entry control is only one of the possible ways of limiting inflows and settlement in the country. It follows, therefore, in relation to the established objective, that we need to compare the cost-effectiveness of frontier controls with other indirect methods, for example the imposition of penalties on the employers of clandestine foreign workers or policies of cooperation with origin countries. The policy of controlling inflows responds to general principles of immigration policy regarding the number and characteristics of legal migrants. In settlement countries, in particular the United States, this involves defining immigration criteria and measures for combating clandestine immigration; in the European Union, it takes the form of severely restricting labour immigration from non-member countries. Whether they limit access to the country through a policy of visas or prevent the clandestine crossing of frontiers, these policies of controlling migration flows have revealed their effectiveness but also their limitations. Although they have reduced the number of entries of the categories concerned, they have also led to their substitution, to some degree, by those categories whose entry continues to be possible and/or less controlled, and who have subsequently transformed themselves into clandestine residents. Clearly, policies for controlling inflows cannot on their own hope to regulate immigration. The international opening of economies, the volume of cross-border movements, the maintenance (indeed the heightening) of economic imbalances between rich and poor countries, and the existence of networks sustained by the presence of estab-
241
lished foreign communities ensure that control is not simply a matter of visas and frontier police. In the context of globalisation, entry control presents a real problem for developed countries. First, outside a closed system (such as that of the Soviet Bloc or the Berlin Wall), and in a democratic environment, a selective, partial system of control is difficult to implement. Moreover, it is generally the case that countries that attract migrants are often those that also attract entrants of all kinds, mainly tourists and family visitors. The problem is how to distinguish clearly at the point of entry between potential migrants and other flows. No administrative measure [e.g. visa policies that distinguish between different categories of inflow, the insistence on special conditions for tourists such as the obligation to have a return ticket and/or a certain amount of money, and the recently withdrawn French system of an accommodation certificate (certificat dhbergement)] has proved itself sufficient to meet the problem.13 In this context, the United States migration policy, which focuses mainly on entry (i.e. the visa system)14 and the surveillance of land frontiers, provides a particularly good illustration. How effective is the threat of being apprehended by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)? Research by Espenshade (1995) does not offer a firm response.15 There is a 30% chance of being apprehended each time an attempt is made to enter the United States, but of course migrants can simply keep trying until they succeed. There is a 1-2% chance of being apprehended on American soil. It is clear that, when migrants reach the American border, they will cross it eventually, and once they are inside the country, there is very little likelihood of their being arrested. It appears, then, that there is no link between the perceived risk of being arrested at the border and the total number of illegal immigrants in the United States. However, Espenshade concludes that implementation of INS policies does have some dissuasive effect. Over recent years, although the strengthening of INS controls has increased the risk of apprehension it has also been accompanied by an enlargement in the number of crossing points. Assessing the administrative effectiveness of control policy by its impact on flow reduction can be deceptive as soon as there exists ambiguity in the policys objective. In North America and Europe, the stepping up of controls does not rule out a degree of acceptance of irregular entries. In the United States, at least until 1994, the declared control policy at the Mexican border was exercised somewhat selectively.16
In Europe, after frontiers were closed the admission of asylum seekers was for a time and without calling the principle of closure into question an indirect and more efficient means of selecting entries. Control over entry in no way guarantees control over the length of stay. The strengthening of external controls, however effective they may be as far as inflows are concerned, does have an impact on the rate of migration return, on length of stay and, therefore, on the stock of illegal immigrants in these countries. In the United States, where the risk of being apprehended at the frontier has increased over recent years, migrants have tried to compensate for the additional cost by crossing the border less often and spending more time in the United States. In Europe, the closing down of frontiers has had the effect of slowing down the rate at which labour migrants return home (with marked differences by nationality), consolidating the family reunion process, and extending the length of stay. Democratic and liberal states face a range of political, legal and administrative difficulties. Sending back long-standing foreign residents, particularly if they are in employment is, irrespective of their legal status, open to question. Among developed countries, no recipient country has introduced plans for a mass-scale repatriation. Public opinion is in favour of restrictive measures at entry but is much more reluctant to accept coercive repatriation measures. There are also legal and technical difficulties that hinder the implementation of forced departure measures. The law requires compliance with strict conditions for repatriation or expulsion: these take the form of individual legal or administrative decisions, notifying the foreigner of the decision personally, and the possibility of verifying the individuals identity and citizenship. There is no shortage of examples of people against whom decisions have been taken, but which have proved impossible to carry out: these include individuals who have had their identity papers taken away from them and cannot be expelled or escorted to the border, and cases where, despite strong evidence of a persons nationality, it has been necessary, in the absence of formal proof, to obtain acknowledgement of citizenship from the consulate in the country of origin, the latters co-operation in such matters being linked to considerations outside the field of migration. Readmission agreements are specifically aimed at dealing with this type of problem. The asylum applications system is a typical illustration of the limitations affecting the control of inflows and length of stay. The asylum system seeks to guarOECD 1999
242
antee legal protection for asylum seekers in situations where they are few in number and where there exists an indisputable means of assessing personal risk in the country of origin. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the use of the asylum procedure by candidates for migration, when all other means were out of the question or more difficult, has been reflected in a substantial growth in the number of asylum seekers in western Europe, particularly Germany to the point of severely hampering the functioning of the system. This crisis has led to reform of national legislation. Let us take the case of someone entering a country and applying for asylum. He files an application but, because of the large number of requests outstanding, the processing can take months, sometimes longer than two years. In most cases, the request is rejected in the first instance and the application goes through to appeal, a procedure designed to ensure so far as possible that no legitimate request for refugee status is turned down. The appeal procedure is suspensive; the person can therefore stay in the country for the duration of the procedure. During this time, the country has to decide between the following alternatives: either the asylum seeker obtains a work permit, which means that if the appeal is rejected (which is what usually happens), the asylum seeker is to all intents and purposes settled and the implementation of the judicial decision (which should involve sending him to a foreign country) turns out to be technically and humanely out of the question; or the country does not grant the asylum seeker a work permit, and this involves giving him financial assistance and enabling him to qualify for social security benefits while he awaits the final decision. In the latter case, the charge increases over time and becomes increasingly difficult to justify, especially so given that some asylum seekers manage to find jobs in the hidden economy.17 Countries faced with this dilemma have initially chosen to speed up the process by increasing the budgets of the government departments responsible for refugees. This has been effective. However, it ultimately proved necessary to make the asylum scheme more restrictive: in Germany, this resulted in an amendment to Article 16 of the Basic Law; in Europe more generally, it took the form of implementing the Dublin Convention whereby candidates may make only one application in the European Union. These measures have led to a significant reduction in the number of asylum seekers. Yet, greater financial resources and stronger controls have only a limited effect on the principle of the asylum system; there is therefore reason to believe that
OECD 1999
the asylum route will continue to be a one of the key components of migration flows. The asylum procedure, which is specific with regard to entry, illustrates the general difficulty of controlling the length of stay. It appears therefore that there is an inter-relationship between entry control and the regulation of migration return. A country which makes entry more difficult thereby reduces the incentive to leave for those already present. However, when confronted with the difficulty of exerting control over length of stay, countries react by raising barriers to entry, often going further than the degree of closure that was initially planned and seen by the country as desirable. Immigration control can only be carried out at entry, but the economic, social and political problems of immigration are more the result of the settlement of migrants. As soon as unauthorised migration is, in the absence of reliable data, assumed to reach proportions deemed large, governments face a dilemma: either they apply the existing legislation and thereby create a group of marginalised individuals, or they decide on an amnesty which has to be presented and perceived as an exceptional and one-off operation. In the latter instance efforts are made in the hope of ensuring that the amnesty does not attract new inflows,18 and in particular that it does not stimulate expectations of another amnesty. The European experience, particularly since 1973-74, and the American experience (IRCA, 1986) show that no regularisation exercise has ever put an end to the presence of clandestine immigrants, in the sense that none have affected the decisive factors and mechanisms underlying illegal migration. This does not mean that regularisation programmes should be ruled out, rather that it is important to realise that amnesties (partly) efface the past, but have no effect on the future. However, the American example shows that, even in the absence of any prospect of a new amnesty, illegal migration has once again increased; this makes it quite clear that there does not need to be the prospect of a new amnesty for the stock of clandestine immigrants to increase. Recent experience in Europe shows that it is not an option to decide whether to have an amnesty or not; rather, the choice is between repeated amnesties and discreet amnesties carried out on a case-by-case basis. 2. Employment controls and penalties against employers
243
The imposition of penalties against employers who use clandestine labour, that is to say the second
form of control, aims to influence the determining factors of unauthorised migration but, like regularisation, it is a means after the fact of dealing with the problem. In the light of the most recent European and American experiences, sanctions against employers would appear to be of very limited effectiveness. There are a number of reasons for this. First, there are intrinsic difficulties in implementing such a system; some are legal or technical, while others are linked to the socio-cultural environment. In most cases, employers are not asked (or, more accurately, they cannot be asked) to check the validity of documents produced by migrant workers. As a result, even if the employer is under a duty to check on a workers status, he can only be punished for not ensuring that the documents were valid. More importantly, the system of sanctions can only be effective if it is perceived by society, particularly at local level, as a legitimate element of labour market intervention. In reality, there is usually quite a gap between being found breaking the law and being found guilty in a court of law. It is hardly surprising, therefore, that the legal process comes to a halt somewhere between the two as a result of local considerations and political pressures that highlight the difficulties that enterprises would face if they had to pay for labour at the current market rate and the risks that a cessation of activities would have on the employment of nationals. Sanctions against employers also have an economic dimension. The effectiveness of the system of sanctions depends on the extent to which a sanction reduces the demand for unauthorised workers by adding a risk premium to their wage. This effectiveness also depends on the extent to which sanctions encourage the replacement of clandestine immigrants by nationals or legal immigrants thereby reducing clandestine entries. There is a price that entrepreneurs are prepared to pay to be able to hire unauthorised workers; the problem may be formulated within the theory of optimal taxation (Hill and Pearce, 1990). Entrepreneurs will risk employing unauthorised foreigners for as long as the expected cost of being penalised (a function of the expected size of the penalty and the likelihood of being caught) is lower than the difference between the labour costs of illegal and legal migrants. The unknown element for the employer is the likelihood of being checked up on. It can however be calculated, or at least its determinants can be
assessed on the basis of such factors as the amount of money invested by the competent government department (the INS, for example), the degree of geographical and sectoral concentration of illegal workers, and the size and location of the company. This economic analysis needs qualification in the case of European countries. The vision of the market economy ignores the shame that can go with being found guilty of employing illegal workers. Clandestine workers can be hired by small enterprises in the formal and informal sectors, but not by large firms. These latter possess, however, the political influence to recruit the migrants they need through other, more widely accepted, means. It follows that the perceived concentration of illegal workers in certain jobs, and in firms marked by certain characteristics, can be deceptive. There remains the question of the discriminatory effect that employer sanctions have on legal migrant workers. An honest employer who does not seek to hire illegal migrants might refuse to hire workers who display characteristics that point to a high probability of their being clandestine (e.g. a low level of skills, or a poor command of the language). Paradoxically, law-abiding employers who have no intention of discriminating are more likely to operate on this basis thereby actually discriminating against legal workers. However, this legitimate concern must not be used as an excuse for relaxing a system of sanctions that aims to prevent unfair competition among unskilled workers (North, 1994). In any case, that administrative effectiveness is limited does not justify the conclusion that there should be no controls at all. After all, that the police will never succeed in completely stamping out criminality would not justify disbanding their force. The significance and scope of these measures also depend on the context in which they operate and on the importance attached to the socioeconomic and legal dimensions of the offence. In European countries such as France, the combating of the employment of foreigners in an irregular situation forms part of the wider campaign against clandestine employment. It aims above all to secure compliance with employment legislation with a view to preventing the unfair competition that would result from hiring clandestine labour. The penalties are directed at employers, not at workers. To this end, drawing upon the lessons learned from applying the law, in particular the variety of legal devices used with the aim of evading employment and taxation regulations, attempts have been made to strengthen and reposition control provisions (i.e. focus on preOECD 1999
244
vention), the justification for which goes beyond administrative and economic efficiency. The question of the efficiency of sanctions, notably with regard to how much they reduce clandestine immigration and what impact they have at the macroeconomic level, has been accorded rather less attention. The perspective in the United States is different. The imposition of penalties on employers seeks to reduce clandestine entry and residence; it is not first and foremost a legal instrument of regulating the labour market. Here, as a result of experience acquired since 1986, less effort has been made to alter labour market regulation in response to the inventiveness of clandestine workers and their employers. Instead, questions have been asked about the relative efficiency of implementing laws against employers as compared with measures aimed directly at curbing clandestine inflows at frontiers. Taken to their logical conclusion, were it to be shown that, by comparison with legal immigration, illegal immigration is of greater benefit to the economy then such considerations of economic efficiency would lead to the conclusion that implementing laws against employers has a negative economic impact. This means that sanctions are efficient only if they reflect societys view of the legitimacy and necessity of combating clandestine employment and form part of a more general policy directed to this end. Real control is social control, as the Swiss example testifies. It necessitates at the local level a consensus on the need to combat the phenomenon and implement sanctions against employers. The new strategic orientation adopted by the INS, which proposes to associate local communities and the implementing agencies in its actions in order to identify and define the problems linked to illegal immigration is in line with such an view (INS, March 1999). 3. Policies designed to reduce the propensity to emigrate
answers to two lines of inquiry: What effect can the liberalisation of national economies and trade liberalisation be expected to have on growth in revenues and employment? and, What effect can stronger economic growth in origin countries be expected to have on the incentive to emigrate (Tapinos, 1999)? The impact of external opening on the growth of economies is highly debatable. The analysis mainly (and often solely) focuses on the impact on exports and imports and on growth in the economy; it is more discreet about the effects on employment and income distribution.19 The relationship between economic growth and emigration is even more uncertain. Economic theory and empirical observation suggest two possible approaches. If the explanation for migration is mainly to be found in income differentials (this is the only scenario produced by the theory of international trade that assumes full use of factors of production) and employment (the neo-classical theory of allocation of factors), and if the opening up to trade and movements of capital is likely to encourage growth in the revenues and well-being of all trading partners and stronger growth among the less developed countries, it is possible to predict that the surplus workforce will be absorbed and that there will be convergence in wages. A reduction in the incentive to emigrate follows from this; free trade and development aid are then an alternative to population movements. On the other hand, if it is true that the origin of migration lies in the breakdown of the demographic-economic equilibrium, which results notably from the take-off of the development process, then an increase in internal mobility, which is inherent to this process, normally extends outside the confines of the country. According to this hypothesis, development and international migration go hand in hand (Tapinos, 1974; Diaz Briquets and Weintraub, 1991, Massey, 1988). This hypothesis finds confirmation in empirical studies of the American and European cases. The two viewpoints may be reconciled through the introduction of a time dimension. In the medium term, the kind of development fostered by trade liberalisation strengthens the incentive to emigrate; in the long term, improved standards of living make emigration less advantageous for potential candidates. The decrease in clandestine migration is envisaged in this way as the consequence of a fall in the general propensity to emigrate. However, the selec-
In a world where demographic and economic imbalances produce a supply of emigrants out of all proportion to the reception capacities and demand in developed countries, it has become necessary to re-situate migration in the context of development, and to promote a strategy of trade liberalisation, incentives for private investment, aid and co-operation, from which one might eventually hope to see a reduction in inequalities between nations and less incentive to emigrate. The realism of this approach, and the confidence we can have in it, depend on the
OECD 1999
245
tive character of migration needs to be taken into account. If those who are disposed to migrate clandestinely are different from other potential migrants, whether these characteristics be observable or otherwise, then the question of the specific impact of development and trade liberalisation will remain open. A partial indication in this context was provided by Hanson and Spilimbergo (1996), who showed that illegal migration as measured by apprehensions is a function of wage differentials between Mexico and the United States, but that it is more responsive to variations in real wages in Mexico than to variations in real wages in America. Generalisation on the basis of this observation would not, of course, be warranted.
migration is a process with inflows and outflows. It is the obstacles to entry which have the effect of ultimately inducing an increase in the number of illegal immigrants greater than would be the case under a more liberal system of entering and leaving. The problem of the control of migration flows should not be viewed as being uniquely bilateral. The emergence of new geographic areas for migration imposes on governments forms of co-operation ranging from the exchange of experiences through to coordination in the methods they employ to regulate migration flows.20 Yet in a world increasingly open to the circulation of goods and capital, where the reduction in transport costs leads to considerable crossborder movements linked to tourism, to the acquisition of tertiary education and professional training and to business travel it is anachronistic to conceive of immigration control exclusively in terms of sovereignty. A distinction needs to be made between movement, the expression of the human right to come and go, and settlement which is conditional on the legitimate prerogative of societies to decide the extent to and the conditions under which they are ready to accept new members. For all that, the difficulty of managing the risk that incomers will remain beyond the duration of their visa cannot legitimise the imposition of restrictions on the circulation of persons for this would be detrimental to the majority of them who desire merely and with honest intent to undertake a brief stay. It should be noted also that migrants belong neither to their country of origin nor to their country of destination. It is an illusion to imagine that irregular migration can be eliminated solely by state intervention and improved co-operation between the origin and destination countries. Clandestine migration, as well as being a breach of the law is also a manifestation of individual liberty. Between the inspector who carries out his duty and the migrant in search of his destiny, the issues are not of the same nature. This is the root of the problem.
Conclusion What lessons can we draw from this examination of the economic and political issues of international migration in the light of experiences in North America and Europe? What is the scope for public intervention in the context of accelerating globalisation alongside the persistence of demographic and economic disequilibria between the rich and poor countries and the instability resulting from intra- and inter-national conflicts? The phenomenon of clandestine migration is not confined to any one migration regime in particular. Neither a regime open to regular migration such as that in North America nor one of closed borders such as that prevailing in Europe guarantees the containment of clandestine entries and the prevention of unauthorised residence by foreigners in an irregular situation. The diversity of the potential forms of clandestinity, the multiplicity of the objectives in the fight against clandestine immigration, the conflicts of interest between different groups in recipient countries and the ambivalence of public opinion necessitate the implementation of a range of measures. The effectiveness of these measures rests on the assumption that
246
OECD 1999
NOTES
1. The OECD and the Dutch authorities with the support of the United States organised a seminar on preventing and combating the employment of foreigners in an irregular situation. The seminar took place in The Hague on 22-23 April 1999. The seminar was a continuation of the work carried out since 1995 by the OECD Secretariat under the auspices of the Working Party on Migration. This work has facilitated the study of illegal immigration in several OECD Member countries in relation to labour market and other programmes to regularise foreigners in an irregular situation. The seminar comprised three sessions. The first session analysed the impact of irregular migration on the economy and the labour market. The second session was dedicated to the comparative analysis and the evaluation of measures undertaken to prevent and combat the employment of foreigners in an irregular situation. The third session was composed of two round tables. Participants in the first round table included OECD policy makers, representatives of governmental administrations in charge of the implementation of sanctions against labour traffickers, dishonest employers and foreigners in an irregular situation. Representatives of Trade Unions also contributed to the discussions on the difficulties encountered in implementing sanctions at national levels and proposals for actions to overcome these difficulties. The second round table was devoted to the extension and improvement of international co-operation directed at effectively preventing and combating the employment of foreigners in an irregular situation. The proceedings of the seminar as well as the conclusions and recommendations of the OECD Secretariat will be published by the OECD in January 2000. The document presented at the seminar by Georges Tapinos (Irregular migration: economic and political issues) has been chosen for the Special Chapter of this edition of the annual report "Trends in International Migration". 2. The relative proportion of these two components in the number of illegal migrants varies from country to country. In the United States, it has been estimated that illegal entries (entries without inspection) and overstayers each account for 50% of total illegal immigration (Warren, 1994). A more recent estimate by the INS puts the figures at 60% and 40% respectively. 3. One can not always distinguish these different categories in the administrative statistics. Indeed, these record either legal movements or infractions which, when they are penalised, measure clandestinity at the very moment that it has ceased to exist. Moreover,
administrative statistics, ross-sectional by nature, record the events or migrants affected by the events without, in general, it being possible to attach the events to a reference population. Further, there is distinction to be drawn as to the reliability of the information: between administrative records which can include a fiscal dimension or an element of sanction which might incite inexact declarations, and data which respond to a desire for socio-economic knowledge such as censuses and some surveys; they do not necessarily have the same utility when one seeks to determine the number of clandestine immigrants. When clandestine immigration is tolerated, it is quite possible that a census will record a non-negligible proportion of the clandestine immigrants. 4. It is a gross over-simplification, but we can identify three overlapping types of procedure. Firstly, there are surveys that have the advantage of including characteristics of economic sectors and the workers concerned, but do not identify variations over time. Then, there are numerical methods that focus on anomalies between observed and assumed developments; the variables customarily used are participation rates, the disparity between national revenue and expenditures, the proportions of expenditure using cash and largedenomination notes, and household electricity consumption. These methods need a departure point at which time it is reasonable to assume that the hidden economy is, to all intents and purposes, non-existent. It is then possible to identify growth in the hidden economy over time. A more ambitious econometric procedure uses a theoretical model of the informal economy that involves the introduction of a series of variables defining determiners (e.g. fiscal pressure or regulations covering employment) and indicators of the hidden economy (e.g. participation rates). Because of the wide variety of procedures used and specific features of the statistical factors requested and the field covered, it is difficult to make comparisons. As a percentage of GDP, estimates range between 2% and 4%, with particularly high levels for certain sectors such as building, hotels and catering, domestic services and agriculture. 5. Despite the multiplicity of conceivable procedures, for most of the countries concerned we do not have a single estimate worthy of the name. For the European countries, one is obliged to content oneself with very partial measurements, typically estimates inferred from the number of asylum or regularisation applications refused. In the United States, however, the civil
247
OECD 1999
service furnishes one of the most reliable estimates of the stock of clandestine immigrants. The number in October 1996 was put at 5 million, there having taken place between 1992 and 1996 an annual growth of 275 000 (US Statistical Abstract 1996 and GAO, April 1999). 6. This can vary for nationals and established regular migrants. Although there is certainly more of an incentive for nationals to work in the informal economy than for undocumented foreigners, the advantages for the former outweigh the risk; this is not so for illegal workers. Contini (1982) cites the example of Fiat whose staff between the mid-1960s and the early 1970s left for employment with smaller enterprises where there was more work and higher capitalisation and profits. Regular migrants, too, have accepted restrictions that limited their mobility. 7. However, it should be pointed out that there are cases where undocumented migrant workers have lost their jobs following regularisation; they are less likely to repeat the experience another time. 8. The decision to sub-contract part of production reinforces, and often conditions, the opportunity to reduce wages and avoid mandatory deductions (i.e. taxes and social security). 9. Sub-contracting, a practice that responds to a logic of efficiency, also allows artificially created companies to expand by employing unauthorised labour. For example, a French legal judgement refers to a subcontractor who employed eight people, five of whom had no residence permits or work permits, and one of whom had no work permit. Work was supervised by a charge-hand from the main company, the workers were lodged in huts hired by the same company, and all the equipment and materials used for production were also the property of the main company. Sub-contracting enabled the main company to avoid paying taxes and social charges (Pupier, 1992). 10. Unauthorised migrants often have a better understanding of conditions in the informal labour market than nationals and immigrants who have been in the country for a long time, particularly in the services sector. This gives them a comparative advantage. 11. For example, some Sri Lankans who had no real intention of settling, applied for asylum in order to take advantage of the slow pace at which the application process is conducted, and used the time to build up their savings before returning home (Costes, 1991). 12. We have indeed very little research material of the statistical quality necessary to make an assessment. One of the monographs worthy of note, that by Venturini (1997) measured the elasticity of regular employment compared with unauthorised, irregular employment and threw doubt on the hypothesis that there is competition from irregular foreign labour. Using ISTAT data on the hidden economy during the period 1980-1994, she showed in 14 branches in 5 sectors (agriculture, industry, construction, tradable services and nontradable services) that there are variations between
sectors, in particular that the depressive effect is more pronounced in agriculture, but that the overall impact is small. However, in another context, other studies show that the pay of undocumented workers is lower than that of nationals (allowing for different levels of productivity), and that they perform lowly regarded jobs with few differences in pay determined by qualifications, gender or age (Lianos, Sarris and Katseli, 1996; Markova and Sarris, 1997). 13. However, as statistics on flows into European countries show, it would be wrong to under-estimate the impact of the visa policy. 14. Under American law, obtaining a visa from an American consulate abroad does not remove the right of immigration officers to refuse entry at the point of entry. 15. n 1993, the INS spent $US 362m on implementing the policy; to this sum, we must add the $US 12.2m spent on equipment used in achieving the same objective. That year, 1 282 000 apprehensions were carried out by border patrols; another 45,000 were made inside the United States. In 1998, the INS spent around $US 900m for the Budget Authority for Border Patrol (cf. Tightened Controls and Changing Flows: Evaluation the INS Border Enforcement Strategy by R. Suro in Research Perspectives on Migration, Vol. 2, n1, 1999). 16. This has been well documented by the Zapata Canyon Project (Bustamante, 1990). Illustrations of this include the fact that most migrants do not choose to cross the frontier where the geographical conditions are least dangerous, but where there is a large labour market on the American side (e.g. the Tijuana-San Diego border), and the large number of 'illegal commuters'. 17. It is interesting to note that countries choosing the former option (e.g. France) have subsequently gone for the latter, and countries choosing the latter (e.g. Germany) have subsequently adopted the former. 18. This assumes that provision is made for deadlines, proof that the applicant is indeed residing in the country, and possibly further proof that he has a job. 19. Given the wide range of experiences, it is particularly interesting to identify the factors likely to influence the direction of variations and to measure their effects. In a review of the literature, Edwards (1993) selects five elements: liberalisation measures, in particular the distinction between, on the one hand, the removal of quota and tariff barriers and, on the other, devaluation that can become necessary as a result of the opening; the timetabling and speed of the opening; the stage of development that the country has reached; the international environment; and labour market distortions. 20. Hence the lifting of internal controls within the European Union and the drafting of common regulations for external border control (the Schengen intergovernmental agreement and the Dublin Convention on asylum seekers). For all this, none of the countries concerned has ruled out the possibility of applying special conditions to certain categories of would-be entrants.
248
OECD 1999
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BAGANHA, M.I. (1998), Immigrant involvement in the informal economy: the Portuguese case, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, Vol. 24, No. 2, April, pp. 367-385. BEAN, F.D., LOWEL, B.L. and TAYLOR, L.J. (1988), Undocumented Mexican immigrants and the earnings of other workers in the United States, Demography, Vol. 25, No. 1, February, pp. 35-52. BENEDETTI, L. (1991), Le travail clandestin entre le travail choisi et le travail possible, in Montagne-Villette, S. (ed) Espace et travail clandestin, Masson, Paris, pp. 65-70. BERANEK, W. (1982), The illegal alien work force, demand for unskilled labour and the minimum wage, Journal of Labour Research, Vol. III, No. 1. BHAGWATI, J.N. (1981), Alternative theories of illegal trade: economic consequences and statistical detection, Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv., 117, pp. 409-427. BOND, E.W. and CHEN, T.J. (1987), The welfare effects of illegal immigration, Journal of International Economic, 14, pp. 315-328. BORJAS, G., FREEMAN, R.B. and KATZ, L.F. (1986), Searching for the effect of immigration on the labor market in American Economic Review, May, pp. 246-251. BRATSBERG, B. (1995), Legal vs. illegal U.S. immigration and source country characteristics, Journal of International Economics, pp. 715-726. BUCCI, G.A. and TENORIO, R. (1996), On financing the internal enforcement of illegal immigration policies, Journal of Population Economics, Vol. 9, pp. 65-81. BUSTAMANTE, J. (1990), Undocumented migration from Mexico to the United States: preliminary findings of the Zapata canyon Project in Undocumented Migration to the United States. IRCA and the Experience of the 1980s, Santa Monica, Calif., Rand Corporation, Washington, D.C., The Urban Institute. CHISWICK, B.R. (1986), Illegal aliens: a preliminary report on employeeemployer survey, American Economic Review, Vol. 76, No. 2, May, pp. 253-257. CHISWICK, B.R. (1986), Illegal Aliens: Their Employment and Employers, WE Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
CHISWICK, B.R. (1988), Illegal immigration and immigration control, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 2, pp. 101-115. CLARK, R.L., PASSEL, J.S., ZIMMERMANN, W.N. and FIX, M. with MANN, T.L. and BERKOWITZ, R.E. (1995), Fiscal Impacts of Undocumented Aliens: Selected Estimates for Seven States, The Urban Institute, Washington D.C., January. COBB-CLARK, D. A., SHIELLS, C. R. and LOWELL, B. L. (1995), Immigration reform: the effects of employer sanctions and legalization on wages, Journal of Labor Economics, Vol. 13, No. 3, July, pp. 472-498. COMMISSION FOR THE STUDY OF INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION AND COOPERATIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (1990), Unauthorized Migration: An EconomicDevelopment Response, Report, July. CONTINI, B. (1982), The second economy of Italy in Tanzi V. (ed.), The Underground Economy in the United States and Abroad, DC Heath and Co., Boston, pp. 199-208. COSTES, L. (1991), Immigrs et travail clandestin dans le mtro in Montagne-Villette, S. (ed) Espaces et travail clandestins, Masson, Paris. CORNELIUS, W.A., MARTIN, P.L. and HOLLIFIELD, J.F. (1994), Controlling Immigration: A Global Perspective, Stanford University Press, Tanford, California. DELLARINGA, C. and NERI, F. (1989), Illegal migrants and the informal economy in Italy in Gordon, I. and Thirwall, A.P. (eds) European Factor Mobility (Trends and Consequences), Basingstoke (Macmillan), pp. 133-147. DELAUNAY, D. and Tapinos, G. (1998) La mesure de la migration clandestine en Europe. Vol. : Rapport de synthse, Eurostat Working Paper (Population et conditions sociales). DJAJIC, S. (1997), Illegal immigration and resource allocation, International Economic Review, Vol. 38, No. 1, February, pp. 97-117. DJAJIC, S. (1997), Dynamics of immigration control, CEPR Worshop, 14-15 February, Athens. DONATO, K.M., DURAND, J. and MASSEY, D.S. (1992), Stemming the tide? Assessing the deterrent effects of Immigration Reform and Control Act, Demography, Vol. 29, No. 2, May, pp. 139-157.
249
OECD 1999
DUNN, L. F. (1990), An empirical study of labour market equilibrium under working hours constraints, Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 72, No. 2, May, pp. 250-258. ESPENSHADE, T.J. (1995), Using INS border apprehension data to measure the flow of undocumented migrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico Frontier, International Migration Review, 29, pp. 545-565. ETHIER, W.J. (1986), Illegal immigration. The host country problem, The American Economic Review, Vol. 76, pp. 57-71. ETHIER, W.J. (1986), Illegal immigration, The American Economic Review, Vol. 76, No. 2, May, pp. 258-262. GARSON, J.P. and THOREAU, C. (1997), Lessons from regularisation programmes and measures taken to combat employment of foreigners in irregular situations, CEPR Workshop, 14-15 February, Athens. GONZALES, J.G. (1994), Illegal immigration in the presence of labor unions, International Economic Journal, Vol. 8, pp. 57-70. GROSSMAN, J.B. (1984), Illegal immigrants and domestic employment, Industrial and Labour Relations Review, Vol. 37, No. 2, January, pp. 240-251. HAMILTON, B. and WHALLEY, J. (1984), Efficiency and distributional implications of global restrictions on labour mobility, Journal of Development Economics, 14, pp. 61-75. HANSON, G. H. and SPILIMBERGO, A. (1996), Illegal immigration, border enforcement, and relative wages: evidence from apprehensions at the U.S.Mexico Border, NBER Working Paper n 5592, May. HAUT CONSEIL A LINTGRATION (1992), Lemploi illgal des trangers (rapport particulier). HILL, J.K. and PEARCE, J.E. (1990), The incidence of sanctions against employers of illegal aliens, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 98, No. 1, pp. 28-44. ISKANDER, N. (1999), Immigrant workers in an irregular situation: the case of the garment industry in Paris and its suburbs, The Hague Seminar, OECD, 22-23 April. KARAMESSINI, M. (1996), Labour flexibility and segmentation of the Greek labour market in the eighties: sectoral analysis and typology, European Association of Labour Economists, 8e confrence annuelle, Crete, 12-22 September. LAYARD, R., NICKELL, S. and JACKMAN, R. (1991), Unemployment, Macroeconomic Performance and the Labour Market, Oxford University Press. LEVINE, P. (1995), The welfare economics of legal and illegal migration, CEPR Workshop, 14-16 September, Halkidiki. LIANOS, T. P., SARRIS, A. and KATSELI, L.T. (1996), Illegal migration and local labour markets. The case of Northern Greece, International Migration, Vol. XXXIV, No. 3, pp. 449-484.
LUTZ, V. (1963), Foreign workers and domestic wage levels, with an illustration from the Swiss case, Banca Nazionale del Lavoro Quarterly Review, March, pp. 3-68. McCARTHY, K. F. and VERNEZ, G. (1997) Immigration in a Changing Economy Californias Experience, RAND, Santa-Monica. MARIE, C.V. (1994), La verbalisation du travail illgal, les chiffres de lanne 1994, MILUTMO, Mission de liaison interministrielle pour la lutte contre le travail clandestin, lemploi non dclar et les trafics de main-duvre, Paris. MARIE, C.V. (1997), La loi du 11 mars 1997 sur le travail illgal : les donneurs dordre en ligne de mire, Regards sur lactualit, No. 235, November, pp. 31-53. MARKOVA, E. and SARRIS, A. H. (1997), The Performance of Bulgarian Illegal Immigrants in the Greek Labour Market, Department of Economics, Athens University, February. MASSEY, D. S. (1987), Do undocumented migrants earn lower wages than legal immigrants? New evidence from Mexico, International Migration Review, Vol. XXI, No. 2, pp. 236-274. MASSEY, D.S. (1998), Economic development and international migration in Population and Development Review, September, pp. 383-413. MIGRATIONS-SOCIT (1995) March de lemploi et clandestinit, Vol. 7, No. 39, May-June, pp. 30-91 (Suite darticles). MOULIER-BOUTANG, Y., GARSON, J.P. and SILBERMAN, R. (1986), conomie politique des migrations clandestines de main-duvre, Publisud, Paris. MOULIER-BOUTANG, Y. (1991), Dynamique des migrations internationales et conomie souterraine : comparaison internationale et perspectives europennes, in Espaces et travail clandestin, Montagn-Vilette (S.), Paris, Masson, pp. 113-121. NORTH, D. (1994), Enforcing the minimum wage and employer sanctions, Annals AAPSS, Vol. 534, pp. 58-68. NORTH, D. and HOUSTON, M. (1976), The Characteristics and Role of Illegal Aliens in the U.S. Labor Market: an Exploratory Study, Report, U.S. Department of Labour, Washington D.C. OECD (1990), Comparative analysis of regularisation experience in France, Italy, Spain and the United States in SOPEMI, Paris, pp. 65-101. PALLIDA, S. (1990), Limmigration entre lconomie ethnique et lconomie souterraine, in Abou Sada, G., Courault, B. et Seboulou, Z. (ed) Limmigration au tournant, CIEMII, LHarmattan, Paris. PHILIBERT, J.P. and SAUVAIGO, S. (1996), Rapport sur limmigration clandestine et le sjour irrgulier dtrangers en France, Commission denqute; Rapport
250
OECD 1999
n 2699 de lAssemble nationale, Tome 1 : Rapport, Tome 2 : Audition, Paris. PORTES, A., CASTELLS, M. and BENTON, L. A. (eds.) (1989), The Informal Economy Studies in Advanced and Less Developed Countries, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore and London. PUPIER, A. (1992), La fausse sous-traitance dans le btiment et les travaux publics, Socits contemporaines, No. 10, pp. 153-170. REYNOLDS, C.W. and MCCLEERY, R.K. (1988), The political economy of immigration law: impact of Simpson Rodino on the United States and Mexico, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 117-131. RICCA, S. (1984), Administering migrant workers in an irregular situation in Greece, Italy and Spain, Working Paper No. 11E, ILO, Geneva. ROBIN, S. and MARIE, C. V. (1995), A comparative analysis of legislation in several European countries aimed at the illegal employment of foreigners, OECD Working Party on Migration, Paris. ROTHMAN, E.S. and ESPENSHADE, T.J. (1992), Fiscal impact of immigration to the United States, Population Index, Vol. 58, No. 3, pp. 381-415. SLIMANE, L. (1995), Limmigration clandestine de la main-duvre dans la rgion bruxelloise, Bruylant, Brussells. TANZI, V. (ed.) (1982), The Underground Economy in the United States and Abroad, Lexington Books, Lexington (Mass.). TAPINOS, G. (1973), L conomie des migrations internationales, Fondation nationale des Sciences politiques/Armand Colin, Paris. TAPINOS, G. (1992), La pression migratoire : sentiment dinquitude ou concept analytique ?, in Tapinos, G. and Keely, C.B. La migration internationale : deux approches, Programme mondial pour lemploi, Document de travail, ILO, Geneva, May, pp. 1-14. TAPINOS, G. (1999), Migration, trade and development. The European Union and the Maghreb countries, in Eldorado or Fortress? Migration in Southern Europe, edited by Russel King, Gabriella Lazaridis and C. Tsardanidis, Mac Millan, London. TAPINOS, G. (en collaboration avec de RUGY, A.) (1993), The macroeconomic impact of immigration. Review of
the literature published since the mid-1970 in Trends in International Migration, OECD, Paris. TAPINOS, G., LACROIX, P. and RUGY, A. de (1996), Les mthodes dvaluation de limmigration clandestine dans certains pays trangers, Fondation nationale des Sciences politiques, December, Paris. TAPINOS, G. and DELAUNAY, D. (1999), Can one really talk of the globalisation of migration flows? in Globalisation, Migration and Development, OECD, Paris. TIENDA, M. and SINGER, A. (1995), Wage mobility of undocumented workers in the United States, International Migration Review, Vol. XXIX, No. 1, Spring, pp. 112-138. TODARO, M.P. and MARUSZCO, L. (1987), Illegal migration and U.S. immigration reform, Population and Development Review, Vol. 13, No. 1, March. UNITED NATIONS (1998), World Population Monitoring, 1997: International Migration and Development, United Nations, New York (Economic and Social Affairs). UNITED STATES GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE (1997) Illegal Immigration Southwest Border Stragegy Inconclusive: More Evaluation Needed, GAO, December. UNITED STATES GENERAL ACCOUNTRIG OFFICE (1999) Illegal Aliens-Significant Obstacles to Reducing Unauthorized Alien Employment Exist, GAO, April. US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (1999), Backgrounder, Immigration and Naturalization Service, Interior Enforcement Stragegy, March. VAN HAMERSFOORT, H. (1996), Migration: the limits of governmental control, New Community, Vol. 22, No. 2, April, pp. 243-257. VENTURINI, A. (1997), Do immigrants working illegaly reduce the nativess legal employment? Evidence from Italy, Paper presented for the CEPR Seminar on Illegal Migrants, Athens. WARREN, R. (1994), Estimates of the unauthorized immigrant population residing in the United States by country of origin and state of residence, October, P.A.A. Meeting, April 1995. YOSHIDA, C. (1996), The global welfare of illegal immigration no discernment case, Indian Journal of Economics, Vol. LXXVI, No. 303, April, pp. 537-550.
251
OECD 1999
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Data on the flows 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 definitions difficult and hence particular attention needs to be paid to the characteristics of the data, especially in the context of international comparisons. Section A of this annex describes the sources and methods used to generate migration statistics and is followed by presentation of data in Section B. These data are a selection from the OECDs database of migration statistics. Some preliminary remarks are required concerning the nature of the OECDs migration data. Most of the data 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 noted 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 clarification 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. A. SOURCES AND COMPARABILITY OF MIGRATION STATISTICS to generate harmonised data. Hence, although there has been some development and agreement in the definition and classification of migration for statistical purposes (see Box 1), these standards have proved difficult to implement. Aside from problems relating to international comparability, there are other difficulties with migration statistics, most notably the problem of measuring illegal immigration. Estimation is difficult and the figures that exist should be viewed, therefore, with some scepticism (see OECD, 1989). For this reason, explicit estimates of illegal immigrants have not been included in this annex. However, some stock and flow data partially incorporate illegal migration, therefore the phenomenon does not necessarily go completely unmeasured. For example, individuals may remain on population registers after their permits have expired, residing as illegal (or undocumented) immigrants. Finally, it should be noted that those achieving legal status under regularisation programmes are sometimes included in inflow data and must be taken into account when analysing trends. In addition, regularisation programs may be followed by an additional wave of immigration depending on the extent to which the acquisition of legal status allows family reunification. The following provides a brief review of the sources of migration statistics (A); this is followed by a discussion of the techniques used for measuring migration flows (B), and of data issues relating to stocks of migrants and the immigrant population (C). 1. Sources of migration statistics
Compared to some other areas of statistics, such as labour force data, there exists little international standardisation of migration statistics. Consequently there are varying degrees of comparability between countries. One reason for this is that relatively few sources have as their raison dtre the recording of migration. Population registers, a common source of migration statistics, are used for a number of other administrative and statistical purposes. As a result, tailoring registers such that migration data conform to an international standard is made more difficult. Comparability is also problematic if data are based on residence or work permits. The data reflect migration systems and the policies of national governments and so, once again, it can be difficult
The principle sources of migration statistics are population registers, residence or work permits, censuses and surveys. However, a wide variety of other data sources (e.g. special surveys, counts at border crossings, analysis of landing cards) may sometimes be used. Table 1 provides an overview of data sources and shows that population registers are commonly used as a source of flow and stock data on migration, especially in northern Europe. In other countries, data on residence permits and census data are the most common means of measuring flows and stocks of international migrants. Population registers Population registers are accounts of residents within a country. They are typically maintained via the legal requirement that both nationals and foreigners residing in the country must register with the local authorities. Aggregation of these local accounts results in a record of population and population movement at the national level. As a result, the
253
OECD 1999
Box 1. Definitions of migration flows and immigrant populations developed by the United Nations
Migration flows The United Nations has endeavoured to encourage the standardisation of migration statistics through establishing data collection procedures and defining the resultant data (UN, 1989, pp. 28-30). The UNs aim is to account for all categories of persons crossing international borders, regardless of their place of residence. Taking this very general definition, the criterion of residence allows an initial distinction between migrants and "non-migrants", i.e. tourists, shortterm business travellers, visitors and "special categories" (seasonal workers, students, refugees, diplomatic and consular representatives, etc.). According to the United Nations recommendations, migrants consist of four categories: a) long-term immigrants (or emigrants); b) short-term immigrants (or emigrants); c) residents returning after (or leaving for) a period working abroad, i.e. short-term emigrants returning (or leaving); and d) nomads. The United Nations define long-term migrants as follows (these definitions 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 and who are departing to take up residence abroad for more than one year; long-term immigrants are non-residents or persons who have arrived for a length of stay of more than one year but have not yet continuously lived in the country for more than one year. Whilst this definition has not been widely adopted and is difficult to apply, it continues to provide a useful benchmark and focus for further efforts towards harmonisation. The UN is currently working on a new method of defining migration flows which is aimed at increasing the viability of harmonised statistics. Immigrant population The immigrant population is usually measured either as the part of the resident population who are foreign nationals, or as the part of the foreign-born in the resident population. In the latter case there are situations where individuals are difficult to classify due to changes in national boundaries. The United Nations recommends that the foreign-born be defined as those born outside the country or area where the country or area of birth is based on current national boundaries (or, more precisely, those that existed at the time the data were collected) (UN, 1989, pp. 103).
registers can provide data on all migrant flows (inflows and outflows of both nationals and foreigners) as well as data on stocks of foreigners and nationals. For this reason they tend to be widely used. However there are some drawbacks: individuals often fail to record their departures and therefore data on outflows can be less reliable. Also, there are differences in the type of migrants counted which must be taken into account in international comparisons. Permit data Residence and work permit data commonly form the basis of flow statistics for countries which do not have population registers. The data are necessarily more limited in scope as they do not capture all flows and it can be difficult to use them to generate stock and outflow data as these require careful accounting of the number of permits both issued and expired. Census and household survey data Census data enables comprehensive, albeit infrequent analysis of the stock of immigrants (censuses are generally conducted every 5 to 10 years). In addition, many labour force surveys now include questions about nationality and place of birth, thus providing a source of annual
stock data. However, some care has to be taken with detailed breakdowns of the immigrant population from survey data as sample sizes can be very small. Inevitably, both census and survey data may under-represent migrants, especially where they tend not to be registered for census purposes, or where they do not live in private households (labour force surveys do not usually cover those living in institutions, such as reception centres and hostels for immigrants). 2. Measurement of migration flows
The inflows and outflows included in this annex are all based either on population registers or on permit data. The types of flow measured differ quite markedly between these two sources and there are also differences to account for between different registers and the different types of permit used to generate the statistics. Flows derived from population registers Population registers can usually produce inflow and outflow data for both nationals and foreigners, however there are differences in the type of flows measured due to differences in the way migrants are defined in the registers. In this regard, a key condition used to define immigrants is
254
OECD 1999
OECD 1999
Australia Austria Belgium Canada Czech Republic Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Ireland Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Poland Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States
F R P C S A Population register or register of foreigners Residence or work permits (renewable) Acceptances for permanent settlement Census Labour Force Survey Other administrative sources
Table 1. Summary table on the sources of migration statistics

