OECD 1998 Trends in International Migration

SOPEMI
OECD
TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

ANNUAL REPORT
1998 EDITION
SOPEMI

Continuous Reporting System on Migration
ANNUAL REPORT
1998 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. Country programmes, providing more focused dialogue and assistance, are now in place for 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 1998 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.
File: ENG:[207.TXT]FORE.;2 NGUYEN
Seq: 1 Page: Free: 5400D Next: 0D VJ: R
17-AUG-98 14:04
FOREWORD
The twenty-third 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 at the end of the report, and on the summary of debates at their latest annual meeting (December 1997). Following Denmark, Ireland and Mexico in 1994, the Slovak Republic joined the SOPEMI network in 1995, and Korea in 1998. The 1998 Edition is composed of three parts and a Statistical Annex. Part I describes overall trends in international migration. It focuses on the magnitude, the nature and the direction of ows. Special attention is given to changes in the foreign or immigrant population in OECD countries and to the role of immigrants in the labour market and in the various sectors of economic activity. This section also includes an overview of migration policies, in particular those relating to the control of ows, the integration of immigrants in host countries and international co-operation. Part II consists of country notes describing recent developments in migration ows and policies in twenty-seven OECD countries and three non-member countries (Bulgaria, the Slovak Republic and Romania). Part III presents a study on the temporary employment of foreigners in several OECD countries. It compares the different categories of these workers as well as the conditions of their admission and recruitment. This volume is published on the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
GENERAL INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Part I MAIN TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION A. MIGRATION, POPULATION AND THE LABOUR MARKET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 2. 3. Trends in migration movements and changes in the foreign population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Immigration and population growth in OECD countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Immigrants and the labour market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 15 22 33 41 42 47 52 53 62 69
B. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN ASIA AND CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 2. Migration ows of Asian origin to OECD countries and the impact of the nancial crisis in Asia on migration ows between Asian countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recent migration trends in Central and Eastern Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C. AN OVERVIEW OF MIGRATION POLICIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 2. 3. Policies for regulating and controlling ows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Policies for integrating immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Migration, international co-operation and economic development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Part II RECENT CHANGES IN MIGRATION MOVEMENTS AND POLICIES (COUNTRY NOTES) Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 Bulgaria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Czech Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 Greece . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 Ireland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 Korea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 Poland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Romania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 Slovak Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 Turkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173 United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
Part III REPORT ON THE TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT OF FOREIGNERS IN SEVERAL OECD COUNTRIES Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. The general characteristics of temporary employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Conditions of recruitment and residence of the main categories of temporary workers . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix: Recruitment conditions and conditions for staying of the main categories of temporary foreign workers for selected OECD countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185 186 188 198 201
STATISTICAL ANNEX A. SOURCES AND COMPARABILITY OF MIGRATION STATISTICS . . . . . . . . 1. Sources of migration statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Measurement of migration ows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Stocks of migrants and characteristics of the immigrant population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 214 215 216 218 218 221 281
B. STATISTICAL SERIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Introduction to the Statistical Annex tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Tables of the Statistical Annex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF SOPEMI CORRESPONDENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF CHARTS AND TABLES Part I MAIN TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION Charts I.1. Inows of foreign population relative to the stocks of foreign and total population in selected OECD countries over the last 10 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.2. Immigration ows into selected OECD countries by main categories in 1990 and 1996 . . . . . . . I.3. Inows of migrants by country of origin to selected OECD countries, latest available year . . . I.4. Average annual inows of asylum seekers to OECD countries in 1986-1990, 1991-1995 and 1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.5. Components of total population growth in selected OECD regions and countries, 1960-96 . . . I.6. Natural increase and net migration in OECD countries, 1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.7. Share of foreign births in total births relative to the share of foreigners in the total population in selected OECD countries, 1980 and 1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.8. Foreign-born and foreign labour force, 1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.9. Change in total and foreign employment by major industry division between 1993 and 1997 in selected European OECD countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.10. Share of foreigners or foreign-born in total unemployment relative to their share in the labour force, 1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tables I.1. Projected old-age dependency ratios for 2010 and 2020 in OECD countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.2. Foreign or foreign-born population and labour force in selected OECD countries . . . . . . . . . . . I.3. Stocks of European Union citizens and total foreigners in the European OECD countries, total population and labour force, 1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.4. Maghrebian, Turkish and former Yugoslavian residents in selected European OECD countries, total population and labour force, 1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.5. Participation rates and unemployment rates in selected OECD countries by sex, place of birth and nationality, 1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.6. Comparative development of total employment and employment of foreigners between 1993 and 1997 and fragility indicator for foreign employment in selected European OECD countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.7A. Stock of Asian nationals in selected OECD countries in 1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.7B. Stock of immigrants born in an Asian country in Australia, Canada and the United States . . . . I.8A. Foreign residents who are nationals of central and eastern European countries in selected European OECD countries, latest available year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.8B. Immigrants born in central and eastern European countries residing in selected OECD countries, latest available year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.9. Central and Eastern Europe: economic indicators, 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.10. Main regularisation programmes of immigrants in an irregular situation in selected OECD countries, by nationality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
17 18 19 21 24 25 26 36 38 40 29 31 32 34 35
39 44 44 48 48 52 61
Part II RECENT CHANGES IN MIGRATION MOVEMENTS AND POLICIES (COUNTRY NOTES) Charts II.1. Flows of permanent and long-term residents, Australia, scal years 1982/83-1996/97 . . . . . . . . II.2. Components of population change, 1983-1996, Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
78 80
II.3. II.4. II.5. II.6. II.7. II.8. II.9. II.10. II.11. II.12. II.13. 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.
Work permits and foreign employment, 1980-1996, Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Population and net migration change, 1983-1996, Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inows of permanent settlers by entry class and region of origin, 1980-1997, Canada . . . Share and concentration of foreign employees by economic activity, 1997, France . . . . . Migration ows of foreigners, 1960-1996, Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Components of German population change, 1970-1996, nationals and foreigners . . . . . . Change in employment and unemployment in Germany, 1981-1997, total population and foreigners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trends and characteristics of migration, Ireland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Migration ows and components of foreign population change, 1980-1996, Netherlands . Demographic characteristics of permanent emigrants, 1990-1996, Romania . . . . . . . . . . . Migration ows and acceptances for settlement, 1986-1996, United Kingdom . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
82 83 92 106 108 109 110 122 140 157 174
Permanent and temporary migration programme outcomes, 1994-1997, and 1998 planning levels for permanent settlers, by category, Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Immigrant landings by type, 1993-1997, Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of migrants, Czech Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Denmark . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force, Finland . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, France . . . . . . . . . Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Residence permits issued to foreigners, by country of origin, 1993-1996, Greece . . . . . . . . . . . Current migration gures, Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Demographic characteristics of permanent foreign residents and naturalised persons, 30 June 1997, Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force, Ireland . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on foreign population, Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Regularisation requests of immigrants in an irregular situation, three last regularisation progammes, by region of residence, Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Japan . . . . . . . . . . Estimates of foreign workers in Japan by status of residence, 1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stock of foreign population in Korea by nationality, 1986, 1994-1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foreign workers in Korea by category, 1993-1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mexican emigration to the United States, 1911-1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inows of temporary visitors for business under NAFTA, by category and nationality, 1994-1996, Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force, Netherlands . . . . . . . Foreign-born population by birthplace, 1 January 1996, Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of foreign population, Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Permanent immigration and emigration, 1