Foreign and foreign-born population Inows of foreigners Outows of foreigners Asylum seekers Stocks of foreign-born population Stocks of foreign population Naturalisation Inows of foreign workers Foreign and foreign-born labour force Seasonal workers Stocks of foreign-born workers Stocks of foreign workers
P F F P F F R F F F F F F
F F F F
A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A
C F F C F F F F C F F S R F F F F F R R F F S C
A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A
R R R R R R R R R R R
A R A
S R R C F
A R
S A R S R R R A F R R S R S C
F F F F F F
A R R R R R R A R
F F A P
F F
F C, S
Statistical Annex
255
intention to reside for more than a specified length of time. In addition, foreigners who register may have to indicate possession of an appropriate residence and/or work permit. Emigrants are usually identified by a stated intention to leave the country, however a period of (intended) absence is not typically specified. Key features of migration data derived from population registers are as follows: Departures tend to be less well recorded than arrivals, often because registration results in certain rights and benefits to the individual, whereas there is less incentive to inform authorities of departure. In order to provide more accurate figures, some countries use additional information such as hostcountry estimates to generate emigration data. The rules governing entry into the register and who is defined as a migrant vary across countries. Notably, the minimum duration of stay for individuals to be defined as immigrants varies between three months and one year, implying that for some countries the data include short as well as longer term migration flows. Asylum seekers are included in some register data but excluded from others. Inclusion typically occurs when the asylum seekers live in private households (as opposed to reception centres and hotels). In the data presented in this annex, some asylum seekers are included in the data for Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Norway. Despite these qualifications, population registers are generally regarded as a good source of migration data and are used in preference to other sources, especially in the generation of annual estimates. Flows derived from residence and work permits Countries which do not have population registers use a variety of sources to generate flow data. Inflows for Australia, the United States, Canada, and France are based on residence and/or work permits. Data for the United Kingdom are based on information from landing cards. Note that permit data usually represent the number of permits issued in a given period and have the following general characteristics: The nature of the flows measured obviously depends on the type of permit(s) used to generate the statistic. Inflows for the so-called settlement countries (Australia, Canada and the United States) are calculated as the number of permanent residence permits (also known as acceptances for settlement) issued. In the case of France, a sum of various types of permit issued (all of limited duration) is used. Flows of nationals are not recorded in the data and some flows of foreigners may also not be recorded, depending on the type of permit used as a basis for the statistic and also on the nature of free-circulation agreements. In France, some inflows from other EU countries are included in the data as permanent work permits are still required for EU nationals (this is a formality rather than a means of restricting entry). Permit data do not necessarily reflect physical flows or actual lengths of stay since: i) permits may be
issued overseas but individuals may decide not to use them, or delay their arrival; ii) permits may be issued to persons who have in fact been resident in the country for some time, the permit indicating a change of status, or a renewal of the same permit. The data for Australia do not include those who have been accepted for permanent settlement whilst resident in Australia, whereas data for Canada and the United States include all issues of permanent settlement permits. Permit data may be influenced by the processing capacity of government agencies. In some instances a large backlog of applications may build up and therefore the true demand for permits may only emerge once backlogs are cleared. Estimation of net migration From the preceding discussion on flow data it is evident that some countries have readily available means to calculate net migration (e.g. through population registers) whilst others face greater difficulties and estimates must be made on the basis of a variety of sources. This annex contains data for the net migration of foreigners. Note that for some countries, figures for total net migration (i.e. including the movement of both foreigners and nationals) are presented in the Country Notes. The OECD also publishes a series of total net migration figures in Labour Force Statistics. These are calculated as a residual from data on annual population change and natural increase. Refugees and asylum seekers Asylum seekers are usually allowed to remain in the country whilst their applications are processed. The time taken to process applications varies and it is therefore difficult to determine whether they should be counted as migrants or not. In practice, asylum seekers are not generally counted in migrant inflows unless they are subsequently granted asylum. However there are some countries where they are partially, or wholly included in the data. For example, asylum seekers often enter population registers because they have been resident for some time and live outside reception centres. Statistics on asylum seekers and the numbers granted asylum are usually readily available from administrative sources, however there are some differences in the type of data made available. 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 according to the date of approval (note that approval of application simply means that the application will be considered by the authorities and allows the individual certain rights as an asylum seeker whilst their application is being processed). For some countries (e.g. Switzerland), the data include the dependants of the principal applicant; for certain others (e.g. France), they do not, since dependants are admitted under other provisions In addition to asylum seekers entering under the usual administrative channels there are some cases where individuals are allowed entry under exceptional circumstances and who are given other forms of status. For example, in the early
256
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
1990s, a number of European countries (e.g. Austria, and the Nordic countries) granted temporary residence to those fleeing conflict in the former Yugoslavia. To date, evidence suggests that these individuals have largely been allowed to remain in these countries through renewal of permits and therefore effectively represent a group of de facto refugees. 3. Stocks of migrants and characteristics of the immigrant population
Time series of stocks of immigrant population Time series of stocks are generally derived either from population registers or from labour force survey or census data. In this annex, the figures for Australia, Canada France, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States are based on survey, census or permit data, data for all other countries are from population registers (see Table 1). Impact of naturalisation on the development of the immigrant population Naturalisations must be taken into account in the analysis of the populations of foreigners and nationals. Also, differing approaches to naturalisation between countries must be considered when making international comparisons. In France and Belgium, for example, where foreigners can fairly readily acquire the nationality of the country, increases in the foreign population through immigration and births can eventually contribute to a significant rise in the native population. In Germany and Switzerland (see OECD, 1995), on the other hand, where naturalisation is more difficult, increases in immigration and births amongst foreigners manifest themselves almost exclusively as rises in the foreign population. In addition, changes in rules regarding naturalisation can have significant numerical effects, for example during the 1980s, a number of countries made naturalisation easier and this resulted in noticeable falls in the foreign population (and rises in the population of nationals). However, host-country legislation is not the only factor affecting naturalisation. For example, where naturalisation involves forfeiting citizenship of the country of origin, there may be incentives to remain as a foreign citizen. Where the difference between remaining a foreign citizen or becoming a national is marginal, naturalisation may largely be influenced by the time and effort required to make the application for naturalisation and the symbolic and political value individuals attach to being citizens of one country or another. Data on naturalisations are usually readily available from administrative sources. As with other administrative data, resource constraints in processing applications may result in a backlog of unprocessed applications which are not reflected in the figures. B. STATISTICAL SERIES Introduction to the statistical Annex tables The Tables are divided into two series. The A series tables provide aggregate data on stock and flow statistics as well as administrative data on asylum seekers and naturalisations. The B series tables present data disaggregated by country of origin (as defined either by country of birth or by nationality). As is evident from the preceding discussion on the sources and methods used to generate migration statistics, the presentation of the tables in a relatively standard format should not lead users to think that the data have been fully standardised and are comparable at an international level. In order to facilitate understanding of the data, detailed notes on the sources and definitions are presented at the end of the Statistical Annex.
Time series of stocks are used in conjunction with flow data to examine trends in migration. In addition, data which include socio-economic variables can be used to examine differences between immigrants and native populations. In both cases, there are differences in how immigrants are defined. Definition of the immigrant population In data, the immigrant population is usually defined in one of two ways. Some countries have traditionally focused on producing data that represents foreign nationals (European countries, Japan and Korea) whilst others refer to the foreign-born (Australia, Canada and the United States). This difference in focus relates in part to the nature and the history of immigration systems and legislation on citizenship and naturalisation (see Box 2). The foreign-born population can be viewed as representing first-generation migrants, and may consist of both foreign and national citizens. The size and composition of the foreign-born population is influenced by the history of migration flows and mortality amongst the foreign-born. For example, where inflows have been declining over time, the stock of the foreign-born will tend to age and represent an increasingly established community. The population of foreign nationals may represent second and higher generations as well as first-generations of migrants. The characteristics of the population of foreign nationals depend on a number of factors: the history of migration flows, natural increase in the foreign population and naturalisations. Higher generations of immigrants arise in situations where they retain their foreign citizenship even when native-born. The nature of legislation on citizenship and the incentives foreigners have to naturalise both play a role in determining the extent to which this occurs in practice. A more comprehensive view of the immigrant population is possible when both nationality and birthplace are known. This type of data is becoming increasingly available for some OECD countries and allows four sub-populations to be examined: the foreign-born who are foreign citizens; the foreign-born who are nationals; the native born who are foreign nationals and the native born who are nationals. The first three of these groups represent the immigrant population, as defined either by nationality or by place of birth. Note that in some countries, such as the United States, those who are native-born but who are foreign nationals are a non-existent or negligible group as legislation is such that birth within the country usually entitles individuals to citizenship.
257
OECD 1999
Box 2.
Migration systems
Historically, migration systems developed alongside the evolution of nation-states and the concomitant desire to enumerate and sometimes influence the size and composition of the resident population. The need to implement immigration control is also linked to the increased numbers of individuals who are aware of attractive economic and social conditions elsewhere and able to afford the expense and risk associated with a long-term, or permanent move overseas. In some areas of the world, immigration control has also developed at an international as well as national level, creating zones of free movement, the most notable example being the European Union. Whether operating at a national or an international level, most migration systems have the following features: The opportunity to enter the country and remain there for a limited length of time (often three months). Depending on the nationality of the entrant, a visa may or may not be required. Generally, the regulations are designed to encourage movements of individuals which provide economic benefits. Such movements include, inter alia, tourism and business travel. However, there are situations where entry may be strictly monitored. This type of movement is not regarded as migration as such and is commonly referred to as short-term movement. A mechanism for spouses and close relatives of citizens or permanent residents to enter the country on a permanent basis. They may arrive as accompanying family at the same time as the migrant, or at a later date under what is often called family reunification. A means for individuals who claim social and political persecution in their country of origin to apply for asylum. Such asylum seekers are usually treated on a case-by-case basis and may also have the right to remain in the country whilst their application is being processed. Mechanisms for individuals to enter largely for the purpose of employment and business. Policies governing this type of migration may reflect purely economic considerations such as perceived labour shortages or a desire to encourage international business links. However, policy may also be influenced by diplomatic considerations as well as policies and agreements in international trade. Means by which foreign citizens can acquire national citizenship (naturalisation). The ease with which this may be achieved and the incentives to do so vary across countries and may also depend on the implications of a change in legal status in the country of origin (see OECD, 1995, pp. 157-181). Beyond these general features of immigration systems, it is common to distinguish between temporary permit systems and permanent residence systems (for a more detailed classification, see OECD, 1994). In temporary residence systems, characteristic of most OECD countries, initial entry to the country is typically made on the basis of a temporary residence permit and permanent status can only be granted after several years stay in the country. Only certain special groups (e.g. close relatives, refugees) are able to acquire permanent residence status on entry into the country. In permanent residence systems, typified by settlement countries (e.g. Australia, Canada and the United States), there are more channels available for individuals to enter with permanent resident status, beyond those catering for special groups. This reflects the historical, if not always current, use of migration policy as a means for populating the country. The additional channels available to immigrants take a variety of forms but are generally based on attracting individuals with certain characteristics, such as high levels of skill or experience in certain occupations. There are differences between these systems in the type of migration statistics commonly used. Permanent residence type countries tend to focus on acceptances for permanent settlement as an indication of inflows and on the population of foreign-born as an indication of the stock of immigrants. Temporary permit type countries, coincidentally, tend to have population registers and use these to focus on inflows and stocks of foreign citizens (as distinct from the foreign-born). Two notable exceptions are France and the United Kingdom who do not have population registers and rely on other sources of data.
A number of general comments apply to the tables: a) The tables provide annual series for the ten most recent years (in general 1988-1997). However data relating to the stock of foreigners by nationality (Tables B.1.6 and B.2.2) are only given for certain years (in general 1985, 1990, 1995 and the most recent available year). b) Up to 1994 (inclusive), European Union (unless stated otherwise) 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. From 1995 onwards, European Union also includes the following three countries: Austria, Finland and Sweden. c) The A series 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. In series B.1.3. (Net migration of foreigners by nationality), net migration has been
258
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
calculated for the fifteen principal immigration countries; the countries are listed in the same order as that of series B.1.1. (Inflows of foreigners by nationality). Countries for which emigration data are not available do not feature in the table. d) In the tables by country of origin (series B) only the main 15 countries are shown and only when this information is available. Other countries is a residual calculated as the difference between the total foreign population and the sum of the nationalities indicated in the table. For some nationalities, data
are not available for all years and this is reflected in the residual entry of Other countries. This must be borne in mind when interpreting changes in this category. e) The rounding of entries may cause totals to differ slightly from the sum of the component entries. f) The symbols used in the tables are the following: .. Data not available. Nil, or negligible.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
OECD (1989), Trends in International Migration, Annual Report 1989, Paris. UN (1991), 1989 Demographic Yearbook, New York. OECD (1994), Migration and Development; New Partnerships for Co-operation, Paris. OECD (1995), Trends in International Migration, Annual Report 1994, Paris. OECD (1997), Trends in International Migration, Annual Report 1996, Paris. OECD (1998), Trends in International Migration, Annual Report 1997, Paris.
259
OECD 1999
TABLES OF THE STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table A.1.1.
1988
Inows of foreign population into selected OECD countries

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Inow data based on population registers: Belgium 38.2 43.5 Denmark 13.8 15.1 Finland .. 4.2 Germany 648.6 770.8 Hungary 23.5 33.7 Japan 234.8 237.4 Luxembourg 8.2 8.4 Netherlands 58.3 65.4 Norway 23.2 18.5 Sweden 44.5 58.9 Switzerland 76.1 80.4
50.5 15.1 6.5 842.4 37.2 223.8 9.3 81.3 15.7 53.2 101.4
54.1 17.5 12.4 920.5 23.0 258.4 10.0 84.3 16.1 43.9 109.8 121.7 230.8 109.9 .. 1 827.2
55.1 16.9 10.4 1 207.6 15.1 267.0 9.8 83.0 17.2 39.5 112.1 107.4 252.8 116.6 203.9 974.0
53.0 15.4 10.9 986.9 16.4 234.5 9.2 87.6 22.3 54.8 104.0 76.3 255.8 99.2 190.3 904.3
56.0 15.6 7.6 774.0 12.8 237.5 9.2 68.4 17.9 74.7 91.7 69.8 223.9 91.5 193.6 804.4
53.1 33.0 7.3 788.3 13.2 209.9 9.6 67.0 16.5 36.1 87.9 87.4 212.9 77.0 206.3 720.5
51.9 24.7 7.5 708.0 12.8 225.4 9.2 77.2 17.2 29.3 74.3 99.1 226.1 75.5 216.4 915.9
49.2 .. 8.1 615.3 13.4 274.8 9.7 76.7 22.0 33.4 72.8 85.8 216.0 102.4 236.9 798.4
Inow data based on residence and work permits: Australia 143.5 145.3 121.2 Canada 161.9 192.0 214.2 France 44.0 53.2 102.4 United Kingdom .. .. .. United States 643.0 1 090.9 1 536.5
Note: Data from population registers are not fully comparable because the criteria governing who gets registered differ from country to country. Counts for the Netherlands, Norway and especially Germany include substantial numbers of asylum seekers. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table A.1.2.
1988
Outows of foreign population from selected OECD countries

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Belgium Denmark Finland Germany Japan Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Sweden Switzerland
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 15.8 64.2
33.1 5.3 1.5 561.1 194.4 4.9 21.7 9.0 15.4 67.5
32.4 6.0 3.0 559.1 160.1 5.6 22.4 10.0 14.5 67.7
23.5 .. 1.6 637.1 176.6 5.8 21.9 10.0 15.3 63.4
Note: Data are from population registers. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table A.1.3.
1988
Net migration of foreign population in selected OECD countries

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Belgium Denmark Finland Germany Japan Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Sweden Switzerland
262
6.0 8.5 .. 289.5 51.1 2.9 36.9 13.9 32.7 20.3
16.1 10.3 3.2 332.5 32.6 2.8 43.9 8.0 45.8 22.9
23.4 10.5 5.6 376.4 57.7 3.8 60.7 5.9 37.0 41.8
18.8 12.3 11.2 423.0 77.1 4.1 63.0 7.7 28.9 43.3
26.9 12.1 8.9 592.9 62.2 4.2 60.3 9.1 26.3 31.7
21.8 10.5 9.4 276.6 34.0 4.2 65.4 11.8 40.0 32.8
21.9 10.5 6.1 152.5 33.3 3.9 45.7 8.3 59.0 27.5
20.0 27.7 5.8 227.2 15.5 4.7 45.3 7.5 20.7 20.4
19.5 18.8 4.5 148.9 65.3 3.7 54.8 7.2 14.9 6.6
25.8 .. 6.6 21.8 98.2 3.9 54.8 12.0 18.1 9.3
Note: Data are derived from Tables A.1.1. and A.1.2. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table A.1.4.
1989
Inows of asylum seekers into selected OECD countries

Thousands
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
Australia Austria Belgium Canada Czech Republic Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Poland Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States
0.5 21.9 8.2 19.9 .. 4.6 0.2 61.4 121.3 6.5 .. .. 2.3 0.1 13.9 4.4 .. 0.1 4.1 30.0 24.4 16.8 101.7
3.8 22.8 13.0 36.7 1.8 5.3 2.7 54.8 193.1 4.1 .. 0.1 4.7 0.1 21.2 4.0 .. 0.1 8.6 29.4 35.8 38.2 73.6
17.0 27.3 15.4 32.3 2.0 4.6 2.1 47.4 256.1 2.7 .. 31.7 0.2 21.6 4.6 .. 0.2 8.1 27.4 41.6 73.4 56.3
4.1 16.2 17.6 37.7 0.9 13.9 3.6 28.9 438.2 2.0 .. 2.6 0.1 20.3 5.2 .. 0.6 11.7 84.0 18.0 32.3 104.0
4.6 4.7 26.5 21.1 2.2 14.3 2.0 27.6 322.6 0.8 .. 0.1 1.3 0.2 35.4 12.9 .. 2.1 12.6 37.6 24.7 28.0 144.2
4.2 5.1 14.7 21.7 1.2 6.7 0.8 26.0 127.2 1.3 .. 0.4 1.8 0.2 52.6 3.4 0.6 0.8 12.0 18.6 16.1 42.2 146.5
5.1 5.9 11.7 25.6 1.4 5.1 0.8 20.4 127.9 1.4 .. 0.4 1.7 0.2 29.3 1.5 0.8 0.5 5.7 9.0 17.0 55.0 154.5
6.0 7.0 12.4 25.7 2.2 5.9 0.7 17.4 116.4 1.6 .. 1.2 0.7 0.3 22.9 1.8 3.2 0.3 4.7 5.8 18.0 37.0 128.2
9.3 6.7 11.8 22.6 2.1 5.1 1.0 21.4 104.4 4.4 1.1 3.9 1.9 0.4 34.4 2.3 3.5 0.3 5.0 9.6 24.0 41.5 79.8
7.8 13.8 22.0 22.6 4.1 5.7 1.3 21.8 98.7 2.6 7.4 4.6 4.7 1.6 45.2 8.3 2.9 0.3 6.5 13.0 41.2 57.7 50.8
Note: For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table A.1.5.
Stocks of foreign-born population in selected OECD countries

Thousands
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Australia % of total population Canada % of total population Denmark % of total population Netherlands % of total population Norway % of total population Sweden % of total population United States % of total population
.. .. .. .. .. .. 1 217.1 8.1 .. .. .. .. 19 767.3 7.9
3 753.3 22.3 4 342.9 16.1 .. .. .. .. 195.7 4.6 .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. 207.4 4.0 .. .. .. .. 834.5 9.6 .. ..
.. .. .. .. 215.0 4.1 1 375.4 9.0 216.2 5.0 869.1 9.9 .. ..
.. .. .. .. 222.1 4.3 1 387.4 9.0 233.4 5.4 922.1 10.5 22 600 8.7
.. .. .. .. 244.5 4.7 1 407.1 9.1 240.3 5.5 936.0 10.5 23 000 8.8
3 908.3 21.1 4 971.1 17.4 259.2 4.9 1 433.6 9.2 246.9 5.6 943.8 11.0 24 600 9.3
.. .. .. .. 276.8 5.2 1 549.0 .. 257.7 5.8 954.2 11.0 .. ..
Note: Data are from censuses for Australia, Canada and the United States and from population registers for the other countries. For more details on sources, see the notes at the end of the Annex.
263
OECD 1999
Table A.1.6.
1988
Stocks of foreign population in selected OECD countries

1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Austria % of total population Belgium % of total population Czech Republic % of total population Denmark % of total population Finland % of total population France % of total population Germany % of total population Hungary % of total population Ireland % of total population Italy % of total population Japan % of total population Korea % of total population Luxembourg % of total population Netherlands % of total population Norway % of total population Portugal % of total population Spain % of total population Sweden % of total population Switzerland % of total population United Kingdom % of total population United States % of total population
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 45.1 0.1 105.8 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 47.2 0.1 106.9 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 49.5 0.1 113.1 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 11 770.3 4.7
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 51.0 0.1 117.8 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 41.2 0.4 180.1 3.5 46.3 0.9 .. .. 6 495.8 8.0 .. .. 94.9 2.7 925.2 1.6 1 281.6 1.0 55.8 0.1 122.7 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 77.7 0.8 189.0 3.6 55.6 1.1 .. .. 6 878.1 8.5 .. .. 89.9 2.7 987.4 1.7 1 320.7 1.1 66.7 0.2 127.6 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 9.1 103.7 1.0 196.7 3.8 62.0 1.2 .. .. 6 990.5 8.6 137.9 1.3 91.1 2.7 922.7 1.6 1 354.0 1.1 84.9 0.2 132.5 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 2 032 3.6 .. ..
723.5 9.0 909.8 9.0 158.6 1.5 222.7 4.2 68.6 1.3 .. .. 7 173.9 8.8 139.9 1.4 96.1 2.7 991.4 1.7 1 362.4 1.1 110.0 0.2 138.1 33.4 725.4 4.7 160.8 3.7 168.3 1.7 499.8 1.2 531.8 5.2 1 330.6 18.9 1 948 3.4 .. ..
728.2 9.0 911.9 9.0 198.6 1.9 237.7 4.7 73.8 1.4 .. .. 7 314.0 8.9 142.2 1.4 118.0 3.2 1 095.6 2.0 1 415.1 1.1 148.7 0.3 142.8 34.1 679.9 4.4 157.5 3.6 172.9 1.7 539.0 1.3 526.6 6.0 1 337.6 18.9 1 934 3.4 .. ..
732.7 9.1 903.2 8.9 209.8 2.0 249.6 4.7 80.6 1.6 .. .. 7 365.8 9.0 143.8 1.4 114.4 3.1 1 240.7 .. 1 482.7 1.2 176.9 .. 147.7 34.9 678.1 .. 158.0 3.6 175.3 1.8 609.8 1.5 522.0 6.0 1 340.8 19.0 2 066 3.6 .. ..
Note: Data are from population registers or from register of foreigners except for France and the United States (Census), Portugal and Spain (residence permits), Ireland and the United Kingdom (Labour Force Survey) and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated unless otherwise stated. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
264
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table A.1.7.
Acquisition of nationality in selected OECD countries

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Countries where national/foreigner distinction is prevalent Austria 8.2 8.5 9.2 % of foreign population 2.5 2.5 2.4 Belgium % of foreign population Denmark % of foreign population Finland % of foreign population France % of foreign population Germany % of foreign population Hungary % of foreign population Italy % of foreign population Japan % of foreign population Korea % of foreign population Luxembourg % of foreign population Netherlands % of foreign population Norway % of foreign population Spain % of foreign population Sweden % of foreign population Switzerland % of foreign population United Kingdom % of foreign population .. .. 3.7 2.7 1.1 6.0 74.0 .. 40.8 1.0 .. .. .. .. 5.8 0.7 0.3 0.6 0.8 0.7 9.1 1.5 3.4 2.7 8.1 2.4 18.0 4.5 11.4 1.2 64.6 3.5 .. .. 3.3 2.3 1.5 8.1 82.0 .. 68.5 1.5 1.1 .. .. .. 6.1 0.6 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.6 28.7 4.6 4.6 3.4 5.9 1.6 17.6 4.2 10.3 1.0 117.1 6.4 .. .. 3.0 2.0 0.9 4.2 88.5 .. 101.4 2.1 3.2 .. .. .. 6.8 0.7 0.6 1.2 0.7 0.7 12.8 2.0 4.8 3.4 7.0 2.8 16.8 3.7 8.7 0.8 57.3 3.2
11.4 2.5 8.5 0.9 5.5 3.4 1.2 4.7 95.5 2.7 141.6 2.7 5.9 .. 4.5 0.6 7.8 0.7 0.5 1.1 0.6 0.5 29.1 4.2 5.1 3.5 3.8 1.3 27.7 5.7 8.8 0.8 58.6 3.4
11.9 2.2 46.4 5.0 5.1 3.0 0.9 2.3 95.3 .. 179.9 3.1 21.9 .. 4.4 0.5 9.4 0.8 0.6 1.1 0.6 0.5 36.2 4.9 5.1 3.5 5.3 1.5 29.3 5.9 11.2 1.0 42.2 2.4 125.2 116.2 240.3
14.4 2.3 16.4 1.8 5.0 2.8 0.8 1.8 95.5 .. 199.4 3.1 11.8 .. 6.5 0.7 10.5 0.8 0.7 1.2 0.7 0.6 43.1 5.7 5.5 3.6 8.4 2.1 42.7 8.5 12.9 1.1 45.8 2.3 122.1 150.6 314.7
16.3 2.4 25.8 2.8 5.7 3.0 0.7 1.2 126.3 .. 259.2 3.8 9.9 .. 6.6 0.7 11.1 0.8 1.0 1.5 0.7 0.6 49.5 6.3 8.8 5.4 7.8 1.8 35.1 6.9 13.8 1.1 44.0 2.2 112.2 217.3 407.4
15.3 2.1 26.1 2.8 5.3 2.7 0.7 1.1 92.4 .. 313.6 4.5 10.0 7.3 7.4 0.8 14.1 1.0 1.0 1.1 0.8 0.6 71.4 9.4 11.8 7.2 6.8 1.5 32.0 6.0 16.8 1.3 40.5 2.0 114.8 227.7 445.9
16.2 2.2 24.6 2.7 7.3 3.3 1.0 1.4 109.8 .. 302.8 4.2 12.3 8.8 7.0 0.7 14.5 1.1 1.4 1.3 0.8 0.6 82.7 11.4 12.2 7.6 8.4 1.7 25.6 4.8 19.4 1.5 43.1 2.2 111.6 .. 1 044.7
16.3 2.2 31.7 3.5 5.5 2.3 1.4 2.0 116.2 .. 271.8 3.7 8.7 6.1 9.2 0.8 15.1 1.1 .. .. 0.7 0.5 59.8 8.8 12.0 7.6 10.3 1.9 28.9 5.5 19.2 1.4 37.0 1.9 108.3 .. 600.0
Countries where native-born/foreign-born distinction is prevalent Australia 81.2 119.1 127.9 118.5 Canada United States 58.8 242.1 87.5 233.8 104.3 270.1 118.6 308.1
Note: 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. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. The naturalisation rate (% of foreign population) indicates 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.
265
OECD 1999
Table A.2.1.
1988
Inows of foreign workers into selected OECD countries

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Australia Permanent settlers1 Temporary workers1 Austria Belgium Canada Denmark France Permanents APT Germany Hungary Ireland Italy Luxembourg Spain Switzerland United Kingdom Long term Short term Trainees Total United States Permanent settlers Temporary workers
34.8 .. 17.4 2.8 .. 3.1 12.7 1.9 60.4 .. .. .. 12.6 9.6 34.7 10.4 11.8 3.8 26.0 58.7 113.4
43.8 .. 37.2 3.7 289.2 2.7 15.6 3.1 84.8 25.3 1.2 .. 14.7 14.1 37.1 13.3 12.2 4.2 29.7 57.7 141.3
42.8 .. 103.4 .. 229.5 2.8 22.4 3.8 138.6 51.9 1.4 .. 16.9 16.0 46.7 16.1 13.8 4.8 34.6 58.2 144.9
48.4 .. 62.6 5.1 233.8 2.4 25.6 4.1 241.9 41.7 3.8 125.5 16.9 81.6 46.3 12.9 12.6 3.5 29.0 59.5 169.6
40.3 14.6 57.9 4.4 230.4 2.4 42.3 3.9 408.9 24.6 3.6 123.7 15.9 48.2 39.7 12.7 14.0 3.4 30.1 116.2 175.8
22.1 14.9 37.7 4.3 185.6 2.1 24.4 4.0 325.6 19.5 4.3 85.0 15.5 7.5 31.5 12.5 13.3 3.5 29.3 147.0 182.3
12.8 14.2 27.1 4.1 172.9 2.1 18.3 4.1 221.2 18.6 4.3 99.8 16.2 15.6 28.6 13.4 12.9 3.8 30.1 123.3 210.8
20.2 14.3 15.4 3.0 .. 2.2 13.1 4.5 270.8 18.4 4.3 111.3 16.5 29.6 27.1 15.5 15.6 4.4 35.5 85.3 220.7
20.0 15.4 16.3 2.2 .. 2.8 11.5 4.8 262.5 14.5 3.8 129.2 18.3 31.0 24.5 16.9 16.8 4.0 37.7 117.5 254.4
19.7 12.5 15.2 2.5 .. 3.1 11.0 4.7 285.4 19.7 4.5 166.3 18.6 23.2 25.4 18.7 19.0 4.7 42.4 90.6 ..
Note: For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Including accompanying dependents.
Table A.2.2.
1988
Inows of seasonal workers in selected OECD countries

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Australia Austria Canada France Germany Italy Netherlands Norway Switzerland United Kingdom United States
.. .. .. 70.5 .. .. .. 154.0 .. ..
32.0 24.3 .. 61.9 .. .. .. 156.4 .. ..
38.0 26.3 .. 58.2 .. .. 4.3 153.6 .. ..
36.7 17.6 .. 54.2 .. .. 4.3 147.5 .. ..
25.2 20.4 11.1 13.6 212.4 1.7 1.0 4.7 126.1 3.6 16.4
25.6 15.8 11.2 11.3 181.0 2.8 0.9 4.6 93.5 4.2 16.3
29.6 .. 10.4 10.3 155.2 5.8 0.5 4.5 83.9 4.4 13.2
35.4 .. 10.9 9.4 192.8 7.6 5.0 72.3 4.7 11.4
40.3 .. .. 8.8 220.9 8.9 5.4 62.7 5.5 9.6
50.0 .. .. 8.2 226.0 8.4 6.1 46.7 9.3 ..
Note: For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
266
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table A.2.3.
Stocks of foreign and foreign-born labour force in selected OECD countries

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Stocks of foreign labour force Austria % of total labour force Belgium % of total labour force Denmark % of total labour force France % of total labour force Germany % of total labour force Hungary % of total labour force Ireland % of total labour force Italy % of total employment Japan % of total labour force Luxembourg % of total employment Netherlands % of total employment Norway % of total employment Portugal % of total labour force Spain % of total labour force Sweden % of total labour force Switzerland % of total labour force United Kingdom % of total employment Stocks of foreign-born labour force Australia % of total labour force Canada % of total labour force United States % of total labour force
160.9 5.4 .. .. 65.1 2.2
178.0 5.9 .. .. 66.9 2.3
229.5 7.4 .. .. 68.8 2.4
277.2 8.7 .. .. 71.2 2.4
295.9 9.1 .. .. 74.0 2.6
304.6 9.3 .. .. 77.7 2.7
316.5 9.7 .. .. 80.3 2.9
325.2 9.9 328.3 7.8 83.8 3.0
328.0 10.0 341.7 8.2 88.0 3.1
326.3 9.9 333.0 7.9 .. ..
1 557.0 1 593.8 6.4 6.6 1 910.6 1 940.6 7.0 7.0 .. .. 35.0 2.7 .. .. .. .. 69.4 39.9 176 3.0 49.5 2.3 45.5 1.0 58.2 0.4 220 4.9 607.8 16.7 871 3.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 33.0 2.6 .. .. .. .. 76.2 42.4 192 3.2 47.7 2.3 48.7 1.0 69.1 0.5 237 5.2 631.8 17.0 914 3.5 .. .. .. ..
1 549.5 1 506.0 1 517.8 1 541.5 1 593.9 1 573.3 1 604.7 1 569.8 6.2 6.0 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.2 6.3 6.1 2 025.1 2 179.1 2 360.1 2 575.9 2 559.6 2 569.2 2 559.3 2 521.9 7.1 7.5 8.0 8.9 8.9 9.0 9.1 .. 31.7 .. 34.0 2.6 .. .. .. .. 84.7 45.2 197 3.1 46.3 2.3 51.8 1.0 85.4 0.6 246 5.4 669.8 18.9 882 3.3 33.4 .. 39.3 2.9 285.3 1.3 .. .. 92.6 47.5 214 3.3 46.3 2.3 54.9 1.1 171.0 1.1 241 5.3 702.5 17.8 828 3.0 15.7 0.4 40.4 3.0 296.8 1.4 85.5 0.1 98.2 49.2 229 3.5 46.6 2.3 59.2 1.3 139.4 0.9 233 5.3 716.7 18.3 902 3.6 17.6 0.4 37.3 2.7 304.8 1.5 95.4 0.1 101.0 49.7 219 3.3 47.9 2.4 63.1 1.4 117.4 0.8 221 5.1 725.8 18.5 862 3.4 20.1 0.5 34.5 2.5 307.1 1.5 105.6 0.2 106.3 51.0 216 3.3 50.3 2.5 77.6 1.6 121.8 0.8 213 5.0 740.3 18.9 847 3.4 21.0 0.5 42.1 2.9 332.2 1.7 88.0 0.1 111.8 52.4 221 3.2 52.6 2.5 84.3 1.8 139.0 0.9 220 5.1 728.7 18.6 899 3.5 18.8 0.5 52.4 3.5 .. .. 98.3 0.1 117.8 53.8 218 3.1 54.8 2.6 86.8 1.8 166.5 1.0 218 5.1 709.1 17.9 878 3.4 20.4 0.5 51.7 3.4 .. .. 107.3 0.2 124.8 55.1 208 2.9 59.9 2.8 87.9 1.8 176.0 1.1 220 5.2 692.8 17.5 949 3.6
. . 2 182.3 .. 25.7 . . 2 681.0 .. 18.5 .. ..
. . 2 194.9 2 164.1 2 138.8 2 238.8 2 251.6 .. 25.3 24.8 23.9 24.6 24.8 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
. . 11 564.6 .. 9.4
267
OECD 1999
Table B.1.1.
AUSTRALIA, inows of permanent settlers and temporary residents by country or region of birth
Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
A. Permanent New Zealand United Kingdom Former Yugoslavia China South Africa Hong Kong (China) India Philippines Vietnam Chinese Taipei United States Sri Lanka Lebanon Fiji Former USSR Other countries Total
settlers1 23.5 23.9 2.9 3.8 3.0 7.3 3.1 9.2 8.0 2.1 2.1 2.9 2.8 2.7 1.0 47.0 145.3 51.2 15.8 4.4 40.9 1.2 33.2 1.1 0.6 2.7 0.2 151.4 11.2 23.5 2.0 3.1 2.4 8.1 3.0 6.1 11.2 3.1 1.9 2.2 2.2 2.6 1.7 37.0 121.2 53.6 15.6 3.4 39.5 1.2 32.8 1.0 0.6 0.9 0.4 149.0 7.5 20.7 1.9 3.3 2.1 13.5 5.1 6.4 13.2 3.5 1.9 3.3 2.9 2.4 0.9 33.1 121.7 47.0 15.5 3.9 38.0 0.9 29.5 1.0 1.0 1.7 0.4 139.0 7.2 14.5 2.5 3.4 1.3 12.9 5.6 5.9 9.6 3.2 1.7 2.8 1.6 2.1 2.0 31.0 107.4 34.9 14.4 2.7 34.9 1.0 26.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 0.6 117.8 6.7 9.5 4.2 3.0 1.0 6.5 3.6 3.7 5.7 1.4 1.3 1.6 1.0 1.6 3.2 22.2 76.3 26.5 12.7 2.9 26.1 0.9 20.8 1.1 0.9 1.2 0.1 93.2 7.8 9.0 4.9 2.7 1.7 3.3 2.6 4.2 5.4 0.8 1.4 1.4 1.1 1.3 2.0 20.3 69.8 35.7 15.9 3.3 30.6 1.1 24.1 1.4 1.9 1.1 0.1 115.2 10.5 10.7 6.7 3.7 2.8 4.1 3.9 4.1 5.1 0.8 1.8 2.0 1.2 1.5 2.3 26.3 87.4 42.1 16.9 3.0 30.4 1.1 26.1 1.0 2.2 1.4 0.2 124.4 12.3 11.3 7.7 11.2 3.2 4.4 3.7 3.2 3.6 1.6 1.6 2.0 1.3 1.7 1.7 28.7 99.1 42.8 17.7 2.8 33.1 1.3 27.9 0.8 1.8 1.8 0.2 130.2 13.1 9.7 5.3 7.8 3.2 3.9 2.7 2.8 3.0 2.2 1.5 1.4 1.0 1.7 1.8 24.8 85.8 49.1 18.9 2.7 41.6 1.5 25.3 1.4 4.1 1.8 0.6 147.12 14.7 9.2 5.2 4.3 4.3 3.2 2.8 2.8 2.3 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.1 1.0 21.3 77.3 60.7 22.1 3.2 46.8 1.3 29.7 1.3 5.8 1.6 0.8 173.22
B. Temporary residents 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
Note: Data refer to scal years (July to June of the given year). For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Counts include both principal applicants and their accompanying dependents, if any. 2. Including 17 049 and 51 998 holders of a Temporary Business Entry (TBE) visa (Long stay) in 1996/1997 and 1997/98 respectively. This new visa was introduced on 1 November 1995.
Table B.1.1.
1988
BELGIUM, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
France Netherlands Morocco United States Germany Italy United Kingdom Portugal Turkey Spain Poland Japan Zaire Greece China Other countries Total of which: EU
268
.. .. 2.0 .. .. 2.5 .. 1.3 1.4 0.7 .. .. .. 0.7 .. 29.6 38.2 19.8
.. .. 2.3 .. .. 2.7 .. 1.7 1.8 0.8 .. .. .. 0.7 .. 33.5 43.5 22.5
.. .. 2.6 .. .. 2.6 .. 1.7 2.4 0.8 .. .. 1.8 0.7 .. 37.7 50.5 24.6
5.8 6.2 3.4 2.9 2.7 2.6 3.2 1.9 2.9 0.8 0.5 0.7 1.9 0.7 0.6 17.3 54.1 24.8
5.9 6.6 3.3 3.1 2.8 2.6 3.1 3.2 2.7 1.1 0.6 0.7 2.7 0.7 0.6 15.3 55.1 27.1
6.0 6.7 3.4 2.7 3.0 2.8 2.9 2.1 2.5 1.0 0.7 1.0 2.3 0.8 0.6 14.6 53.0 26.4
6.2 4.3 4.8 2.9 3.1 1.9 2.8 1.2 3.6 1.0 0.8 1.1 2.2 1.8 0.5 17.9 56.0 27.0
6.2 6.5 3.6 3.0 3.1 2.6 2.8 1.7 2.5 1.0 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.7 0.6 16.1 53.1 26.6
6.6 7.8 4.0 3.0 3.2 2.7 2.8 1.8 2.5 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.6 12.7 51.9 28.7
7.0 6.3 3.9 3.1 3.1 2.8 2.7 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.6 12.4 49.2 27.6
Note: Data are from population registers. Asylum seekers awaiting a decision are excluded from 1995 on. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.1.
CANADA, inows of permanent settlers by region or country of origin

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Asia and the Pacic Hong Kong (China) India China Chinese Taipei Pakistan Philippines Iran Sri Lanka Vietnam Other Asian countries Europe United Kingdom Bosnia Herzegovina Poland Other European countries Africa and the Middle East Lebanon Other African countries America United States El Salvador Other American countries Total
70.0 23.3 10.4 2.8 2.2 .. 8.3 .. 2.4 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 4.4 3.4 .. 11.4 .. 2.4 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 8.0 3.7 .. 12.0 .. 3.1 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 13.9 4.5 .. 12.3 .. 6.8 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 10.4 7.5 .. 13.3 .. 12.6 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 9.5 9.9 .. 19.8 .. 9.1 8.3 17.2 46.6 7.2 2.8 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 12.5 7.4 3.7 19.1 2.7 6.7 6.2 8.5 38.6 6.0 4.9 3.4 24.3 29.4 2.6 26.8 27.6 6.2 1.2 20.3 223.9
112.9 31.8 16.3 13.3 7.7 4.0 15.2 3.7 8.9 4.0 8.1 41.3 6.2 6.3 2.3 26.6 32.9 1.9 31.0 25.7 5.2 0.7 19.7 212.9
124.8 30.0 21.3 17.5 13.2 7.8 13.2 5.8 6.2 2.5 7.4 40.0 5.6 5.1 2.1 27.3 36.5 1.8 34.7 24.7 5.9 0.7 18.2 226.1
117.1 22.1 19.6 18.5 13.3 11.2 10.9 7.5 5.1 1.8 7.1 38.7 4.7 3.8 1.7 28.5 37.8 1.2 36.5 22.5 5.0 .. 17.4 216.0
Note: Counts include both principal applicants and their accompanying dependents, if any. Figures include backlog clearance. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.1.1.
1990
DENMARK, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Somalia Turkey Iceland Germany Iraq Norway United Kingdom Sweden United States Iran Netherlands France Thailand Poland Pakistan Other countries Total of which: EU1
.. 1.1 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.7 .. 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.2 0.2 .. 0.5 0.4 8.6 15.1 2.3
.. 1.8 0.4 0.7 0.5 0.7 .. 0.7 0.6 0.9 0.2 0.3 .. 0.5 0.4 9.8 17.5 2.6
.. 1.1 0.4 0.7 1.3 0.6 .. 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.3 .. 0.5 0.4 9.6 16.9 2.7
.. 0.7 0.5 0.9 1.0 0.7 .. 0.6 0.7 0.4 0.4 0.2 .. 0.4 0.3 8.7 15.4 3.0
1.3 0.6 0.7 1.1 0.7 0.8 1.1 0.7 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.3 6.1 15.6 3.7
1.5 0.8 1.2 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.2 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 22.2 33.0 4.4
2.5 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 11.5 24.7 3.9
Note: Entries of foreigners staying in Denmark more than one year. Asylum seekers and refugees with a provisional residence status are not included. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Including Finland and Sweden from 1995 on.
269
OECD 1999
Table B.1.1.
1992
FINLAND, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Former USSR Sweden Estonia Iraq Somalia Iran Turkey Former Yugoslavia United Kingdom United States China Germany Vietnam Thailand Ukraine Other countries Total
2.9 0.6 2.1 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 .. 2.5 10.4
2.2 0.4 2.0 0.4 0.9 0.1 0.2 1.7 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 2.0 10.9
1.9 0.6 1.4 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 1.8 7.6
2.0 0.6 1.0 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.1 7.3
2.0 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 2.0 7.5
2.4 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.8 8.1
Note: Entries of foreigners intending to stay in Finland for longer than one year. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.1.1.
1988
FRANCE, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Algeria Morocco Turkey Tunisia Zaire China Haiti Former Yugoslavia Japan Poland Vietnam Russian Federation Lebanon Cambodia Romania Other countries Total1 of which: EU Total2
4.9 10.8 4.7 2.9 .. .. .. 0.6 .. 0.9 .. .. .. .. .. 19.2 44.0 .. ..
6.3 13.6 5.3 3.2 .. .. .. 0.6 .. 1.4 .. .. .. .. .. 22.8 53.2 .. ..
13.8 18.0 7.0 4.0 .. .. .. 1.2 1.3 2.9 3.5 .. 6.4 1.3 0.7 42.3 102.4 11.3 ..
12.9 18.2 9.2 4.3 .. .. .. 1.1 1.5 2.5 3.1 .. 4.4 1.2 1.3 50.3 109.9 11.7 ..
12.3 16.4 9.2 4.0 .. .. .. 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.3 .. 1.8 0.8 1.1 66.1 116.6 25.9 ..
13.1 13.8 6.8 3.5 2.2 .. 3.2 4.0 1.2 1.1 1.3 .. .. 0.8 1.0 47.0 99.2 14.4 ..
9.7 8.1 4.7 2.3 1.3 1.3 1.9 1.3 1.1 0.8 0.8 .. 0.9 0.7 0.7 33.9 69.3 10.8 91.5
8.4 6.6 3.6 1.9 0.9 0.9 1.4 1.6 1.0 0.9 0.7 .. 0.6 0.6 0.6 27.1 56.7 7.9 77.0
7.8 6.6 3.4 2.2 0.9 0.7 0.8 1.3 1.1 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 27.1 55.6 7.1 75.5
12.2 10.3 5.1 3.6 2.9 2.8 1.9 1.5 1.2 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 35.1 80.9 6.4 102.4
Note: For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. 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. 2. Figures include estimates of some unregistered ows (inows of family members of European Economic Area citizens for example).
270
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.1.
GERMANY, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Poland Turkey Italy Former Yugoslavia Portugal Russian Federation1 Greece United States Romania Hungary Croatia2 Spain Bosnia Herzegovina3 Bulgaria Former USSR Other countries Total of which: EU4
207.8 78.4 41.8 55.7 3.6 .. 33.0 .. 11.2 .. .. 3.9 .. .. .. 213.2 648.6 140.1
260.3 85.7 40.2 61.5 5.3 .. 29.5 .. 14.2 .. .. 4.4 .. .. 32.6 237.1 770.8 142.0
200.9 83.6 36.9 65.2 7.0 .. 26.5 .. 78.2 15.9 .. 4.4 .. .. 37.0 286.8 842.4 139.6
128.4 81.9 35.4 221.0 10.7 .. 28.3 .. 61.4 24.9 .. 5.1 .. .. 39.0 284.4 920.5 147.4
131.7 80.6 30.1 341.3 10.1 24.6 23.6 21.3 109.8 27.9 38.6 5.4 .. 31.4 15.2 315.8 1 207.6 140.8
75.2 67.8 31.7 141.6 12.9 29.4 18.3 17.6 81.6 24.2 26.0 5.8 107.0 27.2 13.3 307.1 986.9 136.7
78.6 63.9 38.7 63.2 26.5 33.4 18.9 15.8 31.4 19.3 16.7 6.0 68.3 10.4 7.8 275.0 774.0 155.8
87.2 73.6 48.0 54.1 30.5 33.0 20.3 16.0 24.8 18.8 14.9 7.2 55.2 8.0 2.3 294.5 788.3 177.2
77.4 73.2 45.8 42.9 32.0 31.9 18.8 16.3 17.1 16.6 12.3 7.8 11.1 6.3 2.3 296.0 708.0 172.5
71.2 56.0 39.0 31.2 26.4 24.8 16.4 15.1 14.2 11.2 10.0 7.8 6.9 6.3 4.4 274.2 615.3 151.5
Note: For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Included in Former USSR until 1991. 2. Included in Former Yugoslavia until 1991. 3. Included in Former Yugoslavia until 1992. 4. European Union 15 for all years.
Table B.1.1.
1988
HUNGARY, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 19971
Romania Ukraine China Former Yugoslavia2 Germany Russian Federation Slovak Republic Greece Poland Croatia Israel Norway Austria United Kingdom Vietnam Other countries Total of which: EU3
17.8 0.7 0.4 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 1.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 1.9 23.5 0.8
26.6 0.6 0.1 0.4 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.2 1.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.8 2.2 33.7 1.3
29.6 1.1 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.8 37.2 1.3
10.9 1.3 2.1 3.6 0.4 0.6 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 2.5 23.0 1.4
6.5 1.1 0.4 3.2 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 2.0 15.1 1.0
6.1 1.2 0.5 5.0 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.8 16.4 1.0
4.3 1.4 0.5 2.3 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 2.1 12.8 1.3
4.7 1.2 1.2 1.4 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 2.2 13.2 1.3
4.0 1.3 1.7 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 2.3 12.8 1.5
4.3 1.9 1.5 1.1 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.0 13.4 1.6
Note: Data are from the Register of long-term residence permits. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Data are estimates. 2. Excluding Croatia. 3. European Union 15 for all years.
271
OECD 1999
Table B.1.1.
1988
JAPAN, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
1989
China Philippines Brazil United States Korea United Kingdom Thailand Chinese Taipei Canada Germany1 Peru Other countries Total
71.4 48.1 3.1 28.5 13.5 6.4 5.9 6.8 2.5 4.2 0.6 43.8 234.8
53.1 48.0 5.3 28.6 21.0 6.9 6.1 6.5 3.1 3.7 4.3 50.8 237.4
29.9 48.8 11.6 30.8 23.1 7.5 7.0 7.3 3.8 4.3 2.8 46.9 223.8
35.6 63.8 17.3 29.8 26.6 6.1 8.3 7.6 4.2 4.1 1.1 53.9 258.4
52.4 57.5 19.2 29.3 26.0 6.7 7.7 6.0 4.2 4.2 0.9 52.9 267.0
45.2 48.2 14.6 27.4 21.3 5.9 6.5 5.2 3.8 4.2 1.0 51.3 234.5
38.9 58.8 11.8 27.6 21.3 6.6 6.8 4.7 4.1 4.0 1.0 51.9 237.5
38.8 30.3 11.9 27.0 18.8 6.4 6.5 4.7 4.1 3.7 1.7 55.9 209.9
45.6 30.3 16.4 27.9 17.1 6.4 6.6 4.4 4.6 4.2 2.4 59.6 225.4
53.3 43.2 39.6 27.7 17.9 6.9 6.4 5.1 4.8 4.3 3.1 62.6 274.8
Note: New entry except temporary visitors. Re-entry are excluded. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Data for 1988 relate to western Germany.
Table B.1.1.
1988
LUXEMBOURG, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Portugal France Belgium Germany Italy Netherlands United States Spain Other countries Total of which: EU1
3.0 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 .. 1.9 8.2 7.0
2.9 1.1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 .. 2.0 8.4 6.9
3.4 1.1 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.3 .. 2.3 9.3 7.6
3.5 1.1 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 .. 2.9 10.0 7.8
2.4 1.1 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.3 .. 3.9 9.8 7.1
2.9 1.2 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.1 2.5 9.2 7.1
2.4 1.3 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 2.6 9.2 7.1
2.4 1.5 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.1 2.9 9.6 7.1
2.0 1.5 1.1 0.7 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.1 2.8 9.2 ..
1.9 1.7 1.2 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 3.0 9.7 ..
Note: For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. European Union 15 for all years.
Table B.1.1.
1988
NETHERLANDS, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Turkey Germany Morocco United Kingdom United States Suriname Belgium France China Former Yugoslavia Iran Poland Somalia Spain Italy Other countries Total of which: EU1
272
10.4 4.4 8.2 4.0 2.0 2.9 2.3 1.6 .. .. .. 0.7 .. .. 0.9 20.9 58.3 15.6
11.0 4.6 8.4 4.2 2.3 4.4 2.2 1.6 .. .. .. 1.1 .. .. 1.0 24.6 65.4 15.7
12.6 5.6 9.4 5.4 2.5 6.8 2.4 1.8 .. .. .. 1.3 .. .. 1.1 32.3 81.3 18.6
12.4 6.8 8.9 6.0 2.6 6.7 2.4 1.7 .. .. .. 1.4 .. .. 1.0 34.4 84.3 20.8
9.1 7.1 7.2 6.5 2.9 6.9 2.2 1.8 .. 4.9 .. 1.4 .. .. 1.0 32.0 83.0 22.3
7.8 7.4 5.9 5.0 2.6 7.8 2.0 1.5 1.1 8.9 .. 1.3 .. .. 1.0 35.2 87.6 19.7
4.3 6.1 3.2 3.5 2.2 2.9 1.7 1.4 1.0 8.4 .. 0.8 .. .. 0.9 31.9 68.4 16.0
4.8 4.7 3.1 3.7 2.2 1.7 1.3 .. .. 7.3 .. .. .. .. .. 38.2 67.0 14.8
6.4 5.7 4.3 4.3 3.1 2.8 1.9 1.7 1.3 3.4 .. 1.4 .. 1.0 1.2 38.7 77.2 19.2
6.5 5.7 4.5 4.3 3.1 2.6 2.2 2.1 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.2 35.6 76.7 20.3
Note: For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. European Union 15 for all years.
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.1.
1988
NORWAY, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Sweden Denmark United States United Kingdom Germany Iran Bosnia Herzegovina1 Pakistan Somalia Sri Lanka Turkey Philippines China Poland Former Yugoslavia Other countries Total of which: EU2
2.0 3.2 1.0 1.5 0.4 1.7 .. 1.0 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.5 .. 0.5 0.8 8.8 23.2 6.0
1.1 2.2 0.9 0.9 0.3 0.9 .. 0.9 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.5 .. 0.7 1.0 7.1 18.5 4.1
1.1 1.8 0.9 0.7 0.3 0.7 .. 0.6 0.3 0.6 0.5 0.4 .. 0.5 0.8 6.5 15.7 3.4
1.1 1.8 1.0 0.8 0.3 0.7 .. 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.3 .. 0.4 1.0 6.5 16.1 3.6
1.3 1.7 0.9 1.1 0.4 0.5 .. 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 .. 0.3 2.5 6.5 17.2 3.9
1.6 1.7 0.9 1.1 0.4 0.4 6.2 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.3 .. 0.3 1.7 5.9 22.3 4.0
1.9 1.9 0.8 0.8 0.4 0.3 3.2 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.3 .. 0.3 0.8 5.9 17.9 3.9
2.1 1.6 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.2 1.7 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 .. 0.2 0.6 6.2 16.5 6.6
2.9 1.6 0.9 0.9 0.6 0.3 1.0 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 6.6 17.2 7.7
4.9 1.8 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 8.5 22.0 10.8
Note: Data are from population registers. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Included in former Yugoslavia before 1993. 2. European Union 15 from 1995 on.
Table B.1.1.
1988
SWEDEN, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Former Yugoslavia Iraq Finland Bosnia Herzegovina1 Iran Norway Somalia Denmark United States Turkey United Kingdom Poland Chile Ethiopia Lebanon Other countries Total of which: EU2
1.1 1.3 5.4 .. 8.1 3.2 .. 2.3 0.8 1.2 0.9 1.5 2.9 1.5 0.6 13.7 44.5 10.6
1.7 1.4 4.5 .. 7.0 8.7 .. 4.5 0.8 1.5 0.7 1.7 5.9 1.8 1.8 16.9 58.9 11.6
2.2 2.0 4.1 .. 4.5 7.3 .. 3.1 0.9 1.6 0.9 2.0 1.6 1.8 2.0 19.2 53.2 10.2
2.0 2.5 3.0 .. 3.8 2.6 .. 1.7 0.9 1.5 0.7 1.6 0.6 1.8 1.6 19.6 43.9 7.2
1.8 3.8 2.7 .. 3.6 1.9 .. 1.3 0.9 1.1 0.7 1.5 0.4 0.8 1.3 17.7 39.5 6.2
3.3 4.6 2.4 20.7 1.9 1.5 .. 1.2 0.7 0.8 0.7 1.0 0.4 0.5 0.5 14.7 54.8 5.8
15.8 3.5 2.8 25.7 1.5 1.6 2.8 1.8 0.8 1.1 0.6 1.0 0.3 0.4 0.4 14.6 74.8 7.0
2.5 2.3 2.8 4.6 1.1 1.7 0.5 1.8 1.1 1.1 0.8 0.9 0.3 0.4 0.3 14.0 36.1 ..
0.8 2.1 2.6 1.2 0.8 1.5 0.4 1.4 1.1 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.4 0.4 0.4 13.5 29.3 ..
3.9 3.7 2.8 1.8 1.7 1.5 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.3 11.9 33.4 ..
Note: Data are from population registers. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Included in former Yougoslavia before 1993. 2. EU 15 for all years.
273
OECD 1999
Table B.1.1.
1988
SWITZERLAND, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Former Yugoslavia Germany Italy France Portugal Turkey United States United Kingdom Spain Austria Netherlands Canada Other countries Total of which: EU
13.5 8.1 8.4 4.6 8.4 3.6 2.3 2.3 5.1 1.8 1.7 0.6 15.7 76.1 ..
15.9 8.4 7.9 4.9 9.5 4.0 2.4 2.3 4.8 1.9 1.6 0.6 16.2 80.4 ..
21.9 9.8 8.8 5.4 13.8 6.0 2.5 2.5 5.6 2.1 1.9 0.7 20.4 101.4 ..
27.0 9.9 8.3 4.9 14.1 6.7 3.0 2.5 4.6 2.1 1.7 0.7 24.2 109.8 ..
33.6 9.6 8.3 5.1 13.3 5.3 2.6 2.5 3.9 2.0 1.8 0.7 23.4 112.1 ..
34.2 8.6 7.3 4.5 10.0 4.8 2.4 2.5 3.1 1.6 1.4 0.6 22.8 104.0 ..
25.3 8.7 6.9 5.0 8.6 3.8 2.6 2.4 2.3 1.5 1.5 0.7 22.3 91.7 37.8
22.3 8.6 6.7 5.0 7.6 3.8 2.9 2.6 2.7 1.3 1.5 0.9 22.0 87.9 39.3
14.1 8.7 5.4 5.0 5.5 3.4 2.9 2.4 2.0 1.3 1.4 0.8 21.6 74.3 35.7
12.8 8.5 5.0 4.8 4.0 3.4 2.7 2.4 1.8 1.3 1.1 0.8 24.1 72.8 34.4
Note: Data are from the register of foreigners. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Tableau B.1.1.
1992
UNITED KINGDOM, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
United States Australia India South Africa New Zealand Japan Pakistan Canada Philippines Poland Korea Bangladesh Russian Federation Malaysia China Other countries Total
43.9 25.0 9.2 2.3 10.6 10.4 8.3 6.4 2.6 3.5 .. 3.2 .. 3.0 1.8 73.6 203.9
37.3 21.5 8.9 2.6 9.3 9.4 7.5 5.8 3.3 3.5 1.5 3.2 .. 3.0 2.3 71.2 190.3
38.2 27.2 9.9 5.6 12.1 10.4 6.6 6.7 5.2 3.5 2.0 3.2 3.5 3.3 2.7 53.4 193.6
39.4 26.6 11.6 11.1 12.0 10.1 7.2 6.7 6.5 3.5 2.5 2.8 4.2 3.5 3.2 55.6 206.3
43.2 25.1 13.0 12.9 11.0 10.8 7.8 7.4 6.8 3.6 3.2 3.3 3.6 3.3 3.2 58.3 216.4
42.5 26.5 16.1 13.0 12.1 10.4 9.6 8.3 7.5 5.4 4.2 4.0 4.0 3.6 2.5 67.3 236.9
Note: Passengers, excluding European Economic Area nationals, admitted to the United Kingdom. Data exclude visitors, passengers in transit or returning on limited leave or who previously settled. Students and au pair girls are excluded. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
274
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.1.
UNITED STATES, inows of permanent settlers by region or country of birth

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
North and Central America Mexico Cuba Dominican Republic El Salvador Jamaica Haiti Other North or Central American countries Asia Philippines China Vietnam India Korea Pakistan Other Asian countries Europe Former USSR1 Russian Federation Ukraine Other European countries South America Africa Oceania Total
250.0 95.0 17.6 27.2 12.0 21.0 34.8 42.4 264.5 50.7 28.7 25.8 26.3 34.7 5.4 92.9 64.8 2.9 .. .. 61.8 41.0 18.9 3.8 643.0
607.4 405.2 10.0 26.7 57.9 24.5 13.7 69.4 312.1 57.0 32.3 37.7 31.2 34.2 8.0 111.7 82.9 11.1 .. .. 71.8 58.9 25.2 4.4 1 090.9
957.6 679.1 10.6 42.2 80.2 25.0 20.3 100.1 338.6 63.8 31.8 48.8 30.7 32.3 9.7 121.5 112.4 25.5 .. .. 86.9 85.8 35.9 6.2 1 536.5
1 211.0 946.2 10.3 41.4 47.4 23.8 47.5 94.4 358.5 63.6 33.0 55.3 45.1 26.5 20.4 114.7 135.2 57.0 .. .. 78.3 79.9 36.2 6.2 1 827.2
384.0 213.8 11.8 42.0 26.2 18.9 11.0 60.4 357.0 61.0 38.9 77.7 36.8 19.4 10.2 113.0 145.4 20.4 8.9 14.4 101.8 55.3 27.1 5.2 974.0
301.4 126.6 13.7 45.4 26.8 17.2 10.1 61.6 358.0 63.5 65.6 59.6 40.1 18.0 8.9 102.3 158.3 28.2 12.1 18.3 99.7 53.9 27.8 4.9 904.3
272.2 111.4 14.7 51.2 17.6 14.3 13.3 49.6 292.6 53.5 54.0 41.3 34.9 16.0 8.7 84.1 160.9 27.2 15.2 21.0 97.5 47.4 26.7 4.6 804.4
231.5 89.9 17.9 38.5 11.7 16.4 14.0 43.0 267.9 51.0 35.5 41.8 34.7 16.0 9.8 79.2 128.2 22.5 14.6 17.4 73.7 45.7 42.5 4.7 720.5
340.5 163.6 26.5 39.6 17.9 19.1 18.4 55.5 307.8 55.9 41.7 42.1 44.9 18.2 12.5 92.6 147.6 22.0 19.7 21.1 84.8 61.8 52.9 5.3 915.9
307.5 146.9 33.6 27.1 18.0 17.8 15.1 49.1 265.8 49.1 41.1 38.5 38.1 14.2 13.0 71.8 119.9 16.7 16.6 15.7 70.8 52.9 47.8 4.3 798.4
Note: Data refer to scal years (October to September of the given year). Since 1989, approximately 2.9 millions of immigrants obtained a permanent residence permit following legalization under the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Excluding Russian federation and Ukraine from 1992 on.
Table B.1.2.
1988
BELGIUM, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Netherlands France United States United Kingdom Germany Italy Spain Portugal Japan Greece Poland Morocco Canada Turkey China Other countries Total of which: EU
.. .. .. .. .. 3.0 1.5 0.4 .. 0.6 .. 1.1 .. 1.1 .. 24.6 32.3 16.8
.. .. .. .. .. 2.5 1.2 0.4 .. 0.6 .. 0.7 .. 0.7 .. 21.4 27.5 15.6
.. .. .. .. .. 2.5 1.2 0.5 .. 0.6 .. 0.7 .. 0.6 .. 20.9 27.0 15.5
3.4 4.4 3.1 2.4 2.2 3.6 2.0 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.3 0.9 .. 0.7 0.2 9.3 35.3 20.7
3.4 3.3 3.0 2.3 2.1 2.0 1.0 0.6 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.5 .. 0.6 0.2 7.8 28.1 15.7
3.5 3.4 3.0 2.4 2.2 2.0 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.4 0.3 0.6 .. 0.6 0.3 9.8 31.2 16.6
3.9 4.0 2.9 2.0 2.3 0.7 1.2 0.6 0.9 2.7 0.2 0.6 .. 0.8 0.3 11.1 34.1 19.1
3.9 4.2 2.9 2.7 2.3 2.1 1.5 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.3 0.9 .. 0.6 0.3 8.9 33.1 20.0
4.1 4.3 2.7 2.6 2.3 1.9 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.3 0.8 .. 0.5 0.4 8.8 32.4 19.7
3.8 2.8 2.5 2.1 2.0 1.6 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 4.5 23.5 15.4
275
Note: Data are from population registers. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
OECD 1999
Table B.1.2.
1990
DENMARK, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
United Kingdom Norway Germany Sweden Iceland United States France Netherlands Somalia Finland Turkey Italy Iran Pakistan Poland Other countries Total of which: EU1
.. 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 .. 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 1.8 4.6 1.4
.. 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.1 .. 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 2.0 5.2 1.6
.. 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 .. 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 1.9 4.8 1.4
.. 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 .. 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.0 4.9 1.4
0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.1 .. 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.5 5.0 1.7
0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.1 .. 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.7 5.3 2.2
0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.9 6.0 1.8
Note: Departures of foreigners for more than one year. Departures of asylum seekers and refugees with a provisional residence status are not included. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Including Finland and Sweden from 1995 on.
Table B.1.2.
1992
FINLAND, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Sweden Estonia Former USSR United States United Kingdom Somalia Germany China Other countries Total
0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.6 1.5
0.4 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.6 1.5
0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.5 1.5
0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 1.5
0.4 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.2 3.0
0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.6 1.6
Note: Data are from population registers. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
276
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.2.
GERMANY, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Bosnia Herzegovina1 Poland Turkey Former Yugoslavia Italy Portugal Greece Croatia2 Hungary Romania Russian Federation3 Spain Bulgaria United States Former Yug. Rep. of Macedonia4 Other countries Total of which: EU5
.. 99.3 39.9 26.1 37.2 1.9 12.8 .. .. 3.4 .. 6.0 .. .. .. 132.6 359.1 96.9
.. 142.5 37.7 36.0 38.5 2.8 14.6 .. .. 3.5 .. 6.4 .. .. .. 156.3 438.3 104.9
.. 157.7 35.1 38.3 34.1 2.9 14.3 .. 8.7 15.8 .. 6.1 .. .. .. 153.0 466.0 100.9
.. 115.3 36.1 53.0 36.4 4.1 15.4 .. 14.9 30.2 .. 6.2 .. .. .. 185.9 497.5 114.6
.. 109.5 40.3 99.4 32.7 4.9 16.2 28.5 21.2 51.9 6.2 6.5 10.8 16.2 .. 170.4 614.7 111.8
10.3 101.8 45.5 73.5 31.0 6.3 17.5 25.0 25.1 101.9 7.8 7.2 34.9 16.9 .. 205.6 710.2 116.4
16.5 65.8 46.4 62.1 32.1 14.3 19.2 28.5 22.0 44.0 12.3 7.6 17.8 17.2 5.2 210.5 621.5 133.4
15.7 70.7 43.2 40.4 33.5 20.5 19.3 22.0 18.8 25.2 13.5 7.2 10.3 16.0 5.5 199.3 561.1 139.6
27.2 71.7 43.5 34.3 36.8 25.4 20.1 17.3 17.0 16.6 12.6 8.2 7.0 16.0 3.8 201.7 559.1 153.9
83.9 70.2 46.0 44.5 37.9 26.5 21.8 18.9 15.1 13.6 11.2 9.2 6.3 5.6 3.0 223.3 637.1 159.3
Note: Data are from population registers. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Included in Former Yugoslavia until 1992. 2. Included in Former Yugoslavia until 1991. 3. Included in Former USSR until 1991. 4. Included in Former Yugoslavia until 1993. 5. European Union 15 for all years.
Table B.1.2.
1988
JAPAN, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
1989
Philippines United States China Brazil Korea United Kingdom Thailand Germany1 Chinese Taipei Canada Peru Other countries Total
42.6 27.0 38.3 2.4 10.3 6.1 4.7 3.1 5.8 2.1 0.3 41.0 183.7
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 204.8
40.3 26.5 14.5 3.7 16.1 6.7 5.9 4.1 6.1 2.7 0.8 38.7 166.1
50.7 25.0 12.7 6.9 18.2 4.9 6.7 3.8 5.9 3.1 0.8 42.6 181.3
57.2 26.0 17.0 13.8 18.9 5.8 6.8 4.1 5.2 3.3 2.1 44.6 204.8
43.2 25.7 23.0 20.7 16.6 5.1 6.1 4.1 4.4 3.2 1.8 46.6 200.5
50.7 25.6 20.9 19.7 16.5 5.9 5.4 3.8 4.2 3.2 1.4 46.9 204.2
44.2 24.9 21.7 16.8 14.5 5.5 5.5 3.6 4.0 3.3 0.9 49.5 194.4
16.3 24.8 21.8 14.0 12.4 5.0 5.3 3.9 3.2 3.3 0.8 49.3 160.1
31.4 24.3 23.6 14.1 12.4 5.4 4.7 3.9 3.5 3.5 0.6 49.2 176.6
Note: Data are from the register of foreigners. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Data for 1988 relate to western Germany.
Table B.1.2.
LUXEMBOURG, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
1988
Portugal France Belgium Germany United States Italy Netherlands Spain Other countries Total
Note:
1.1 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.1 1.3 5.3
1.0 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.1 1.4 5.5
1.2 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.1 1.4 5.5
1.3 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.1 1.3 5.9
1.4 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 1.3 5.6
1.2 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 1.2 5.0
1.2 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.1 1.2 5.3
1.2 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.1 1.0 4.9
1.3 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.1 1.3 5.6
1.3 1.0 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 1.5 5.8
Data are from the Central Population Register. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
277
OECD 1999
Table B.1.2.
1988
NETHERLANDS, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Germany United Kingdom United States Belgium Turkey Japan Morocco France Italy Poland Former Yugoslavia Suriname China Other countries Total of which: EU1
2.3 2.5 1.7 1.2 3.5 .. 1.5 0.7 0.5 .. .. 0.5 .. 7.0 21.4 9.1
2.5 2.5 1.5 1.2 3.0 .. 1.3 0.8 0.5 .. .. 0.5 .. 7.7 21.5 9.7
2.3 2.4 1.7 1.2 2.3 .. 1.0 0.8 0.5 .. .. 0.5 .. 7.9 20.6 8.9
2.7 2.4 1.7 1.3 1.7 .. 1.1 0.9 0.5 .. .. 0.6 .. 8.4 21.3 9.6
2.9 2.4 1.9 1.3 1.8 .. 1.0 0.8 0.5 .. 0.3 0.7 .. 9.1 22.7 10.0
3.0 2.6 1.9 1.1 1.7 0.9 1.1 0.7 0.4 1.2 0.3 0.6 0.1 6.5 22.2 10.5
3.2 2.8 1.8 1.3 1.6 0.9 1.2 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.2 7.4 22.7 10.4
2.9 2.9 1.5 0.9 1.6 .. 1.1 .. .. .. .. 0.4 .. 10.4 21.7 10.0
3.5 2.5 1.9 1.2 1.5 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 7.2 22.4 10.7
3.1 2.3 2.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 7.6 21.9 10.0
Note: Data are from population registers. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. European Union 15 for all years.
Table B.1.2.
1988
NORWAY, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Sweden Denmark United States United Kingdom Bosnia Herzegovina1 Germany China Sri Lanka Pakistan Philippines Chile Former Yugoslavia Iran Other countries Total of which: EU2
1.6 2.6 0.8 1.0 .. 0.2 .. 0.1 0.2 2.7 9.3 4.7
1.7 2.6 1.0 1.5 .. 0.3 .. 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 2.9 10.6 5.4
1.1 2.0 0.8 1.5 .. 0.2 .. 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.1 3.0 9.8 4.5
0.7 1.7 0.9 1.1 .. 0.2 .. 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.1 2.7 8.4 3.6
0.7 1.4 0.7 0.9 .. 0.2 .. 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.2 2.8 8.1 3.0
0.7 1.4 1.0 1.1 0.3 .. 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.3 1.1 0.2 3.7 10.5 3.5
1.0 1.6 0.8 0.9 0.2 0.2 .. 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.1 3.4 9.6 3.3
1.0 1.7 0.9 0.9 0.3 0.3 .. 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 3.1 9.0 5.0
1.1 1.4 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 3.5 10.0 5.1
1.7 1.4 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 3.6 10.0 5.5
Note: Data are from population registers. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Included in former Yugoslavia before 1993. 2. European Union 15 from 1995 on.
278
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.2.
1988
SWEDEN, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Finland Norway Denmark United States United Kingdom Iran Former Yugoslavia Chile Greece Poland Turkey Other countries Total of which: EU1
5.2 1.6 1.0 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 2.3 11.8 7.5
5.4 2.0 1.8 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.3 13.1 8.5
5.4 3.9 2.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 .. 0.1 2.9 16.2 9.2
4.5 4.1 2.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 .. 0.1 2.8 15.0 7.9
3.1 3.4 1.8 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 3.2 13.2 6.2
2.8 2.9 1.6 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.1 4.5 14.8 6.0
2.6 2.4 1.6 0.8 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 5.2 15.8 6.1
2.7 2.2 1.6 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 6.5 15.4 ..
2.9 2.0 1.6 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 5.5 14.5 ..
3.0 2.0 1.4 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 5.9 15.3 ..
Note: Data are from population registers. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. European Union 15 for all years.
Table B.1.2.
1988
SWITZERLAND, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Italy Portugal Former Yugoslavia Germany Spain France Turkey Austria Other countries Total of which: EU
12.2 3.9 4.7 6.1 6.1 3.4 2.6 1.4 15.4 55.8 ..
11.6 4.2 5.2 6.2 6.6 3.6 2.5 1.5 16.1 57.5 ..
11.7 4.7 5.9 6.2 7.2 3.8 2.6 1.5 16.0 59.6 ..
11.5 6.3 6.4 7.2 7.9 3.9 2.7 1.7 18.9 66.4 ..
15.3 10.1 7.5 7.1 11.6 4.0 2.9 1.8 20.2 80.4 ..
11.7 8.7 7.0 7.3 8.1 3.8 3.0 1.6 20.0 71.2 ..
9.9 7.5 8.0 6.2 6.1 3.5 3.0 1.3 18.9 64.2 ..
10.3 7.4 8.7 6.6 6.1 3.8 2.7 1.4 20.5 67.5 42.3
10.8 7.9 9.0 6.2 6.3 3.7 2.5 1.2 20.1 67.7 42.6
9.9 8.7 7.2 5.9 5.8 3.5 2.3 1.2 19.0 63.4 41.7
Note: Data are from registers of foreigners. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.1.3.
1988
BELGIUM, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
France Netherlands Morocco United States Germany Italy United Kingdom Portugal Turkey Spain Poland Japan Zaire Greece China Other countries Total of which: EU
.. .. 0.9 .. .. 0.5 .. 0.9 0.3 0.8 .. .. .. 0.1 .. 5.1 6.0 3.0
.. .. 1.6 .. .. 0.2 .. 1.3 1.1 0.4 .. .. .. 0.1 .. 12.2 16.1 6.9
.. .. 1.9 .. .. 0.2 .. 1.2 1.8 0.4 .. .. 0.9 0.2 .. 17.7 23.4 9.1
1.4 2.8 2.5 0.2 0.5 1.0 0.8 1.1 2.2 1.3 0.2 0.9 0.3 0.3 9.0 18.8 4.1
2.6 3.3 2.8 0.1 0.8 0.6 0.8 2.6 2.2 0.4 0.1 2.2 0.2 0.4 8.1 26.9 11.3
2.5 3.2 2.7 0.3 0.9 0.8 0.5 1.2 1.9 0.4 0.2 1.7 0.4 0.3 5.5 21.8 9.8
2.2 0.4 4.2 0.8 1.1 0.8 0.6 2.8 0.2 0.6 0.3 1.1 0.8 0.2 8.0 21.9 8.0
2.0 2.6 2.7 0.1 0.9 0.4 0.1 0.7 1.9 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.3 8.1 20.0 6.5
2.3 3.8 3.2 0.2 0.9 0.8 0.2 0.8 2.0 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 4.6 19.5 9.0
4.2 2.5 3.5 0.6 1.2 1.2 0.7 0.8 1.2 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.2 0.4 7.8 25.8 12.2
279
Note: Data are derived from Tables B.1.1. and B.1.2. For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
OECD 1999
Table B.1.3.
1990
DENMARK, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Somalia Turkey Iceland Germany Iraq Norway United Kingdom Sweden United States Iran Netherlands France Thailand Poland Pakistan Other countries Total of which: EU1
.. 1.0 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.2 .. 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.1 0.1 .. 0.5 0.3 6.6 10.5 0.9
.. 1.6 0.4 0.5 0.3 .. 0.4 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.1 .. 0.4 0.3 7.5 12.3 1.0
.. 0.9 0.1 0.4 1.3 0.2 .. 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 .. 0.4 0.3 7.5 12.1 1.3
.. 0.5 0.1 0.6 1.0 0.2 .. 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 .. 0.3 0.2 6.5 10.5 1.6
.. 0.4 0.4 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 5.6 10.5 2.0
.. 0.6 1.0 0.7 1.0 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 21.8 27.7 2.3
2.4 1.1 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.3 9.4 18.8 2.1
Note: Data are derived from Tables B.1.1. and B.1.2. For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Including Finland and Sweden from 1995 on.
Table B.1.3.
1992
FINLAND, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Former USSR Sweden Estonia Iraq Somalia Iran Turkey Former Yugoslavia United Kingdom United States China Germany Vietnam Thailand Ukraine Other countries Total
2.8 0.2 2.1 .. 0.3 0.2 0.3 .. 0.1 0.1 0.2 .. 0.1 .. 2.5 8.9
2.0 0.1 1.9 .. 0.9 0.1 0.1 1.7 0.1 0.2 0.2 .. .. 2.0 9.4
1.7 0.2 1.2 .. 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 .. 0.1 .. 1.6 6.1
1.7 0.3 0.8 .. 0.3 .. 0.1 .. 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 .. 0.1 .. 2.2 5.8
1.6 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.9 4.5
2.3 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.3 6.6
280
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.3.
1988
GERMANY, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Poland Turkey Italy Former Yugoslavia Portugal Russian Federation1 Greece United States Romania Hungary Croatia2 Spain Bosnia Herzegovina3 Bulgaria Former USSR Other countries Total of which: EU4
108.5 38.5 4.6 29.6 1.7 .. 20.2 .. 7.8 .. .. 2.1 .. .. .. 80.6 289.5 43.2
117.8 48.0 1.7 25.5 2.5 .. 14.9 .. 10.7 .. .. 2.0 .. .. 22.3 91.1 332.5 37.1
43.1 48.5 2.8 26.9 4.1 .. 12.2 .. 62.4 7.2 .. 1.7 .. .. 25.6 145.2 376.4 38.7
13.1 45.8 1.0 168.0 6.6 .. 12.9 .. 31.2 10.0 .. 1.1 .. .. 26.9 110.6 423.0 32.8
22.2 40.3 2.7 241.9 5.2 18.4 7.4 5.1 58.0 6.8 10.1 1.1 .. 20.6 11.9 148.7 592.9 29.0
26.6 22.3 0.7 68.1 6.6 21.7 0.7 0.7 20.2 0.8 1.0 1.3 96.7 7.6 9.2 105.7 276.6 20.3
12.9 17.6 6.6 1.0 12.2 21.1 0.3 1.3 12.6 2.7 11.8 1.6 51.8 7.5 4.8 62.3 152.5 22.4
16.5 30.4 14.5 13.8 10.0 19.5 0.9 0.3 7.1 39.4 2.3 0.5 91.6 227.2 37.7
5.7 29.7 9.0 8.6 6.6 19.3 1.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 5.0 0.4 16.1 0.7 0.8 92.0 148.9 18.6
1.0 10.0 1.1 13.3 0.1 13.6 5.3 9.5 0.7 3.9 8.9 1.5 77.0 0.1 3.1 49.2 21.8 7.8
Note: Data are derived from Tables B.1.1. and B.1.2. For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Included in Former USSR until 1991. 2. Included in Former Yugoslavia until 1991. 3. Included in Former Yugoslavia until 1992. 4. European Union 15 for all years.
Table B.1.3.
1988
JAPAN, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
China Philippines Brazil United States Korea United Kingdom Thailand Chinese Taipei Canada Germany1 Peru Other countries Total
33.1 5.5 0.7 1.5 3.2 0.3 1.2 1.0 0.4 1.1 0.3 2.8 51.1
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 32.6
15.4 8.5 7.9 4.3 7.0 0.8 1.1 1.2 1.1 0.2 2.0 8.2 57.7
22.9 13.1 10.4 4.8 8.4 1.2 1.6 1.7 1.1 0.3 0.3 11.3 77.1
35.4 0.3 5.4 3.3 7.1 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.1 1.2 8.3 62.2
22.2 5.0 6.1 1.7 4.7 0.8 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.1 0.8 4.7 34.0
18.0 8.1 7.9 2.0 4.8 0.7 1.4 0.5 0.9 0.2 0.4 5.0 33.3
17.1 13.9 4.9 2.1 4.3 0.9 1.0 0.7 0.8 0.1 0.8 6.4 15.5
23.8 14.0 2.4 3.1 4.7 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.3 0.3 1.6 10.3 65.3
29.7 11.8 25.5 3.4 5.5 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.3 0.4 2.5 13.4 98.2
Note: Data are derived from Tables B.1.1. and B.1.2. For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Data for 1988 related to western Germany.
281
OECD 1999
Table B.1.3.
LUXEMBOURG, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Portugal France Belgium Germany Italy Netherlands United States Spain Other countries Total
1.9 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 .. 0.5 2.9
1.9 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.1 .. 0.4 2.8
2.2 0.2 0.4 0.1 .. 0.9 3.8
2.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 .. 1.5 4.1
1.0 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 .. 2.5 4.2
1.7 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 1.3 4.2
1.2 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 1.4 3.9
1.2 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 1.9 4.7
0.7 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.1 1.5 3.7
0.6 0.8 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 1.5 3.9
Table B.1.3.
NETHERLANDS, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Turkey Germany Morocco United Kingdom United States Suriname Belgium France China Former Yugoslavia Poland Italy Other countries Total of which: EU1
6.9 2.1 6.7 1.5 0.3 2.4 1.1 0.9 .. .. .. 0.4 14.6 36.9 6.4
8.0 2.1 7.1 1.7 0.8 3.9 1.0 0.8 .. .. .. 0.5 18.0 43.9 6.0
10.3 3.3 8.4 2.9 0.8 6.3 1.2 1.0 .. .. .. 0.6 25.7 60.7 9.7
10.7 4.1 7.8 3.5 0.9 6.1 1.0 0.8 .. .. .. 0.5 27.5 63.0 11.1
7.3 4.2 6.1 4.1 1.0 6.2 0.9 1.0 .. 4.6 .. 0.5 24.4 60.3 12.2
6.0 4.4 4.8 2.4 0.7 7.2 0.9 0.9 1.0 8.6 0.1 0.6 27.8 65.4 9.2
2.7 3.0 2.0 0.7 0.4 2.4 0.4 0.6 0.9 8.1 0.5 0.4 23.6 45.7 5.6
3.2 1.8 2.0 0.7 0.7 1.3 0.5 .. .. .. .. .. 35.2 45.3 4.8
4.9 2.2 3.2 1.9 1.2 2.4 0.7 0.9 1.1 3.0 1.1 0.7 31.4 54.8 8.6
5.4 2.6 3.7 2.0 0.9 2.3 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.7 31.2 54.8 10.3
Note: Data are derived from Tables B.1.1. and B.1.2. For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. European Union 15 for all years.
Table B.1.3.
NORWAY, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
1988
Sweden Denmark United States United Kingdom Germany Iran Bosnia Herzegovina1 Pakistan Sri Lanka Philippines China Former Yugoslavia Other countries Total of which: EU2
0.4 0.6 0.2 0.5 0.2 1.7 .. 0.9 0.6 0.4 .. 0.6 7.8 13.9 1.3
0.6 0.4 0.1 0.6 0.8 .. 0.8 0.8 0.4 .. 0.9 6.0 8.0 1.3
0.2 0.8 0.1 0.6 .. 0.4 0.5 0.4 .. 0.4 4.5 5.9 1.0
0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.6 .. 0.3 0.3 0.2 .. 0.6 5.1 7.7 0.1
0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 .. 0.2 0.4 0.2 .. 1.9 4.7 9.1 0.9
0.9 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 6.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 .. 0.7 3.1 11.8 0.5
1.0 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.2 3.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 .. 0.2 3.2 8.3 0.6
1.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 1.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 .. 0.4 3.8 7.5 1.6
1.8 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 3.9 7.2 2.6
3.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 5.9 12.0 5.4
282
Note: Data are derived from Tables B.1.1. and B.1.2. For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Included in former Yugoslavia before 1993. 2. European Union 12 for all years.
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.3.
1988
SWEDEN, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Former Yugoslavia Finland Iran Norway Denmark United States Turkey United Kingdom Poland Chile Other countries Total of which: EU1
0.9 0.2 8.0 1.6 1.3 0.3 1.1 0.5 1.4 2.8 14.6 32.7 3.1
1.5 0.9 6.8 6.7 2.7 0.4 1.4 0.4 1.6 5.7 19.5 45.8 3.2
2.0 1.3 4.3 3.4 0.7 0.5 1.5 0.6 .. 1.4 23.9 37.0 1.0
1.8 1.5 3.6 1.5 0.5 0.6 1.4 0.4 .. 0.4 24.2 28.9 0.7
1.6 0.4 3.4 1.5 0.5 0.5 1.0 0.4 1.4 0.1 20.3 26.3
2.7 0.4 1.4 1.4 0.4 0.2 0.7 0.3 0.8 0.1 36.2 40.0 0.2
15.1 0.2 0.8 0.8 0.2 0.9 0.1 0.8 0.3 41.9 59.0 0.9
2.3 0.2 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.2 1.0 0.4 0.8 15.4 20.7 ..
0.6 0.2 0.6 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.1 12.4 14.9 ..
3.6 0.2 1.3 0.6 0.4 0.1 0.7 0.3 0.4 12.9 18.1 ..
Note: Data are derived from Tables B.1.1. and B.1.2. For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. European Union 15 for all years.
Table B.1.3.
SWITZERLAND, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Former Yugoslavia Germany Italy France Portugal Turkey Spain Austria Other countries Total of which: EU
8.8 2.0 3.8 1.2 4.5 1.0 1.0 0.4 7.2 20.3 ..
10.7 2.2 3.7 1.3 5.3 1.5 1.8 0.4 7.0 22.9 ..
16.0 3.6 2.8 1.6 9.0 3.4 1.6 0.6 12.0 41.8 ..
20.6 2.7 3.1 1.0 7.8 4.0 3.3 0.4 13.3 43.3 ..
26.1 2.5 7.1 1.1 3.2 2.4 7.7 0.2 10.9 31.7 ..
27.2 1.4 4.4 0.8 1.3 1.8 4.9 9.7 32.8 ..
17.3 2.5 3.0 1.5 1.1 0.8 3.7 0.2 10.7 27.5 ..
13.6 2.0 3.6 1.2 0.2 1.1 3.4 9.4 20.4 3.0
5.1 2.4 5.4 1.3 2.3 0.8 4.3 0.1 8.9 6.6 7.0
5.6 2.6 4.9 1.3 4.7 1.1 4.0 0.2 12.2 9.3 7.3
Table B.1.4.
1990 1991
FRANCE, inows of asylum seekers by nationality

Thousands
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Romania China Sri Lanka Turkey Zaire Former Yugoslavia Former USSR Algeria Pakistan India Mauritania Mali Angola Guinea Cambodia Other countries Total
3.3 0.8 2.5 11.8 5.8 0.4 0.3 0.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. 1.1 28.8 54.8
2.4 2.4 3.4 9.7 4.3 0.9 0.4 0.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.9 22.8 47.4
2.2 2.1 4.0 1.8 3.1 2.4 0.4 0.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.7 11.7 28.9
2.7 0.4 2.8 1.3 2.2 2.5 0.2 1.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. 1.0 13.4 27.6
4.0 1.3 1.7 1.3 1.2 1.9 0.1 2.4 0.4 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.6 0.3 0.5 8.0 26.0
4.0 1.6 1.1 1.7 1.2 1.4 0.4 1.8 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.4 4.3 20.4
4.0 1.4 .. 1.2 1.1 0.9 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.4 5.0 17.4
5.1 1.7 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 .. 5.5 21.4
283
OECD 1999
Table B.1.4.
1989
GERMANY, inows of asylum seekers by nationality

Thousands
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Turkey Former Yugoslavia Iraq Afghanistan Sri Lanka Iran Armenia Pakistan Zaire India Bosnia Herzegovina Vietnam Nigeria Togo Lebanon Other countries Total
20.0 19.4 .. 3.7 .. 5.8 .. .. .. .. .. 1.0 .. .. 6.2 65.2 121.3
22.1 22.1 .. 7.3 4.4 7.3 .. .. .. .. .. 9.4 5.4 .. 16.2 98.8 193.1
23.9 74.9 .. 7.3 5.6 8.6 .. .. .. .. .. 8.1 8.4 .. .. 119.3 256.1
28.3 122.7 .. 6.4 .. 3.8 .. .. .. .. 6.2 12.3 .. .. 5.6 252.9 438.2
19.1 74.1 1.2 5.5 3.3 2.7 .. .. .. .. 21.2 11.0 .. 2.9 .. 181.6 322.6
19.1 30.4 2.1 5.6 4.8 3.4 2.1 2.0 .. .. 7.3 3.4 .. 3.5 .. 43.4 127.2
25.5 26.2 6.9 7.5 6.0 3.9 3.4 3.1 2.5 2.7 4.9 2.6 .. .. .. 32.6 127.9
23.8 18.1 10.8 5.7 5.0 4.8 3.5 2.6 3.0 2.8 3.5 1.1 1.7 1.0 1.1 27.9 116.4
16.8 14.8 14.1 4.7 4.0 3.8 2.5 2.3 1.9 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.1 1.1 1.0 31.2 104.4
Table B.1.4.
NETHERLANDS, inows of asylum seekers by nationality

Thousands
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Iraq Afghanistan Former Yugoslavia Former USSR Sri Lanka Somalia Iran China Turkey Sudan Zaire Algeria Liberia Romania Other countries Total
0.4 0.6 0.6 0.2 3.0 1.7 1.7 .. 0.8 .. .. .. 0.2 2.2 9.8 21.2
0.7 0.3 2.7 1.0 1.8 1.7 1.7 .. 0.9 .. .. .. 0.3 1.7 8.7 21.6
0.8 0.4 5.6 0.6 1.0 4.2 1.3 .. 0.7 0.1 .. .. 0.3 1.0 4.3 20.3
3.2 1.5 10.2 1.6 1.9 4.3 2.6 0.9 0.6 0.2 1.3 0.3 0.7 1.1 4.9 35.4
2.9 2.5 13.4 4.5 1.8 5.4 6.1 0.9 0.6 0.3 2.2 1.4 0.4 2.8 7.5 52.6
2.4 1.9 6.1 1.9 1.3 4.0 2.7 0.5 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.3 0.4 5.0 29.3
4.4 3.0 2.0 1.7 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.1 3.9 22.9
9.6 5.9 3.8 2.0 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.1 4.5 34.4
284
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.4.
SWEDEN, inows of asylum seekers by nationality

Thousands
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Iraq Former Yugoslavia Somalia Iran Russian Federation Turkey Afghanistan Syria Lebanon Ethiopia Romania Peru Uganda Cuba Other countries Total
2.0 2.3 2.4 4.3 .. 1.0 .. 1.2 3.6 2.0 2.7 .. .. .. 7.9 29.4
2.2 13.2 1.4 0.3 .. 0.4 .. 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.5 .. .. 7.8 27.4
3.2 69.4 2.7 0.8 .. 0.4 .. 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.8 .. .. 5.6 84.0
2.3 29.0 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.2 2.8 37.6
1.7 10.6 0.9 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 .. .. 0.3 0.3 0.1 1.2 2.4 18.6
1.8 2.4 0.9 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 .. .. 0.1 0.4 0.3 1.9 9.0
1.6 1.1 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 .. .. 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.6 5.8
3.1 3.0 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 .. 1.9 9.6
Table B.1.4.
1988
SWITZERLAND, inows of asylum seekers by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Former Yugoslavia Albania Sri Lanka Turkey Somalia Angola Lebanon Romania Other countries Total
0.8 .. 1.5 9.7 .. .. 0.5 .. 4.2 16.7
1.4 .. 4.8 9.4 .. .. 2.5 .. 6.4 24.4
5.6 .. 4.8 7.3 .. .. 5.5 .. 12.6 35.8
14.2 .. 7.3 4.3 .. .. .. 2.7 13.1 41.6
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 18.0 18.0
12.1 2.0 1.7 1.1 2.3 .. .. .. 5.5 24.7
7.5 .. 1.5 1.1 .. 1.1 .. .. 5.1 16.1
9.0 .. 1.0 1.3 .. 0.5 .. .. 5.2 17.0
7.5 .. 2.0 1.3 0.7 .. .. .. 6.5 18.0
6.9 3.1 2.1 1.4 0.9 0.3 0.2 .. 9.1 24.0
Table B.1.4.
UNITED KINGDOM, inows of asylum seekers by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
Former Yugoslavia Somalia Sri Lanka Former USSR Afghanistan Turkey Pakistan China Poland Nigeria Iraq Algeria India Kenya Zaire Other countries Total (excluding dependents) Total (including dependents)
1.9 1.8 .. 2.4 0.3 .. .. 0.2 0.6 0.5 4.0 11.6 16.8
2.3 3.3 0.1 .. 1.6 1.5 .. .. 0.1 1.0 1.5 0.1 2.6 12.2 26.2 38.2
0.3 2.0 3.8 0.2 .. 2.1 3.2 0.5 .. 0.3 0.9 2.1 0.1 7.0 22.2 44.8 73.4
5.6 1.6 2.1 0.3 0.3 1.9 1.7 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.7 0.2 1.5 0.1 0.9 6.9 24.6 32.3
1.8 1.5 2.0 0.4 0.3 1.5 1.1 0.2 0.2 1.7 0.5 0.3 1.3 0.6 0.6 8.5 22.4 28.0
1.4 1.8 2.4 0.6 0.3 2.0 1.8 0.4 0.4 4.3 0.6 1.0 2.0 1.1 0.8 11.9 32.8 42.2
1.6 3.5 2.1 0.8 0.6 1.8 2.9 0.8 1.2 5.8 0.9 1.9 3.3 1.4 0.9 14.6 44.0 55.0
1.0 1.8 1.3 1.4 0.7 1.5 1.9 0.8 0.9 2.9 1.0 0.7 2.2 1.2 0.7 9.6 29.6 37.0
2.3 2.7 1.8 2.0 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.9 0.6 1.5 1.1 0.7 1.3 0.6 0.7 11.2 32.5 41.5
8.0 4.7 3.5 2.8 2.4 2.0 2.0 1.9 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.0 0.9 0.7 10.6 46.0 58.0
285
OECD 1999
Table B.1.4.
1991
UNITED STATES, inows of asylum seekers by nationality

Thousands
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
El Salvador Guatemala Mexico India Haiti China Former USSR Nicaragua Honduras Philippines Pakistan Mauritania Somalia Ethiopia Bangladesh Other countries Total
63.2 0.4 4.9 54.9 123.5
6.8 43.9 0.6 3.2 5.4 3.5 4.5 2.1 1.1 4.0 3.3 .. 0.2 1.0 1.0 23.3 104.0
14.6 34.2 6.4 5.7 10.9 14.5 0.4 3.2 2.8 4.0 4.5 .. 0.1 1.2 3.8 37.9 144.2
18.6 34.4 9.3 4.5 9.5 10.9 0.1 4.7 4.4 2.4 3.3 .. 0.1 0.9 3.7 39.7 146.5
75.9 23.2 9.7 3.4 2.6 5.0 2.4 1.9 3.2 1.0 2.5 .. 0.2 0.9 1.9 20.8 154.5
65.6 13.9 9.7 4.7 4.4 3.5 2.4 2.0 1.8 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 12.5 128.2
Note: Data refer to scal years (October to September of the given year). For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.1.5.
AUSTRALIA, stock of foreign-born population by country of birth, census results of 1986, 1991 and 1996
Thousands
1986 1991 1996
United Kingdom New Zealand Italy Former Yugoslavia1 Vietnam Greece China2 Germany Philippines Netherlands India Malaysia Lebanon Hong Kong (China) Poland Other and not stated Total % of total population
1 083.1 211.7 261.9 150.0 83.0 137.6 37.5 114.8 33.7 95.1 47.8 47.8 56.3 28.3 67.7 791.0 3 247.4 20.8
1 122.4 276.1 254.8 161.1 122.3 136.3 78.8 114.9 73.7 95.8 61.6 72.6 69.0 59.0 68.9 986.0 3 753.3 22.3
1 072.5 291.4 238.2 175.5 151.1 126.5 111.0 110.3 92.9 87.9 77.5 76.2 70.2 68.4 65.1 1 093.5 3 908.3 21.1
Note: For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. In 1996, data include Croatia (47 000), former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (42 200), Bosnia Herzegovina (13 600), Serbia (9 000), Slovenia (6 700) and former Yugoslavia (57 000) without further description. 2. Excluding Chinese Taipei.
286
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.5.
CANADA, stock of foreign-born population by country of birth, census results of 1986, 1991 and 1996
Thousands
of which: Women
1986 1991 1996 1986 1991 1996
United Kingdom Italy United States Hong Kong (China) India China Poland Philippines Germany Portugal Vietnam Netherlands Former Yugoslavia Jamaica Former USSR Other and not stated Total % of total population
793.1 366.8 282.0 77.4 130.1 119.2 156.8 82.2 189.6 139.6 82.8 134.2 87.8 87.6 109.4 1 069.5 3 908.0 15.4
717.7 351.6 249.1 152.5 173.7 157.4 184.7 123.3 180.5 161.2 113.6 129.6 88.8 102.4 99.4 1 357.4 4 342.9 16.1
655.5 332.1 244.7 241.1 235.9 231.1 193.4 184.6 181.7 158.8 139.3 124.5 122.0 115.8 106.4 1 704.2 4 971.1 17.4
425.8 173.0 160.8 38.7 63.5 62.6 78.0 48.1 80.9 68.6 38.5 64.1 41.7 49.5 56.3 545.6 1 995.7
385.6 165.5 141.4 77.3 84.8 81.5 92.8 73.2 92.8 79.8 53.8 62.4 42.4 58.6 52.0 669.0 2 212.9
352.2 158.0 139.8 124.3 117.0 122.2 100.1 111.7 95.2 79.3 69.7 60.9 59.3 67.3 57.1 851.4 2 565.7
Table B.1.5.
DENMARK, stock of foreign-born population by country of birth

Thousands
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Former Yugoslavia Turkey Germany Sweden Norway Lebanon Iran United Kingdom Poland Pakistan Somalia Vietnam Iraq Sri Lanka United States Other countries Total % of total population
9.3 24.0 21.6 11.9 11.8 10.4 9.6 9.0 9.3 8.4 2.0 6.9 4.1 5.1 5.1 58.9 207.4 4.0
9.5 24.4 21.7 11.9 11.8 10.8 9.8 9.4 9.5 8.5 3.2 7.2 4.9 5.3 5.2 61.7 215.0 4.1
9.7 24.7 21.8 11.8 11.9 10.9 9.9 9.8 9.6 8.7 4.4 7.4 5.5 5.5 5.3 65.1 222.1 4.3
24.2 25.3 21.9 11.9 13.0 11.0 10.0 9.9 9.7 8.9 5.7 7.5 6.3 5.8 5.4 68.1 244.5 4.7
27.6 26.3 22.3 12.9 12.3 11.2 10.3 10.2 9.8 9.1 7.9 7.6 7.2 6.0 5.4 73.0 259.2 4.9
287
OECD 1999
Table B.1.5.
NETHERLANDS, stock of foreign-born population by country of birth

Thousands
of which: Women
1990 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1997
Suriname Turkey Indonesia Morocco Germany Former Yugoslavia Belgium United Kingdom Somalia Iraq United States Iran China Spain France Other countries Total % of total population
162.9 149.5 186.1 122.9 128.7 15.2 42.2 38.3 3.6 1.5 14.7 6.3 11.8 17.3 13.7 302.5 1 217.1 8.1
182.9 166.0 183.7 139.4 129.4 29.7 44.0 44.8 11.9 4.8 17.0 10.8 15.2 17.5 15.3 362.9 1 375.4 9.0
180.9 166.0 180.4 139.8 131.2 37.2 43.2 43.3 14.9 7.4 17.1 12.7 15.2 17.5 15.4 365.3 1 387.4 9.0
181.0 167.5 177.7 140.7 130.1 43.8 43.3 42.3 17.2 10.2 17.4 14.9 16.1 17.4 15.4 372.1 1 407.1 9.1
181.6 169.3 174.8 142.7 128.0 46.1 43.3 41.7 19.8 14.4 17.9 17.3 16.9 17.4 15.8 386.6 1 433.6 9.2
182.2 172.7 172.1 145.8 126.8 46.7 44.0 42.3 20.6 20.4 18.5 18.5 18.0 17.6 16.5 486.4 1 549.0 9.9
97.1 60.9 93.5 64.1 77.0 22.9 25.3 19.5 8.7 7.7 9.3 7.6 9.2 8.4 9.4 226.7 747.1
Table B.1.5.
NORWAY, stock of foreign-born population by country of birth

Thousands
1989 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Sweden Denmark United States United Kingdom Pakistan Bosnia Herzegovina1 Vietnam Germany Iran Former Yugoslavia Sri Lanka Turkey Korea Poland Chile Other countries Total % of total population
18.1 20.5 15.0 14.3 10.5 .. 7.5 8.1 5.2 4.2 4.7 5.0 4.7 4.3 5.5 55.6 183.3 4.3
20.0 20.5 14.7 13.4 11.4 5.1 10.4 8.4 6.9 9.0 6.0 5.9 5.1 5.0 5.3 69.0 216.2 5.0
23.2 21.2 15.4 13.7 11.6 8.1 10.6 9.3 7.1 8.9 6.1 6.0 5.4 5.2 5.2 76.5 233.4 5.4
24.3 20.9 15.2 13.6 11.8 10.8 10.8 9.5 7.1 7.9 6.3 6.1 5.5 5.3 5.2 79.9 240.3 5.5
26.0 20.9 15.0 13.5 12.1 11.1 10.8 9.7 7.3 7.3 6.5 6.3 5.6 5.4 5.2 84.1 246.9 5.6
29.3 21.1 15.0 13.6 12.4 11.1 10.9 10.1 7.7 7.2 6.7 6.6 5.7 5.5 5.3 89.6 257.7 5.8
Note: For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Included in former Yugoslavia in 1989.
288
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.5.
SWEDEN, stock of foreign-born population by country of birth

Thousands
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Finland Former Yugoslavia Iran Bosnia Herzegovina1 Norway Poland Denmark Germany Iraq Chile Lebanon Hungary United States United Kingdom Ethiopia Other countries Total % of total population
209.5 70.5 48.1 .. 47.1 38.5 41.1 36.6 20.2 27.7 21.2 15.0 13.8 12.5 13.2 254.1 869.1 9.9
207.8 112.3 48.7 .. 45.9 39.0 40.9 36.5 23.4 27.2 21.6 14.8 13.7 12.6 13.4 264.3 922.1 10.5
205.7 119.5 49.0 .. 53.9 39.4 40.5 36.5 26.4 27.0 .. 14.7 13.8 12.7 13.4 283.5 936.0 10.5
203.4 72.8 49.2 46.8 43.8 39.5 39.8 36.5 29.0 26.9 21.6 14.7 13.8 13.1 13.4 279.5 943.8 11.0
201.0 70.9 49.8 48.3 42.7 39.6 38.9 36.8 32.7 26.7 21.4 14.5 14.0 13.3 13.3 290.3 954.2 11.0
Note: For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Included in former Yugoslavia until 1995.
Table B.1.5.
UNITED STATES, stock of foreign-born population by place of birth, census results of 1970, 1980 and 1990
Thousands
1970 1980 1990
Mexico Philippines Canada Cuba Germany United Kingdom Italy Korea Vietnam China India Former USSR Poland Dominican Republic Jamaica Other and not stated Total % of total population
759.7 184.8 812.4 439.0 833.0 708.2 1 008.7 88.7 .. 172.2 51.0 463.5 548.1 .. .. 3 550.0 9 619.3 4.7
2 199.2 501.4 842.9 607.8 849.4 669.1 831.9 289.9 231.1 286.1 206.1 406.0 418.1 169.1 196.8 5 375.0 14 079.9 6.2
4 298.0 912.7 744.8 737.0 711.9 640.1 580.6 568.4 543.3 529.8 450.4 398.9 388.3 347.9 334.1 7 581.1 19 767.3 7.9
289
OECD 1999
Table B.1.6.
BELGIUM, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1995
1997 1997
Italy Morocco France Netherlands Turkey Spain Germany United Kingdom Portugal Greece United States Zaire Algeria Poland Tunisia Other countries1 Total of which: EU Total women
252.9 123.6 92.3 59.6 74.2 51.2 24.3 20.8 9.5 19.3 11.0 8.9 10.0 .. 5.9 83.0 846.5 538.1 386.5
241.2 141.7 94.3 65.3 84.9 52.2 27.8 23.3 16.5 20.9 11.7 12.0 10.7 4.9 6.4 90.5 904.5 551.2 417.5
210.7 140.3 100.1 77.2 81.7 48.3 31.8 26.0 23.9 19.9 12.0 12.2 9.5 5.4 5.3 105.6 909.8 554.5 429.7
205.8 132.8 103.6 82.3 73.8 47.4 33.3 26.1 25.3 19.2 12.6 12.1 8.9 6.0 4.7 109.2 903.2 562.1 430.3
92.0 62.0 53.3 36.5 36.7 22.9 16.2 12.0 12.5 8.9 6.4 6.0 4.0 4.0 1.8 55.1 430.3 264.1
Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on 31 December of the years indicated. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Including refugees whose stock is not broken down by nationality. In 1997, 19 700 refugees were registered.
Table B.1.6.
CZECH REPUBLIC, stock of foreign residents by nationality

Thousands
1992 1995 1997
Slovak Republic1 Ukraine Poland Vietnam Russian Federation Bulgaria Germany China United States Romania Austria United Kingdom Former Yugoslavia Other Total
.. .. 12.7 2.6 .. 2.9 1.5 1.4 1.5 0.2 .. .. 2.4 16.1 41.2
39.7 28.2 23.1 14.2 4.4 4.3 5.6 4.2 4.4 1.6 2.2 1.9 4.8 20.0 158.6
52.2 43.4 25.0 21.0 8.9 6.6 5.9 4.5 3.8 2.4 2.3 .. .. 33.8 209.8
Note: Data are from registers of foreigners and refer to the population on 31 December of the years indicated. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. 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.
290
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.6.
DENMARK, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1996
1997 19961
Turkey Former Yugoslavia United Kingdom Norway Somalia Germany Sweden Iraq Pakistan Iran Iceland Poland Sri Lanka Vietnam United States Other countries Total of which: EU2 Total women
20.4 7.9 9.7 9.8 .. 8.2 8.1 0.7 6.6 4.7 3.3 2.2 0.6 3.7 4.3 26.7 117.0 37.3 54.0
29.7 10.0 10.2 10.2 0.6 8.4 8.2 2.8 6.2 9.0 3.0 4.7 5.1 3.7 4.5 44.2 160.6 38.2 75.2
36.8 32.2 12.5 11.5 9.7 11.4 9.4 8.1 6.7 7.0 5.6 5.3 5.4 5.1 5.1 65.8 237.7 48.9 117.3
37.5 33.9 12.8 11.9 11.9 11.9 10.0 9.4 6.9 6.8 5.9 5.5 5.4 5.2 5.2 69.4 249.6 .. ..
18.1 15.6 4.5 6.6 4.4 5.2 5.4 3.5 3.6 3.0 .. .. .. .. 2.3 45.2 117.3 ..
Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on 31 December of the years indicated. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Breakdown by sex is not available for 1997. 2. European Union 15 for all years.
Table B.1.6.
FINLAND, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1995
1997 1997
Former USSR1 Estonia1, 2 Sweden Somalia Former Yugoslavia Iraq Vietnam Germany United Kingdom United States Iran Turkey China Bosnia Herzegovina3 Thailand Other countries Total of which: EU Total women
1.6 .. 4.9 .. .. .. .. 1.6 1.1 1.3 .. .. .. .. .. 6.6 17.0 .. ..
4.2 .. 6.1 .. .. .. .. 1.6 1.3 1.5 0.1 0.2 .. 0.9 .. 11.8 26.6 .. 11.5
15.9 8.4 7.0 4.0 2.4 1.3 2.1 1.7 1.9 1.8 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 0.8 16.4 68.6 13.7 32.8
19.0 9.7 7.5 5.2 2.8 2.4 2.2 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.7 1.7 1.6 0.7 1.0 18.7 80.6 14.9 39.5
11.6 5.8 3.4 2.4 1.2 1.0 1.1 0.7 0.5 0.9 0.7 0.4 0.8 0.8 7.6 39.5 ..
Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Figures include Ingrians (ethnic Finns). 2. Included in former USSR until 1990. 3. Included in former Yugoslavia until 1991.
291
OECD 1999
Table B.1.6.
FRANCE, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1975
1982
1990 1990
Portugal Algeria Morocco Italy Spain Tunisia Turkey Former Yugoslavia Cambodia Poland Senegal Vietnam Laos Other countries Total of which: EU Total women
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 1 381.6
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 1 594.6
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 1 614.3
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. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.1.6.
GERMANY, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women1
1985
1990
1995
1997 1997
Turkey Former Yugoslavia2 Italy Greece Poland Bosnia Herzegovina3 Croatia3 Austria Portugal Spain United Kingdom Iran Netherlands United States France Other countries Total of which: EU4 Total women
1 401.9 591.0 531.3 280.6 104.8 .. .. 172.5 77.0 152.8 88.1 51.3 108.4 85.7 74.8 658.7 4 378.9 1 539.0 1 867.4
1 694.6 662.7 552.4 320.2 242.0 .. .. 183.2 85.5 135.5 96.5 92.2 111.7 92.7 85.1 988.3 5 342.5 1 632.6 2 330.7
2 014.3 797.7 586.1 359.5 276.7 316.0 185.1 184.5 125.1 132.3 112.5 107.0 113.1 108.4 99.1 1 656.5 7 173.9 1 811.7 2 459.8
2 107.4 721.0 607.9 363.2 283.3 281.4 206.6 185.1 132.3 131.6 115.2 113.8 112.8 110.1 103.9 1 790.2 7 365.8 1 850.0 2 571.7
666.0 232.3 191.7 136.7 113.6 99.4 86.4 78.3 46.3 56.3 42.2 34.9 48.6 42.6 52.0 644.5 2 571.7 702.1
292
Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on 31 December of the given year. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Women aged 16 years and over. 2. From 1993 on, Serbia and Montenegro. 3. Included in former Yugoslavia until 1992. 4. European Union 15 for all years (except Swedish citizens before 1991).
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.6.
HUNGARY, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1994
1995
1996
1997 1997
Romania Former Yugoslavia Ukraine Germany China Russian Federation Poland Slovak Republic Greece Vietnam Bulgaria United Kingdom Austria Israel Syria Other Total of which: EU Total women
68.3 14.5 11.1 7.4 3.5 3.7 4.6 3.4 1.4 1.3 1.7 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.7 14.6 137.9 11.8 65.0
65.7 15.5 11.5 7.8 4.3 3.7 4.5 3.5 1.6 1.3 1.6 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.7 16.0 139.9 13.0 65.6
61.6 14.9 12.0 8.3 6.7 4.1 4.3 3.7 1.8 1.6 1.5 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.8 18.5 142.5 14.7 66.1
57.4 16.0 12.2 8.4 7.9 5.4 4.5 3.7 2.0 1.8 1.7 1.1 1.1 1.0 0.9 18.6 143.8 15.9 66.7
26.4 6.7 7.2 5.2 2.8 3.3 1.9 2.6 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.1 7.2 66.7 7.9
Note: Data are from registers of foreigners and refer to the population on 31 December of the years indicated. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.1.6.
ITALY, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1985 1990 1995 1997
Morocco Albania Philippines United States Tunisia Former Yugoslavia1 Germany Romania China Senegal Poland France Sri Lanka United Kingdom Egypt Other countries Total of which: EU
2.6 .. 7.6 51.1 4.4 13.9 37.2 .. 1.6 0.3 .. 23.7 2.5 27.9 7.0 243.1 423.0 ..
78.0 .. 34.3 58.1 41.2 29.8 41.6 7.5 18.7 25.1 17.0 24.4 11.5 26.6 19.8 347.6 781.1 148.6
94.2 34.7 43.4 60.6 40.5 56.1 39.4 24.5 21.5 24.0 22.0 27.3 20.3 27.7 21.9 433.4 991.4 164.0
131.4 83.8 61.3 59.6 48.9 44.4 40.1 38.1 37.8 34.8 31.3 28.3 28.2 26.8 26.2 519.7 1 240.7 168.1
Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Excluding the data for Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Bosnia Herzegovina.
293
OECD 1999
Table B.1.6.
JAPAN, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1985 1990 1995 1997
Korea China1 Brazil Philippines United States Peru Thailand United Kingdom Indonesia Vietnam Canada Iran India Australia Bangladesh Other countries Total
683.3 74.9 2.0 12.3 29.0 0.5 2.6 6.8 1.7 4.1 2.4 .. .. 1.8 .. 5.8 827.2
687.9 150.3 56.4 49.1 38.4 10.3 6.7 10.2 3.6 6.2 4.9 .. .. 4.0 .. 47.3 1 075.3
666.4 223.0 176.4 74.3 43.2 36.3 16.0 12.5 7.0 9.1 7.2 8.6 5.5 6.0 4.9 65.9 1 362.4
645.4 252.2 233.3 93.3 43.7 40.4 20.7 14.4 11.9 11.9 8.8 7.9 7.5 6.9 6.1 78.3 1 482.7
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. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Including Chinese Taipei.
Table B.1.6.
KOREA, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1986 1990 1995 1997 1997
China of which: Chinese with Korean descents United States Chinese Taipei Japan Indonesia Vietnam Philippines Bangladesh Canada Sri Lanka Uzbekistan Thailand Pakistan Germany United Kingdom Other Total of which: EU Total women
8.4 24.8 3.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 3.5 41.6 3.1 ..
0.1 14.0 23.6 5.3 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.8 0.7 3.6 49.5 3.0 22.6
19.2 7.4 22.2 23.3 9.4 3.4 5.7 9.0 2.7 3.0 1.7 0.8 0.5 0.8 1.0 0.9 6.6 110.0 3.6 47.0
35.4 11.8 27.9 23.2 13.7 13.6 13.5 13.1 7.9 4.2 3.7 2.2 1.9 1.7 1.3 1.2 12.4 176.9 4.8 68.8
14.7 4.1 12.9 10.7 8.7 2.6 4.6 5.2 0.0 1.9 1.2 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.4 0.4 4.8 68.8 1.8
Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
294
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.6.
LUXEMBOURG, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1985 1990 1995 1997
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
39.1 19.5 13.0 10.1 8.8 2.5 20.1 113.1
51.5 19.8 15.0 11.8 9.7 2.8 27.5 138.1
54.5 19.9 16.5 13.2 10.0 .. 33.6 147.7
Table B.1.6.
NETHERLANDS, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1995
1997 1997
Morocco Turkey Germany United Kingdom1 Former Yugoslavia Belgium Italy Spain Portugal Greece Tunisia United States Other countries Total of which: EU2 Total women
116.4 156.4 41.0 38.5 11.7 22.8 17.8 19.0 7.5 3.8 2.6 10.5 104.5 552.5 166.4 239.8
156.9 203.5 44.3 39.0 13.5 23.6 16.9 17.2 8.3 4.9 2.6 11.4 150.3 692.4 173.9 311.1
149.8 154.3 53.9 41.1 33.5 24.1 17.4 16.7 9.1 5.4 1.9 12.8 205.4 725.4 191.1 335.4
135.7 114.7 53.9 39.2 28.4 24.4 17.4 16.6 8.7 5.3 1.5 .. 232.3 678.1 190.2 320.8
62.8 55.5 26.7 15.9 13.6 12.8 5.8 7.7 4.0 1.8 0.5 .. 113.7 320.8 87.9
Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Including Hong Kong (China). 2. European Union 15 for all years.
295
OECD 1999
Table B.1.6.
NORWAY, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1996
1997 19961
Sweden Denmark Bosnia Herzegovina2 United Kingdom United States Pakistan Former Yugoslavia Germany Sri Lanka Vietnam Iran Turkey Netherlands Chile India Other countries Total of which: EU3 Total women
10.0 15.7 .. 12.5 10.0 8.4 1.7 3.7 1.0 5.3 0.3 3.4 2.4 1.1 2.3 23.7 101.5 52.9 48.1
11.7 17.2 .. 11.8 9.5 11.4 4.2 4.3 5.2 6.9 5.9 5.5 2.6 5.4 3.5 38.2 143.3 55.9 66.5
17.3 18.1 11.5 10.9 8.7 8.6 6.0 5.1 4.4 4.6 3.8 3.9 3.1 3.2 2.4 45.9 157.5 64.1 79.9
20.6 18.4 11.6 10.8 8.6 7.5 5.7 5.4 3.8 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.2 2.8 2.2 46.8 158.0 69.1 ..
8.1 9.1 5.9 4.5 4.6 4.5 2.7 2.7 2.3 2.3 1.6 1.9 1.5 1.5 1.3 25.5 79.9 33.0
Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Breakdown by sex is not available for 1997. 2. Included in former Yugoslavia until 1992. 3. All gures include the 15 countries of the European Union.
Table B.1.6.
PORTUGAL, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1988
1990
1995
1997 1997
Cape Verde Brazil Angola Guinea-Bissau United Kingdom Spain United States Germany France Mozambique Sao Tome and Principe Venezuela Netherlands China Canada Other countries Total of which: EU Total women
296
27.1 9.3 4.4 3.1 7.1 7.1 6.1 4.1 2.8 2.8 1.7 4.8 1.5 1.0 2.1 9.5 94.7 25.3 ..
28.8 11.4 5.3 4.0 8.5 7.5 6.9 4.8 3.2 3.2 2.0 5.1 1.8 1.2 2.1 11.9 107.8 28.8 ..
38.7 19.9 15.8 12.3 11.5 8.9 8.5 7.4 4.7 4.4 4.1 4.5 2.7 2.2 2.4 20.3 168.3 41.5 69.9
39.8 20.0 16.3 12.8 12.3 8.8 8.4 8.3 5.4 4.4 4.3 3.8 3.1 2.4 2.2 22.8 175.3 46.0 73.1
15.8 9.2 6.5 3.4 5.7 4.7 3.6 3.6 2.6 2.0 2.1 1.3 1.4 0.8 0.9 9.6 73.1
Note: Figures include all foreigners who hold a valid residence permit. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.6.
SPAIN, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1985 1990 1995 1997
Morocco United Kingdom Germany Portugal France Italy Peru Dominican Republic Argentina China Netherlands United States Philippines Cuba Belgium Other countries Total of which: EU
5.8 39.1 28.5 23.3 17.8 10.3 1.7 1.2 9.7 1.6 10.9 12.2 6.2 5.0 7.4 61.2 242.0 143.5
11.4 55.5 31.2 22.8 19.7 10.8 2.6 1.5 12.1 2.8 11.7 11.0 5.1 3.5 8.2 68.9 278.8 164.6
74.9 65.3 41.9 37.0 30.8 19.8 15.1 14.5 18.4 9.2 13.0 14.9 9.7 .. 8.9 126.6 499.8 235.6
111.1 68.3 49.9 38.2 34.3 22.6 21.2 20.4 17.2 15.8 14.5 13.3 11.4 10.5 10.5 150.7 609.8 260.6
Note: Numbers of foreigners with a residence permit. Data refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.1.6.
SWEDEN, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1995
1997 1997
Finland Former Yugoslavia Norway Iran Denmark Iraq Turkey Poland Germany Chile United Kingdom United States Iceland Greece Italy 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 3.4 9.4 4.0 58.0 388.6 192.7
119.7 41.1 38.2 39.0 28.6 7.7 25.5 15.7 13.0 19.9 10.1 8.0 5.3 6.5 4.0 101.4 483.7 237.5
104.9 38.4 32.3 29.3 26.5 21.3 20.3 16.0 13.4 13.0 11.2 9.2 4.9 4.6 4.0 182.5 531.8 256.5
101.3 33.6 31.0 26.2 25.4 24.8 18.4 15.8 14.4 11.9 11.7 9.4 4.5 4.4 4.1 215.1 552.0 263.9
56.4 16.2 16.2 12.8 10.9 11.0 9.3 10.8 6.8 5.6 4.0 4.2 2.2 1.7 1.3 94.5 263.9
297
OECD 1999
Table B.1.6.
SWITZERLAND, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1995
1997 1997
Italy Former Yugoslavia Portugal Germany Spain Turkey France Austria United Kingdom Netherlands United States Belgium Greece Vietnam Sweden Other countries Total of which: EU Total women
392.5 69.5 30.9 81.0 108.4 50.9 47.1 29.2 15.4 10.8 9.1 4.8 8.7 6.8 3.8 70.8 939.7 702.7 419.1
378.7 140.7 85.6 83.4 116.1 64.2 50.0 28.8 16.7 11.9 9.7 5.6 8.3 7.2 4.6 88.7 1 100.3 760.2 483.7
358.9 294.2 134.8 90.9 101.4 78.6 53.6 28.1 18.4 13.6 11.4 6.3 7.1 6.1 5.1 121.9 1 330.6 824.9 608.7
342.3 313.5 136.3 94.7 94.0 79.6 55.0 28.0 18.3 13.9 11.6 6.6 6.4 5.1 5.0 130.7 1 340.8 807.1 620.2
147.0 147.1 65.4 43.3 42.6 36.7 26.1 12.3 7.9 6.6 5.5 3.2 2.8 2.5 2.6 68.5 620.2 368.6
Table B.1.6.
UNITED KINGDOM, stock of foreign population by country or region of nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985 1990 1995 1998 1998
Ireland India United States Central and Eastern Europe1 Western Africa Italy Caribbean and Guyana Germany France Pakistan Bangladesh Turkey Australia Eastern Africa Jamaica Other countries Total of which: EU Total women
569 138 86 68 43 83 135 36 27 49 41 .. 28 28 .. 400 1 731 796 ..
478 156 102 58 37 75 82 41 38 56 38 12 44 39 .. 467 1 723 731 910
443 114 110 75 87 80 82 51 60 81 53 29 47 40 46 550 1 948 902 1 036
448 139 120 100 90 89 79 75 74 69 69 63 50 47 43 652 2 207 857 1 163
252 76 68 58 43 39 45 43 43 35 39 26 25 25 23 323 1 163 473
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. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Including former USSR.
298
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.6.
UNITED STATES, stock of foreign population by country of birth

Thousands
1990
Mexico Philippines El Salvador Cuba Canada Korea United Kingdom Vietnam China India Dominican Republic Japan Jamaica Colombia Germany Other Total
3 328.3 420.5 393.9 361.0 341.9 337.5 322.3 311.5 296.4 293.2 252.0 208.3 205.9 203.3 199.9 4 294.4 11 770.3
Note: Data are from 1990 population census and refer to the foreign population born overseas. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.1.7.
1989
AUSTRALIA, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
United Kingdom China New Zealand Vietnam Former Yugoslavia1 Philippines India Iraq Bosnia Herzegovina Sri Lanka Fiji South Africa United States Lebanon Cambodia Others Total
42 2 6 9 3 5 1 2 3 3 1 35
883 911 995 815 999 024 547 .. .. 113 .. 211 .. 115 798 729
39 3 7 8 4 9 1 2 3 4 1 41
495 342 538 256 726 504 933 .. .. 516 .. 029 .. 090 686 742
36 1 6 6 3 9 1 2 2 3 4 38
488 743 562 723 679 275 960 .. .. 576 .. 569 .. 405 584 946
41 5 8 9 3 6 2 2 2 2 1 39
963 018 502 697 487 763 130 .. .. 003 .. 006 .. 585 259 745
39 4 9 12 2 6 2 2 1 2 35
876 872 772 406 972 633 645 .. .. 104 .. 781 .. 976 577 471
36 5 7 10 3 6 2 1 2 1 1 2 30
401 242 786 713 043 600 836 .. .. 691 018 595 634 122 .. 505
36 5 9 7 3 5 3 1 2 1 1 1 35
134 971 033 772 534 408 107 .. .. 730 204 324 912 392 .. 236
35 4 11 7 5 4 2 1 1 1 2 1 32
431 250 724 741 188 021 638 .. .. 644 815 262 272 105 .. 546
27 16 9 5 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 28
294 173 982 083 207 815 563 591 637 620 721 578 701 076 149 076
23 21 8 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 27
080 053 764 685 088 688 358 877 728 049 934 880 565 364 233 997
119 140
127 857
118 510
125 158
122 085
112 186
114 757
111 637
108 266
112 343
Note: For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Excluding Bosnia Herzegovina from 1997 on.
299
OECD 1999
Table B.1.7.
AUSTRIA, acquisition of nationality by country or region of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Turkey Former Yugoslavia Central and Eastern Europe Germany Others Total
1 1 1 2
509 731 985 125 883
723 2 323 1 664 886 2 874 8 470
1 106 2 641 2 118 517 2 817 9 199
1 809 3 221 2 413 455 3 496 11 394
1 994 4 337 1 839 410 3 340 11 920
2 688 5 791 1 858 406 3 659 14 402
3 379 5 623 2 672 328 4 268 16 270
3 209 4 538 2 588 202 4 772 15 309
7 499 3 133 2 083 140 3 388 16 243
5 068 3 671 2 898 164 4 473 16 274
8 233
Note: Figures include naturalisations granted to persons living abroad. For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.1.7.
1991
BELGIUM, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Morocco Turkey Italy Algeria France Zaire Tunisia Spain Netherlands Greece Poland China India Lebanon Former Yugoslavia Others Total
2 091 879 762 191 514 185 96 110 217 104 151 64 179 58 211 2 645 8 457
6 862 3 886 22 362 932 2 179 454 486 1 795 1 179 940 237 113 165 103 386 4 289 46 368
5 500 3 305 1 431 543 532 410 416 196 222 170 174 101 119 81 353 2 823 16 376
8 638 6 273 2 326 714 618 474 573 281 335 312 239 181 159 158 417 4 089 25 787
9 146 6 572 2 096 780 608 452 537 246 336 294 176 170 148 137 416 4 015 26 129
7 912 6 609 1 940 556 539 442 406 261 259 253 175 166 158 150 .. 4 755 24 581
Note: Data cover all means of acquiring the nationality. From 1992 on, following a change in nationality law a signicant number of foreigners where granted Belgian nationality. For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.1.7.
CANADA, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Hong Kong (China) Poland Philippines China India United Kingdom Sri Lanka Lebanon Iran Vietnam El Salvador Jamaica United States Portugal Somalia Stateless and others Total
300
2 2 2 2 2 7 1 3 1 1 1 2 25
888 808 525 736 456 710 570 880 185 469 081 763 223 189 .. 327
3 3 3 3 3 11 1 1 1 5 2 2 1 2
502 674 235 995 284 015 034 750 621 884 111 574 999 871 .. 38 929
556 853 932 574 893 908 645 518 462 527 883 509 729 084 .. 44 194 104 267
5 5 3 4 3 8 2 2 2 8 2 3 1 3
9 6 5 4 4 11 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 3
845 270 988 982 297 257 609 925 214 744 677 604 521 122 .. 50 575
347 155 776 706 946 131 164 992 329 623 014 122 266 093 271 48 266 116 201
13 7 6 4 4 9 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3
11 11 9 7 6 10 2 6 3 3 3 3 4 3
717 528 388 777 306 012 848 772 229 833 140 341 334 937 567 61 841
17 16 11 14 8 12 5 15 5 5 5 4 5 4 2 82
109 384 508 228 953 620 768 875 124 223 314 159 244 797 420 594
14 14 12 12 11 11 10 9 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 92
978 011 953 878 677 173 154 802 457 426 943 258 812 464 925 809
58 810
87 478
118 630
150 570
217 320
227 720
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.7.
DENMARK, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Turkey Iran Sri Lanka Former Yugoslavia Iraq Lebanon Pakistan Sweden Germany Norway Poland Vietnam Morocco United Kingdom Others Total
437 23 19 117 14 16 394 189 240 175 166 650 181 118 1 005 3 744
195 21 14 133 9 12 611 143 175 158 120 583 109 121 854 3 258
107 73 19 130 20 16 433 131 167 188 152 501 114 106 871 3 028
376 989 84 128 181 44 551 163 231 165 317 568 202 133 1 352 5 484
502 1 083 179 78 236 109 265 177 158 174 278 209 167 109 1 380 5 104
560 710 370 138 241 234 192 188 134 164 219 169 168 85 1 465 5 037
915 491 515 806 166 237 203 154 140 163 151 125 136 94 854 4 296
797 531 635 413 177 216 145 149 118 143 175 137 122 82 1 420 5 260
917 829 765 629 339 314 220 135 126 151 237 200 201 98 2 122 7 283
1 036 553 376 291 244 160 149 144 138 132 130 126 110 96 1 797 5 482
Table B.1.7.
FINLAND, acquisition of nationality by country or region of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Europe of which: Former USSR Nordic countries Asia Africa North America South America Oceania Stateless and unknown Total
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
365 198 111 328 120 5 30 1 132 981
509 254 106 489 180 6 46 2 207 1 439
301
OECD 1999
Table B.1.7.
FRANCE, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 19941 19951 19961 19971
Morocco Algeria Tunisia Portugal Turkey Cambodia Vietnam Lebanon Former Yugoslavia Laos Italy Poland Haiti Cameroon Spain Others Total2 Total (estimates)3
4 3 2 7 1 2 1 1 3 1 4 12
435 256 347 984 690 511 012 .. 015 294 081 298 .. .. 460 968
5 4 2 7 1 2 1 1 2 1 3 15
393 070 538 027 921 724 478 .. 249 305 576 587 .. .. 320 142
7 5 3 6 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 14
741 355 076 876 914 827 326 287 405 468 869 446 626 618 868 664
289 631 375 126 124 729 139 390 367 343 475 230 714 625 2 317 15 781 59 655 95 500
10 6 4 7 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1
292 410 991 575 296 701 888 508 400 305 117 873 678 707 1 528 14 977 59 246 95 300
12 7 4 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
131 909 370 233 515 847 775 568 652 187 936 755 744 729 1 385 14 271 60 007 95 500
13 7 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1
22 10 9 6 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 20
676 868 248 908 197 319 660 445 278 991 370 047 351 271 514 939
249 499 182 775 143 445 950 689 499 496 022 892 962 809 780 16 492 61 884 92 410
12 9 4 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1
15 13 5 4 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1
452 218 109 644 447 950 773 390 722 647 255 164 202 973 924 21 108
16 13 5 4 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
365 488 420 997 977 896 432 104 549 539 353 270 174 027 885 23 200
46 351 74 000
49 330 82 000
54 366 88 500
93 082 126 337
79 978 109 823
83 676 116 194
Note: For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. From 1994 onwards, data broken down by nationality include children acquiring French nationality as a consequence of the parents naturalisation. 2. 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. 3. Data include estimates of people acquiring French nationality upon reaching legal majority until 1993 as well as the number of people born in France to foreign parents who declared their intention to become French in accordance with the legislation of 22 July 1993.
Table B.1.7.
1988
GERMANY, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Kazakhstan1 Russian federation1 Turkey Former USSR Romania Poland Former Yugoslavia Italy Austria Others
1 4 10 13 2 6
.. .. 243 810 881 958 119 618 756 398
1 13 11 24 2 13
.. .. 713 557 868 882 076 548 659 223
2 33 14 32 2 16
.. .. 034 339 410 340 082 437 537 198
3 55 29 27 2 21
.. .. 529 620 011 646 832 679 793 520
7 84 37 20 2 1 25
.. .. 377 660 574 248 326 218 959 542
12 105 28 15 5 1 29
.. .. 915 801 346 435 241 154 810 741
19 43 17 11 4 1 160
.. .. 590 086 968 943 374 417 772 020
101 60 31 35 12 10 3 1
000 000 578 477 028 174 623 281 493 57 952
94 60 46 21 9 7 2 1
961 662 294 457 777 872 967 297 605 56 938
88 62 40 8 8 5 2 1
583 641 396 966 668 763 244 176 582 52 754
Total naturalisations 40 783 of which: naturalisations by discretionary decision 16 660

Note:
1.
68 526 17 742
101 377 20 237
141 630 27 295
179 904 37 042
199 443 44 950
259 170 26 295
313 606 31 888
302 830 37 604
271 773 37 534
Data include naturalisations on the basis of a claim, which concern essentially ethnic Germans. For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. Including in former USSR until 1994.
302
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.7.
HUNGARY, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
Romania Former Yugoslavia Former USSR Other Total
2 568 222 228 152 3 170
5 274 12 271 336 5 893
20 480 153 788 459 21 880
10 589 272 567 378 11 805
6 943 852 1 585 525 9 905
7 055 1 132 1 182 651 10 021
8 549 1 999 1 227 491 12 266
5 229 1 610 788 1 030 8 658
3 842 1 082 713 799 6 435
Table B.1.7.
ITALY, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Romania Switzerland Morocco Dominican Republic Brazil Former USSR Poland Argentina Albania Iran Philippines Egypt Vietnam Other countries Total
112 335 126 89 128 112 228 278 113 164 222 80 2 555 4 542
194 385 141 133 123 179 211 432 64 169 152 154 2 071 4 408
446 472 235 245 175 325 262 570 95 222 246 115 3 077 6 485
521 423 295 375 225 260 211 392 73 139 169 88 3 442 6 613
577 638 333 390 191 435 313 286 131 177 223 243 3 505 7 442
639 514 323 468 215 2821 302 260 198 168 162 228 162 3 040 6 961
811 768 586 544 131 1061 96 73 72 39 32 28 23 5 928 9 237
Note: For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Russian Federation.
Table B.1.7.
1988
JAPAN, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Korea China Others 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
9 898 3 976 621 14 495
9 678 4 729 654 15 061
303
OECD 1999
Table B.1.7.
LUXEMBOURG, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Italy France Belgium Germany Netherlands Others Total
162 126 105 104 29 236 762
113 98 78 84 31 200 604
191 106 79 97 30 245 748
123 75 76 54 11 243 582
147 75 86 68 13 220 609
151 89 63 78 18 279 678
169 71 75 64 16 344 739
209 78 67 70 15 363 802
193 85 65 55 20 361 779
192 79 64 60 17 337 749
Note: Minor children acquiring nationality as a consequence of the naturalisation of their parents are excluded. For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.1.7.
NETHERLANDS, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Turkey Morocco Suriname Former Yugoslavia United Kingdom Germany1 Egypt Italy Portugal Greece Belgium Spain France Stateless Others Total
820 1 190 830 110 860 270 .. 90 70 40 110 50 30 400 4 240 9 110
3 280 6 830 3 570 520 1 880 670 .. 150 220 90 250 100 100 510 10 560 28 730
1 950 3 030 1 640 240 620 190 20 50 120 40 100 40 30 270 4 450 12 790
6 110 7 300 4 010 520 900 380 30 90 140 60 140 60 50 360 8 960 29 110
11 7 5 1
520 990 120 060 670 380 30 90 110 80 160 60 70 210 8 690
18 7 4 2
000 750 990 090 490 330 350 100 130 90 120 50 60 180 8 340
23 8 5 1
870 110 390 880 460 310 540 140 140 80 110 90 70 170 8 090
33 13 3 1
060 480 990 700 820 500 810 200 190 150 170 120 110 610 15 530
30 15 4 2 1
700 600 450 240 170 780 1 080 280 300 250 290 160 160 820 24 420
21 10 3 2
190 480 020 830 690 560 550 330 300 230 180 140 120 680 18 530
36 240
43 070
49 450
71 440
82 700
59 830
Note: For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Western Germany until 1989, Germany as a whole from 1990 onwards.
Table B.1.7.
NORWAY, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Pakistan Vietnam Turkey Iran Former Yugoslavia Chile Philippines China Morocco Poland India Sweden Denmark United Kingdom Colombia Others Total
304
428 457 281 10 109 105 203 31 111 105 141 75 144 65 131 968 3 364
582 940 280 23 160 127 219 51 124 332 131 117 200 100 211 1 025 4 622
899 1 039 304 15 111 106 294 48 128 264 149 72 156 96 199 877 4 757
778 1 082 474 39 140 82 235 76 280 234 166 103 108 93 270 895 5 055
1 054 931 238 72 201 81 298 95 299 215 220 108 108 107 221 884 5 132
664 746 393 317 274 117 213 149 275 265 242 153 119 106 217 1 288 5 538
616 710 752 1 287 659 310 243 148 257 275 251 150 187 136 204 2 593 8 778
997 727 793 1 419 754 923 343 235 248 374 346 130 102 110 143 4 134 11 778
1 530 1 446 836 1 154 554 531 315 383 318 267 313 112 91 162 144 4 081 12 237
1 583 1 276 837 834 520 416 360 348 294 282 274 167 143 142 130 4 431 12 037
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.1.7.
SPAIN, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Argentina Dominican Republic Peru Morocco Philippines Portugal Colombia Cuba Chile Uruguay Brazil China Guinea-Bissau Venezuela India Others Total
806 .. 209 3 091 236 584 .. 285 487 .. .. .. .. 220 .. 2 219 8 137
732 .. 154 2 122 192 404 .. 144 342 .. .. .. .. 136 .. 1 692 5 918
1 096 156 242 1 675 318 496 260 163 440 266 .. .. .. 237 .. 1 684 7 033
639 105 136 427 188 234 174 119 249 147 .. .. .. 139 .. 1 195 3 752
944 146 212 597 283 447 247 146 344 187 .. .. .. 183 .. 1 544 5 280
1 532 298 246 986 380 424 433 .. 725 268 .. .. .. 373 .. 2 747 8 412
1 690 393 468 897 340 503 383 172 335 246 .. 106 118 211 129 1 811 7 802
1 314 499 658 785 281 372 364 169 317 217 .. 74 118 130 111 1 347 6 756
1 387 833 1 150 687 455 452 457 250 425 260 128 109 183 133 128 1 396 8 433
1 1 1 1
368 257 159 056 583 524 478 442 428 279 217 180 .. .. .. 2 338
10 309
Note: Persons recovering their former (Spanish) nationality are not included. For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.1.7.
SWEDEN, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Former Yugoslavia Finland Turkey Chile Poland Denmark Norway Germany Greece United Kingdom Spain Others Total
1 197 4 294 1 173 633 2 260 542 512 209 478 161 75 6 432 17 966
1 318 4 611 832 667 1 397 574 671 188 669 135 73 6 417 17 552
1 152 3 532 832 663 1 205 397 480 130 457 102 62 7 758 16 770
832 208 358 323 309 407 539 169 783 143 74 14 518 27 663
2 4 1 1 1
969 805 569 305 294 418 445 141 377 138 49 15 816 29 326
3 3 1 1 1
940 070 201 762 164 283 291 155 464 101 34 20 194 42 659
10 3 4 1 1
352 974 742 446 998 345 450 137 244 107 38 19 251 35 084
6 2 2 1
3 550 2 125 2 836 946 895 318 363 128 140 96 33 20 563 31 993
2 416 2 009 2 030 707 636 272 276 154 113 90 23 16 826 25 552
6 052 1 882 1 402 545 523 296 186 117 68 60 20 17 716 28 867
Table B.1.7.
1988
SWITZERLAND, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Italy Former Yugoslavia Turkey France Germany Spain Portugal Former CSFR United Kingdom Austria Hungary Netherlands Others Total
2 558 556 189 979 1 799 613 135 462 247 676 270 226 2 646 11 356
2 479 528 238 1 025 1 404 560 160 344 183 579 277 149 2 416 10 342
1 995 552 211 684 1 144 401 170 352 141 431 202 153 2 222 8 658
1 802 607 333 677 971 408 146 362 135 478 186 111 2 541 8 757
1 930 936 614 809 1 099 353 101 338 307 465 223 90 3 943 11 208
2 778 1 454 820 862 890 319 89 415 347 413 207 76 4 258 12 928
3 258 1 821 966 935 657 305 119 370 263 256 243 57 4 507 13 757
4 376 2 491 1 205 871 706 432 175 385 278 261 297 52 5 266 16 795
167 783 432 045 675 453 262 465 299 248 278 55 6 213 19 375
5 2 1 1
4 982 2 956 1 814 985 644 481 291 272 269 223 206 71 5 976 19 170
305
OECD 1999
Table B.1.7.
UNITED KINGDOM, acquisition of nationality by country or region of former nationality

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Africa Europe EEA (excluding Ireland) Ireland Other European countries Middle East and Turkey America North America West Indies Other American countries British Dependent Territories citizens Oceania Others Total Acquisitions of nationality in Hong Kong (China)
7 452 5 475 2 177 100 3 198 5 000 4 828 2 100 1 900 828 1 900 1 452 19 684 45 791 41 800
7 877 5 165 2 058 100 3 007 5 000 4 531 2 000 1 800 731 2 200 1 539 17 721 44 033 5 900
7 940 4 615 1 755 200 2 660 4 200 4 096 1 800 1 600 696 2 000 1 666 15 999 40 516 25 700
9 162 4 650 1 722 100 2 828 4 400 4 266 1 900 .. 2 366 2 100 1 542 16 949 43 069 5 500
8 018 4 330 1 546 85 2 699 3 951 3 544 1 646 1 213 685 2 225 1 443 13 499 37 010 3 406
Table B.1.7.
UNITED STATES, acquisition of nationality by country or region of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Mexico Cuba Vietnam Philippines Former USSR El Salvador China India Dominican Republic Colombia Korea Haiti Jamaica Africa United Kingdom Others Total
22 11 21 24 5 2 10 9 5 5 13 2 6 7 7 87
085 228 636 580 304 291 509 983 842 021 012 350 441 122 042 617
18 9 19 24 3 2 11 9 6 4 11 3 6 7 7 87
520 514 357 802 020 001 664 833 454 736 301 692 455 209 865 354
17 10 22 25 2 2 13 11 5 5 10 5 6 8 8 113
564 291 027 936 847 410 563 499 984 540 500 009 762 770 286 113
22 9 29 33 2 3 16 12 6 5 12 4 6 10 9 121
066 554 603 714 822 653 783 961 368 513 266 436 838 230 935 316
12 7 18 28 1 2 13 13 8 6 8 3 6 9 7 90
880 763 357 579 648 056 488 413 464 439 297 993 765 628 800 682
23 15 22 33 2 3 16 16 12 9 9 5 7 11 10 113
630 109 427 864 763 057 851 506 274 976 611 202 976 293 158 984
39 15 26 37 6 4 20 20 11 12 11 7 12 15 15 149
310 896 833 304 708 998 828 454 399 067 389 982 173 327 003 727
67 16 28 33 16 11 20 17 9 12 14 7 10 17 14 147
238 994 074 634 172 505 009 880 892 333 170 855 949 020 143 985
217 62 47 45 36 33 30 28 27 26 24 24 24 21 20 374
418 168 625 210 265 240 656 932 293 115 693 556 270 842 052 354
242 063
233 777
270 101
308 058
240 252
314 681
407 398
445 853
1 044 689
306
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.2.1.
AUSTRALIA, immigrant labour force by place of birth, selected years

Thousands
of which: Women
1986 1991 1996 1998 1998
Europe United Kingdom and Ireland Italy Former Yugoslavia Germany Greece Netherlands Poland Malta Others Asia Vietnam China1 Philippines India Malaysia Others New Zealand America North Africa and the Middle Lebanon Others Other and not stated Total % of total labour force East2
1 319.2 670.2 153.0 106.6 69.9 86.4 62.9 28.9 28.1 113.2 267.5 .. .. .. .. .. 267.5 138.1 55.4 93.6 23.6 70.0 26.7 1 900.5 25.4
1 342.4 703.6 139.5 109.7 70.4 81.2 55.8 .. .. 182.2 342.7 60.6 59.3 44.2 40.0 43.4 95.2 187.8 76.1 94.4 37.0 57.4 138.9 2 182.3 25.7
1 220.8 660.1 95.5 110.2 59.8 59.7 45.0 .. .. 190.5 428.2 82.9 55.5 55.9 48.8 50.8 134.3 208.6 96.7 103.7 35.3 68.4 180.8 2 238.8 24.6
1 209.2 667.7 105.4 98.0 59.9 59.2 43.6 .. .. 175.4 490.3 100.0 70.4 67.2 61.5 47.7 143.5 219.1 102.7 89.1 32.6 56.5 183.5 2 293.9 24.8
482.9 278.7 34.9 36.3 24.6 20.9 16.7 .. .. 70.8 224.6 39.9 29.5 41.5 24.3 21.9 67.5 91.1 45.8 27.1 9.2 17.9 73.6 945.1 23.5
Note: For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Excluding Chinese Taipei. 2. Africa (excluding North Africa) in 1986.
Table B.2.1.
CANADA, immigrant labour force by place of birth, 1991 census results

Thousands
1991
United Kingdom Italy United States India Germany Portugal Hong Kong (China) China Poland Netherlands Other countries Total % of total labour force
422 214 144 127 115 111 96 90 89 82 1 191 2 681 18.5
307
OECD 1999
Table B.2.1.
UNITED STATES, immigrant labour force by place of birth, census results of 1990
Thousands
Mexico Philippines Cuba Germany Canada United Kingdom Korea China El Salvador India Vietnam Italy Jamaica Dominican Republic Colombia Other countries Total % of total labour force
2 630.9 629.0 459.2 378.3 371.8 349.4 328.7 313.6 308.8 308.6 303.7 266.0 232.3 195.4 192.5 4 296.4 11 564.6 9.4
Table B.2.2.
AUSTRIA, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
Of which: Women
1988 19901 1995 1998 1998
Former Yugoslavia Turkey Bosnia Herzegovina2 Croatia3 Poland Hungary Romania Slovenia Czech Republic Slovak Republic Former Yug. Rep. of Macedonia2 China4 Bulgaria Philippines India Other countries Total Total women Total including foreign unemployed5
83.1 34.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 33.6 150.9 57.9 160.9
110.5 50.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 56.5 217.6 76.4 236.0
108.0 55.7 22.8 16.0 10.8 9.6 9.3 5.8 3.6 2.9 1.9 2.0 1.5 2.1 1.8 15.9 269.7 89.5 325.2
79.2 49.3 32.2 22.4 8.8 8.7 7.8 6.1 4.0 4.0 3.8 1.6 1.2 1.2 1.1 9.3 240.5 81.8 ..
33.5 12.9 11.8 8.1 2.3 1.8 2.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.3 2.4 81.8 ..
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. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Data not corrected (data for Table A.2.3. have been corrected. See the note attached to the series). 2. Included in Former Yugoslavia until 1993. 3. Included in Former Yugoslavia until 1991. 4. Including Chinese Taipei. 5. From 1994 on, data on employed foreigners are stock of workers registered with Social Security ofces (including EEA nationals).
308
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.2.2.
BELGIUM, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1995
1996
1997 1997
Italy France Morocco Netherlands Spain Turkey Others Total of which: EU
90.5 37.2 44.7 32.6 23.3 19.6 80.4 328.3 225.7
107.8 40.2 36.2 34.5 19.8 22.3 80.9 341.7 254.2
96.9 40.4 38.5 35.8 20.9 19.1 81.4 333.0 249.5
32.5 16.0 8.4 11.7 8.1 5.0 30.3 111.9 88.9
Table B.2.2.
DENMARK, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1995
1996 1996
Turkey United Kingdom Former Yugoslavia Germany Norway Sweden Iceland Pakistan Finland Other countries Total of which: EU Total women
10.1 5.9 4.2 4.8 5.7 4.7 1.4 2.5 1.1 16.1 56.5 14.8 23.6
12.8 6.2 4.9 5.1 5.8 4.6 1.3 2.2 1.0 25.0 68.8 16.7 28.3
13.5 7.2 6.3 5.9 6.0 5.0 2.3 2.4 1.0 34.2 83.8 26.5 35.2
13.6 7.5 7.3 6.2 6.2 5.2 2.7 2.4 1.0 35.9 88.0 21.5 37.0
5.2 2.2 2.9 2.5 3.5 2.9 1.2 0.9 0.7 14.9 37.0 ..
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). For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.2.2.
FRANCE, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1995
1998 1998
Portugal Algeria Morocco Spain Tunisia Turkey Italy Former Yugoslavia Poland Other countries Total of which: EU1 Total women
456.8 279.0 186.4 117.8 75.1 41.6 125.9 44.1 14.2 308.3 1 649.2 771.6 495.8
428.5 248.5 168.1 108.5 74.7 53.9 96.9 29.6 15.1 325.6 1 549.5 716.2 484.7
375.0 245.6 197.5 82.1 81.0 66.4 76.6 32.3 7.1 409.6 1 573.3 629.1 553.6
316.0 241.6 229.6 88.2 84.4 79.0 72.9 30.0 12.6 432.5 1 586.7 575.5 587.4
140.5 84.0 68.7 31.4 22.4 22.3 21.5 13.0 6.5 176.9 587.4 232.3
Note: Data are derived from the Labour Force Survey and refer to the month of March. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. European Union 12 for all years.
309
OECD 1999
Table B.2.2.
GERMANY, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1995
1997 1997
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
680.2 339.0 199.8 117.8 45.5 66.3 576.5 2 025.1 668.6
752.0 468.9 245.1 139.4 58.1 56.4 849.4 2 569.2 873.8
745.2 348.0 246.5 134.2 58.9 52.5 936.5 2 521.9 863.3
232.9 131.3 70.9 52.2 20.9 19.9 335.2 863.3
Note: Data are for 30 September of each year and include cross-border workers but not the self-employed. Data cover only western Germany for all years. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.2.2.
HUNGARY, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
1990 1995 1998
Romania China Slovak Republic Former USSR Poland Former Yugoslavia Vietnam Other Total
26.2 .. .. 3.0 .. .. .. 2.5 31.7
9.8 2.6 0.7 1.4 1.4 0.9 0.2 4.0 21.0
10.6 2.8 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.3 5.2 22.4
Table B.2.2.
ITALY, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1991 1995 1995
Morocco Philippines Tunisia Albania Former Yugoslavia Senegal Sri Lanka China Egypt Ghana Poland Somalia India Pakistan Ethiopia Other countries Total Total women
310
46.4 24.6 21.3 14.8 12.5 12.3 7.4 9.0 10.1 6.0 3.7 3.4 3.0 2.9 3.4 104.6 285.3 83.6
47.9 27.7 19.5 18.2 17.7 13.6 11.5 10.0 9.7 7.6 5.2 4.3 4.1 3.3 3.3 128.4 332.2 111.2
5.2 19.0 1.4 2.5 4.0 0.3 3.7 3.2 0.4 2.0 3.0 3.1 0.6 0.0 2.5 60.3 111.2
Note: Figures refer to number of foreigners with a valid work permit (including the self-employed). Data exclude unemployed. EU citizens do not need a work permit. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.2.2.
JAPAN, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
1992 1995 1997
China1 Philippines United States Korea United Kingdom Canada Australia India France Germany Other Total
17.1 21.3 18.3 5.5 5.2 3.3 2.0 1.3 1.3 1.3 8.8 85.5
23.3 13.7 17.5 6.4 5.6 4.1 2.4 1.7 1.4 1.3 10.6 88.0
29.7 20.3 17.8 6.9 6.8 5.0 3.0 2.5 1.6 1.5 12.1 107.3
Note: Foreigners whose activity is restricted according to the Immigration Act (revised in 1990). For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Including Chinese Taipei.
Table B.2.2.
LUXEMBOURG, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
1985 1990 1995 1997
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
21.2 22.8 14.6 9.1 8.5 1.2 1.0 6.3 84.7 79.8 29.4
33.2 27.3 19.6 12.7 7.7 1.7 1.0 8.6 111.8 105.4 39.9
39.7 28.3 22.4 14.6 7.7 1.5 1.0 9.6 124.8 118.0 44.8
Note: Data are for 1 October of each year and cover foreigners in employment, including apprentices, trainees and cross-border workers. The unemployed are not included. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.2.2.
NETHERLANDS, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1995
1997 1997
Morocco Turkey Belgium United Kingdom Germany Spain Other countries Total of which: EU Total women
25 35 21 15 16 8 45 166 65 40
27 41 24 18 18 8 61 197 88 53
32 39 22 22 15 7 84 221 98 69
35 29 23 23 14 11 73 208 96 66
8 4 10 8 4 3 29 66 36
Note: Estimates are for 31 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. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
311
OECD 1999
Table B.2.2.
NORWAY, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
1988 1990 1995 1997
Sweden Denmark United Kingdom United States Germany Finland Pakistan Netherlands Sri Lanka Chile Turkey India Poland Other countries Total
6.2 9.2 5.1 3.1 1.9 1.8 2.6 1.2 1.5 1.0 1.6 1.2 0.9 12.1 49.5
5.5 8.6 4.6 2.8 1.9 1.5 2.2 1.2 1.9 1.3 1.4 1.2 0.8 11.4 46.3
7.8 9.0 5.2 3.1 2.2 1.9 1.9 1.4 2.0 1.3 1.0 1.0 0.6 14.2 52.6
10.8 9.5 5.6 3.3 2.7 2.3 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.2 1.0 0.9 0.6 17.2 59.9
Note: Data are for the 2nd quarter (except for 1995 and 1996: 4th quarter). The unemployed and the self-employed are not included. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.2.2.
PORTUGAL, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
1991 19951 1997
Cape Verde Brazil Angola Guinea-Bissau United Kingdom Spain Germany France United States Mozambique Venezuela Other countries Total
16.9 5.4 1.7 2.3 4.2 3.9 3.0 2.1 2.7 1.6 1.0 10.1 54.9
21.8 9.6 7.9 7.0 5.4 4.7 4.1 2.8 3.0 1.8 0.7 15.5 84.3
22.1 9.7 8.2 7.2 5.8 5.3 4.6 3.3 3.2 1.9 0.6 16.2 87.9
Note: Workers who hold a valid residence permit (including the unemployed). For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Figures include workers beneting from the 1992-1993 regularisation procedure.
312
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.2.2.
SPAIN, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1988
1990
1995
1997 1997
Morocco Peru Dominican Republic China Philippines Argentina Senegal Colombia Algeria Poland Gambia Ecuador Chile India United States Other countries Total of which: EU Total women
5.0 0.6 0.5 1.3 3.3 3.5 .. 0.8 .. .. .. .. 1.3 1.6 2.3 38.1 58.2 31.4 21.5
8.8 0.9 0.7 1.7 4.1 6.3 .. 1.2 0.2 .. 0.9 .. 1.7 1.9 3.5 53.6 85.4 34.8 29.8
51.6 11.4 9.7 6.2 7.1 7.5 3.4 3.1 2.7 2.6 2.7 1.4 2.5 2.3 2.3 22.4 139.0 .. 46.1
67.7 14.7 12.1 9.1 8.2 6.6 4.2 3.7 3.7 3.5 3.2 3.1 2.6 2.4 .. 31.3 176.0 .. 60.9
11.4 9.6 10.3 2.9 5.4 2.4 .. 2.5 .. 1.1 .. 2.2 1.2 .. 0.8 11.0 60.9 ..
Note: 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. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.2.2.
SWEDEN, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1995
1997 1997
Finland Former Yugoslavia Norway Denmark Iran Poland Turkey Other countries Total Total women
85 22 14 15 .. .. .. 79 216 100
72 21 20 17 .. 8 11 97 246 114
56 15 19 13 15 9 7 86 220 98
54 31 18 13 10 7 7 80 220 101
31 13 9 6 4 5 2 31 101
Note: Annual average. Estimates are from the annual Labour Force Survey. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
313
OECD 1999
Table B.2.2.
SWITZERLAND, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985 1990 1995 1997 1997
A. Resident Italy Former Yugoslavia Portugal Germany Spain Turkey France Austria United Kingdom Netherlands United States Other countries Total of which: EU Total women
workers1 228.7 47.2 20.9 46.8 68.7 26.0 27.2 19.7 7.6 5.6 3.8 47.1 549.3 .. 185.1 26.2 17.8 21.9 1.9 2.0 1.9 29.7 0.2 1.2 102.8 17.4 234.3 84.4 55.2 53.6 75.1 33.2 31.5 20.9 9.2 7.0 4.8 60.5 669.8 476.1 228.7 40.5 13.5 14.6 2.4 2.5 2.5 44.5 1.3 121.7 20.3 214.3 134.6 80.5 56.3 63.5 35.6 32.3 19.4 9.9 8.1 5.4 68.7 728.7 499.2 261.3 23.8 6.1 4.1 2.3 2.0 1.6 12.2 1.7 53.7 12.7 191.7 138.2 77.4 57.3 56.4 33.1 30.7 18.2 9.7 8.0 7.4 64.6 692.8 462.5 255.1 18.0 4.1 2.5 2.0 1.7 1.2 1.4 31.0 8.8 63.7 49.7 32.8 21.0 22.0 11.8 12.1 6.5 2.9 3.2 1.9 27.8 255.1 169.9
B. Seasonal workers2 Portugal Italy Spain Germany France Austria Former Yugoslavia Turkey Other countries Total Total women
4.7 0.5 0.4 1.0 0.7 0.7 0.7 8.8
Note: For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Data as of 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. Cross-border workers and seasonal workers are excluded. 2. Data as of 31 August of each year, when seasonal work is at its peak.
314
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Table B.2.2.
UNITED KINGDOM, stock of foreign labour by country or region of nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985 1990 1995 1998 1998
Ireland Africa India United States Italy France Germany Caribbean and Guyana Central and Eastern Europe1 Australia2 New Zealand Portugal Pakistan3 Spain Bangladesh Other countries Total of which: EU Total women
269 51 66 37 56 17 18 77 25 23 .. 27 14 .. 128 808 382 ..
268 59 84 50 48 24 22 48 20 39 .. 11 27 16 .. 166 882 419 393
216 83 60 49 43 34 27 17 23 34 19 18 20 17 239 899 441 421
221 108 71 63 52 49 39 35 32 31 30 23 20 18 16 231 1 039 454 471
116 41 29 30 18 28 21 20 21 13 10 12 112 471 232
Note: Estimates are from the labour force survey. The unemployed are not included. The symbol indicates that gures are less than 10 000. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Including former USSR. 2. Including New Zealand until 1991. 3. Including Bangladesh until 1991.
315
OECD 1999
Notes related to tables A.1.1. to A.1.3. and B.1.1. to B.1.3. Migratory ows in selected OECD countries
Flow data based on Population Registers
Types of migrant recorded in the data Other comments Source
Belgium
Criteria for registering foreigners: holding a residence permit and wishing to stay in the country for at least 3 months. Outows include administrative corrections. Criteria for registering foreigners: holding a residence permit and wishing to stay in the country for at least 3 months. However, the data only count immigrants once they have lived in the country for 1 year. Outows include administrative corrections. Criteria for registering foreigners: holding a residence permit and wishing to stay in the country for at least 1 year. Criteria for registering foreigners: holding a residence permit and wishing to stay in the country for at least 3 months.
Until 1994, some asylum seekers were included in the population register. Since 1995 then they have been recorded in a separate register.
Population Register, Institut national de la statistique.
Denmark
Excluded from inows are asylum seekers, and all those with temporary residence permits (this includes some war refugees).
Central population register, Danmarks Statistik.
Finland
Inows of those of Finnish origin are included.
Central population register, Finnish Central Statistical Ofce.
Germany
Includes asylum seekers living in private households. Excludes inows of ethnic Germans. The gures represent Germany as a whole from 1991. Data for 1997 are preliminary.
Population register, Statistisches Bundesamt.
Hungary
Criteria for registering foreigners: holding a long-term residence permit (valid for up to 1 year). Criteria for registering foreigners: remaining in the country for more than 90 days. Criteria for registering foreigners: holding a residence permit and wishing to stay in the country for at least 3 months.
Register of long-term residence permits, Ministry of the Interior.
Japan
Excluding temporary visitors and re-entries.
Register of foreigners, Ministry of Justice, Immigration Ofce.
Luxembourg
In 1997, ows of foreigners were Central population register, deduced with reference to the total Service central de la statistique ows by making the assumption et des etudes economiques. that ows of nationals did not change between 1996 and 1997. Inows include some asylum seekers (except those staying in reception centres). Population registers, Central Bureau of Statistics.
Netherlands
Criteria for registering foreigners: holding a residence permit and wishing to stay in the country for at least 6 months. Outows include administrative corrections. Criteria for registering foreigners: holding a residence permit and wishing to stay in the country for at least 6 months. Criteria for registering foreigners: holding a residence permit and wishing to stay in the country for at least 1 year. Criteria for registering foreigners: holding a permanent or an annual residence permit.
Norway
From 1987 includes asylum seekers Central population register, waiting decisions on their Statistics Norway. application for refugee status.
Sweden
Asylum seekers and temporary workers are not included in inows.
Population register, Statistics Sweden.
Switzerland
316
Inows do not include conversions from seasonal permits to non-seasonal permits.
Register of foreigners, Federal Foreign Ofce.
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Notes related to tables A.1.1. to A.1.3. and B.1.1. to B.1.3. Migratory ows in selected OECD countries (cont.)
Inow data based on residence and work permits
Types of migrant recorded in the data Other comments Source
Australia
A. Permanent migrants: issues of permanent residence permits (including accompanying dependents). B. Temporary residents: entries of temporary residents (i.e. excluding students). In 1997, data include 17 049 holders of a Temporary Business entry (TBE) visa (long stay). Issues of permanent residence permits.
Data refer to the scal year (July to June of the year indicated). Data do not include those persons granted permanent residence whilst already temporary residents in Australia.
Department of Immigration and Population Research.
Canada
Data include those already present in Canada, and also those granted residence in a programme eliminating a backlog of applications.
Statistics Canada.
France
Until 1989 the data consist of those entering as permanent workers, those with provisional work permits and those entering under family reunication. Since 1990, those with provisional work permits are not included. Those entering as self employed and additional permits relating to family reunication have been added to the gures. Passengers, excluding EEA nationals, admitted to the United Kingdom.
Entries from the EU Ofce des migrations are not counted, except permanent internationales. workers (including entries from the EEA since 1994) who are included through declarations. Made by employers to the authorities. From 1994 on, gures include estimates of some unregistered ows (inows of family members of EEA citizens for example). Data exclude visitors, passengers in transit or returning on limited leave or who previously settled. Students and au pair girls are excluded. Home Ofce.
United Kingdom
United States
Issues of permanent residence permits.
The gures include those persons US Department of Justice. already present in the United States: those who changed status and those beneting from the 1986 legalisation program. Data cover the scal year (October to September of the year indicated).
317
OECD 1999
Notes related to tables A.1.4. et B.1.4. Inows of asylum seekers

Comments Source
Australia Austria Belgium Canada Czech Republic Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Poland Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland
Excluding accompanying dependents. Excluding de facto refugees from Bosnia Herzegovina. Excluding accompanying dependents. Excluding accompanying dependents. Excluding accompanying dependents.
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Osterreichisches Statistisches Zentralamt. Institut national de statistique, Ofce des etrangers, Commissaire gen eral aux refugi es et aux apatrides. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Ministry of the Interior. Danmarks Statistik. Ministry of the Interior. Ofce franc ais de protection des refugi es et des apatrides. Bundesministerium des Innern. Ministry of the Interior. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Department of Justice. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Justice. Ministry of Justice. Immigration Directorate. Department for Migration and Refugee Affairs, Ministry of the Interior. Ministry of the Interior. Ofcine de Asilo y Refugio. Swedish Immigration Board. Ofce fed eral des refugi es. Home Ofce. US Department of Justice.
United Kingdom Breakdown by country excludes accompanying dependents. United States Excluding accompanying dependents. Fiscal years (October to September of the years indicated). From 1993 on, gures include applications reopened during year.
318
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Notes related to tables A.1.5. et B.1.5. Foreign-born population

Comments Source
Australia Canada Denmark
Quinquennial censuses, Australian Bureau of Statistics. Quinquennial censuses, Statistics Canada. Danmarks Statistik.
Coverage: Immigrants dened in Danish statistics as foreign-born citizens to parents born abroad or in the country. Reference date: 31 December. Reference date: 31 December. Reference date: 31 December.
Netherlands Norway Sweden
Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS). Statistics Norway. Statistics Sweden. Decennial censuses, US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Population Survey (1994-96) Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
United States Coverage: Persons born overseas whose parents are US citizens are not included in the 1980 and 1990 census gures. Note that estimates by country of birth are not sufciently accurate in the Current Population Survey and are not shown in the tables.
319
OECD 1999
Notes related to tables A.1.6. et B.1.6. Foreign population

Comments Source
Austria
Coverage: Stock of foreign citizens recorded in population register. Reference date: Annual average Other comments: The data were revised following the 1991 census. A breakdown by nationality is not available. Coverage: Stock of foreign citizens recorded in population register. Until 1994, asylum seekers were included in the population register. Since 1995 then they have been recorded in a separate register. Reference date: 31 December. Other comments: There are two breaks in the series between 1984-85 and 1991-92, due to important changes in the law on nationality in June 1984 and September 1991. Coverage: Holders of a permanent residence permit (mainly for family reasons) or a long-term residence permit (1-year permit, renewable). Reference date: 31 December. Other comments: 1992 data cover former Czech and Slovak Federal Republic. Coverage: Stock of foreign citizens recorded in population register. Excludes asylum seekers and all those with temporary residence permits (this includes some war refugees). Reference date: 31 December. Coverage: Stock of foreign citizens recorded in population register. Includes inows of those who are of Finnish origin. Reference date: 31 December. Coverage: Foreigners with permanent residence in France. Comprises of permanent workers, trainees, students and their dependent families. Seasonal and frontier workers are not included. Reference dates: 4 March 1982, 6 March 1990.
Population Register, Osterreichisches Statistisches Zentralamt.
Belgium
Population register, Institut national de la statistique.
Czech Republic
Register of foreigners, Ministry of the Interior.
Denmark
Central population register, Danmarks Statistik.
Finland
Central population register, Finnish Central Statistical Ofce. Census (25 per cent sample), Institut national de la statistique et des etudes economiques.
France
Germany
Coverage: Stock of foreign citizens recorded in population register. Central population register, Includes asylum seekers living in private households. Excludes foreign Statistisches Bundesamt. citizens of German origin (ethnic Germans). Reference date: 31 December. Other comments: Since 1992, disaggregation by sex and nationality covers only those aged 16 and over. Figures represent Germany as a whole from 1991. 1987-89 gures are adjusted to take into account results of the 1987 census. Coverage: Holders of a permanent or a long-term residence permit. Reference date: 31 December. Coverage: Special Survey. Other comments: The only signicant distinction between nationalities is between EU/non-EU and the United States (not published in this Annex). Coverage: Holders of residence permits on population register. Minors registered in the permits of their parents are not counted in the gures. Figures include results of the 1987-88, 1990 and 1995-96 regularisation programmes. Reference date: 31 December. Other comments: The falls in stocks in 1989 and 1994 are the result of a clean-up of the register of foreigners. Coverage: Foreigners staying in Japan more than 90 days and registered in population registers as stated by the law. Reference date: 31 December. Coverage: Foreigners staying in Korea more than 90 days and registered in population registers as stated by the law.
Register of foreigners, Ministry of the Interior. Labour Force Survey, Central Statistical Ofce (CSO).
Hungary Ireland
Italy
Ministry of the Interior.
Japan
Register of foreigners, Ministry of Justice, Ofce of Immigration. Ministry of Justice.
Korea
320
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Notes related to tables A.1.6. et B.1.6. Foreign population (cont.)

Comments Source
Luxembourg
Coverage: Stock of foreign citizens recorded in population register. Does not include visitors (less than three months) or frontier workers. Reference date: 31 December. Other comments: 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. Coverage: Stock of foreign citizens recorded in population register. Figures include administrative corrections and asylum seekers (except those staying in reception centres). Reference date: 31 December. Other comments: The fall in stocks between 1994 and 1995 is due to revision of estimates. Figures for 1997 are provisional. Coverage: Stock of foreign citizens recorded in population register. From 1987 includes asylum seekers waiting decisions on their application for refugee status. Reference date: 31 December. Coverage: Holders of a valid residence permit. Data take into account the 1992-93 and 1996 regularisation programmes. Coverage: Holders of residence permits. Does not include those with temporary permits (less that six months duration) and students. The gures for 1992 include 108 372 permits issued following a regularisation program held in 1991. Reference date: 31 December. Other comments: The fall in gures between 1988 and 1989 is due to a clean-up of the population register. Coverage: Stock of foreign citizens recorded in population register. Reference date: 31 December. Coverage: Stock of all those with annual or settlement permits. Does not include seasonal or frontier workers. Reference date: 31 December Coverage: Foreign residents. Those with unknown nationality from the New Commonwealth are not included (around 10 to 15 000 persons). Reference date: 31 December. Other comments: Figures are rounded and not published if less than 10 000. Coverage: Foreign-born persons who are not American citizens. Table B.1.6. gives a breakdown by country of birth. Reference date: April 1990.
Population register, Service central de la statistique et des etudes economiques.
Netherlands
Population register, Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS).
Norway
CPR, Statistics Norway.
Portugal Spain
Ministry of the Interior. Ministry of the Interior.
Sweden Switzerland
Population register, Statistics Sweden. Register of Foreigners, Federal Foreign Ofce. Labour force survey, Home Ofce.
United Kingdom
United States
1990 census, US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
321
OECD 1999
Notes related to tables A.1.7. et B.1.7. Acquisition of nationality

Comments Source
Australia Austria Belgium
Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs. Osterreichisches Statistisches Zentralamt.
Signicant numbers of foreigners were naturalised Institut national de statistique and Ministry as a result of changes to the law on nationality in June 1984 of Justice. and September 1991. Includes naturalisations of those of Finnish origin. Excludes minors who were automatically naturalised on reaching adulthood under legislation existing prior to 1 January 1994 and those under new legislation (July 1993) requiring minors to state their intention to become French citizens. Includes naturalisations of those of German origin. Including ethnic Hungarians mainly from former Yugoslavia and Ukraine. Excludes children acquiring nationality as a consequence of the naturalisation of their parents. Excludes individuals recovering their former (Spanish) nationality. Data refer to scal years (October to September of the year indicated). Statistics Canada. Danmarks Statistik. Central Statistical Ofce. Ministere ` de lEmploi et de la Solidarite.
Canada Denmark Finland France
Germany Hungary Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States
Statistisches Bundesamt. Ministry of the Interior. Ministry of the Interior. Ministry of Justice, Civil Affairs Bureau. Ministry of Justice Ministry of Justice. Central Bureau of Statistics. Statistics Norway. Ministry of Justice and Ministry of the Interior. Statistics Sweden. Ofce fed eral des etrangers. Home Ofce. US Department of Justice.
322
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Notes related to tables A.2.1. Inows of foreign workers

Types of workers recorded in the data Source
Australia
A. Permanent settlers Skilled workers including the following categories of visas: Employer nominations, Business skills, Occupational Shares System, Special talents, Independent. Including accompanying dependents. Period of reference: scal years (July to June of the given year). B. Temporary workers Skilled temporary resident programme (including accompanying dependents). Including Long Stay Temporary Business Programme from 1995/96. Including accompanying dependents. Period of reference: scal years (July to June of the given year). 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. 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. Grants of work permits. Residence permits issued for employment. Nordic and EU citizens are not included. 1. Permanent workers 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. 2. Provisional work permits (APT) 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. Grants of work permits (including renewals). Work permits issued (including renewals). EU citizens do not need a work permit. New work permits issued to non-EU foreigners. Data cover both arrivals of foreign workers and residents admitted for the rst time to the labour market. Data include both initial B work permits, delivered for 1 year maximum (renewable) for a specic salaried activity and D work permits (same type of permit for self employed). Since 1992, EU citizens do not need a work permit. 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.
Department of Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs.
Austria
Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs.
Belgium
Ministere ` de lEmploi et du Travail.
Canada Denmark France
Citizenship and Immigration Canada. Danmarks Statistik. Ofce des migrations internationales.
Germany
Bundesanstalt fur Arbeit.
Hungary Ireland Italy Luxembourg Spain
Ministry of Labour. Ministry of Labour. Ministry of Labour and ISTAT. Inspection gen erale de la Securit e sociale. Ministry of Labour and Social Security.
Switzerland
Ofce fed eral des etrangers.
323
OECD 1999
Notes related to tables A.2.1. Inows of foreign workers (cont.)

Types of workers recorded in the data Source
United Kingdom
Grants of work permits. 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.
Department of Employment.
United States
A. Permanent settlers US Department of Justice. 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. Period of reference: scal years (October to September of the given year). B. Temporary residence permits Including trainees, excluding intra-company transferees and treaty traders/investors. Period of reference: scal years (October to September of the given year). Figures may be overestimated because of multiple entries by the same person.
Notes related to tables A.2.2. Inows of seasonal workers

Comments Source
Australia
WHM programme (Working Holiday Makers) for young persons aged 18 to 25. The duration of stay is restricted to 1 year (not renewable). Period of reference: scal year (July to June of the given year). Initial work permits issued for less than 6 months. Caribbean and Mexican Seasonal Agricultural Workers Programme. Number of contracts with the Ofce des migrations internationales (OMI). European Union nationals are not subject to OMI control. Workers recruted under bilateral agreements. From 1991 on, data cover Germany as a whole. Agricultural seasonal workers entered in Italy with a work authorisation. Not renewable work permits granted. Issued for 3 months mostly to Polish nationals. Seasonal workers under the special Agricultural Workers Scheme. Including readmissions. Agricultural workers holding a H-2A visa (non-immigrants)
Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs.
Austria Canada France
Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs. Citizenship and Immigration Canada Ofce des migrations internationales.
Germany Italy Netherlands Norway Switzerland United Kingdom United States
Bundesanstalt fur Arbeit. Ministry of Labour. CBS. Statistics Norway. Ofce fed eral des etrangers. Department of Employment. US Department of Justice.
324
OECD 1999
Statistical Annex
Notes related to tables A.2.3., B.2.1. and B.2.2. Foreign and foreign-born labour
Foreign labour
Comments Source
Austria
Annual average. The unemployed are included and the self-employed are excluded. Data on employment by nationality are from valid work permits. Figures may be overestimated as a result of persons holding more than one permit. In Table A.2.3., 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. Estimates are from the Labour Force Survey. Data are from population registers Reference date: 30 November until 1991; 31 December from 1992 on. Labour Force Survey. Reference date: March of each year. Number of work permits. Including cross-border workers but not self-employed. Figures cover western Germany for all years. Reference date: 30 September. Number of valid work permits Reference date: 31 December. Estimates are from the Labour Force Survey. Figures refer to number of foreigners with a valid work permit (including self-employed). Data exclude unemployed. EU citizens do not need a work permit.
Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs.
Belgium Denmark France Germany
INS Danmarks Statistik. Institut national de la statistique et des etudes economiques. Bundesanstalt fur Arbeit.
Hungary Ireland Italy
Ministry of Labour. Central Statistical Ofce. ISTAT.
Japan
Foreigners whose activity is restricted according to the Immigration Ministry of Justice, Act (revised in 1990). Permanent resident, spouse or child of Japanese Service of Immigration. national, spouse orchild of permanent resident and long term resident have no restriction imposed to the kind of activities they can engage in Japan and are excluded from these data. Number of work permits. Data cover foreigners in employment, including apprentices, trainees and cross-border workers. The unemployed are not included. Reference date: 1 October. Estimates 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. Reference date: 31 March. Data are from population registers. Excluding unemployed and self-employed. Reference date: second quarter of each year (except in 1995 and 1996: 4th quarter). Workers who hold a valid residence permit (including the unemployed). Including foreign workers who beneted from the 1992-93 and 1996 regularisation programmes. Reference date: 31 December. Number of valid work permits. From 1992 on, EU workers are not included. From 1991 to 1993, the data include work permits delivered following the 1991 regularisation programme. The data for 1997 are provisional. Reference date: 31 December. Annual average from the Labour Force Survey. Inspection gen erale de la Securit e sociale.
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Central Bureau of Statistics.
Norway
Statistics Norway.
Portugal
Ministry of the Interior.
Spain
Ministry of Labour and Social Security.
Sweden
Statistics Sweden.
325
OECD 1999
Notes related to tables A.2.3., B.2.1. and B.2.2. Foreign and foreign-born labour (cont.)
Foreign labour
Comments Source
Switzerland
Data are counts of the number of foreigners with an annual residence permit or a settlement permit (permanent permit), who engage in gainful activity. Reference date: 31 December (resident workers); 31 August (seasonal workers). Estimates are from the Labour Force Survey. The unemployed are not included.
Ofce fed eral des etrangers.
United Kingdom
Employment Department.
Foreign-born labour
Comments Source
Australia
Labour force aged 15 and over. Reference date: August 1986; June 1993; June 1994; August 1995; August 1996. Labour force aged 15 and over.
Labour Force Survey (ABS).
Canada United States
1991 Census. 1990 Census (US Department of Commerce).
Coverage: Labour force aged 15 and over. Foreign-born citizens with American parents are not included in the immigrant population (foreign-born).
326
OECD 1999
LIST OF SOPEMI CORRESPONDENTS

Mr. A. RIZVI Ms G. BIFFL Ms A. SIPAVICIENE Mr. T. LHOIR Ms D. BOBEVA Ms E. RUDDICK Ms J. MARESOVA Ms K. STEEN Mr. S. LARMO Mr. A. LEBON Ms B. FRHLICH Mr. N. PETROPOULOS Ms J. JUHASZ Mr. J.J. SEXTON Ms C. COLLICELLI Mr. F. AROSIO Mr. Y. SENOO Mr. S. IWATANI Mr. Soo-Bong UH Mr. P. JAEGER Mr. J.A. BUSTAMANTE Mr. P. MUUS Mr. M. HOLTER Mr. M. OKOLSKI Mr. J. ROSARIO Mr. D. GEORGHIU Ms M. LUBYOVA Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, Canberra, Australia Austrian Economic Institute, Vienna, Austria Lithuanian Institute of Philosophy and Sociology, Vilnius, Lithuania Ministre de lEmploi et du Travail, Brussels, Belgium Black Sea Trade and Development Bank, Thessalonika, Greece (Bulgarian Correspondent) Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Ottawa University of Prague, Czech Republic Directorate General for Employment, Placement and Vocational Training, Copenhagen, Denmark Ministry of Labour, Helsinki, Finland Ministre de lEmploi et de la Solidarit, Paris, France Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, Berlin, Germany Pedagogical Institute of Greece, Athens, Greece Hungarian Central Statistical Office, 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 Korea Labour Institute, Seoul Commissaire du gouvernement aux 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, Institute for Social Studies, Poland Ministre des Affaires trangres, Secrtariat dtat aux Communauts portugaises, Lisbon, Portugal National Commission for Statistics, Bucarest, Romania Slovak Academy of Sciences, Institute of Forecasting, Bratislava, Slovak Republic Ministry of the Interior, Stockholm, Sweden Office fdral des trangers, Berne, Switzerland
327
Mr. A. IZQUIERDO ESCRIBANO Facult des Sciences politiques et de sociologie, La Corua, Spain Ms B. ORNBRANT Mr. P. CHATELAIN
OECD 1999
Mr. A. GOKDERE Mr. J. SALT Mr. R. KRAMER
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
328
OECD 1999
OECD PUBLICATIONS, 2, rue Andr-Pascal, 75775 PARIS CEDEX 16 PRINTED IN FRANCE (81 1999 06 1 P) ISBN 92-64-17078-2 No. 50779 1999

OECD 1999 Trends in International Migration

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

OECD 1999 Trends in International Migration

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

O R G A N I S A T I O N

TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT

ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT

OECD CENTRE FOR CO-OPERATION WITH NON-MEMBERS

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

Trends in International Migration

237 237 238 241 241 243 245 246

253 253 254 257 257 327

Trends in International Migration

118 142 143 146 156 179 188 197 217

Trends in International Migration

Foreign and/or foreign-born population: stocks and flows

B.1.5. Stock of foreign-born population by country of birth

B.1.5. Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B.1.5. Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B.1.5. Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B.1.5. Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B.1.5. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6. B.1.6.

295 295 296 296 297 297 298 298 299

Foreign or foreign-born labour force: stocks and flows

Notes related to the Statistical Annex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

In 1997, immigration increased in many OECD countries

Trends in International Migration

MAIN TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

Trends in International Migration

Inflows of foreigners in 1997

1 250 1 000 750 500 250 0 1980 1985 1990 1995

200 150 100 50 0 1980 1985 1990 1995

Per 100 foreigners4 20.0 17.5

125 100 75 50 25 0 1980 1985 1990 1995

15.0 12.5 10.0 7.5 5.0 2.5 0

Main Trends in International Migration

Trends in International Migration

Workers Family members accompanying workers 0 20 40

Main Trends in International Migration

Trends in International Migration

Main Trends in International Migration

Asylum applications have increased in many OECD member countries

Canada (22.6) United States (50.8) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Trends in International Migration

110.2 12.5 0.5 16.4 3.4 143.0 (116.2)

144.5 27.0 7.2 9.6 3.0 191.2 (117.5)

Main Trends in International Migration

Trends in International Migration

Categories of workers by country Admission conditions

Skilled temporary residents

Working Holiday Makers (WHM)

Workers employed under a contract for services

Bilateral agreements Age limit (generally between 18 and 25)

Yes (since 1995/1996 scal year)

Bilateral agreements Medical exam Agreements with certain countries

No, but placement is limited to certain sectors

3 months each year

Yes (by country)

Traineeship carried out in the same occupation as previous studies

Main Trends in International Migration

Working Holiday Makers

2 years (no renewals)

Trends in International Migration

Categories of workers by country Admission conditions

Trainees Professional or specialist qualication training

H-1B (Specialty occupation)

O (Extraordinary ability) H-2A (agricultural activities)

H-3 (Industrial trainees)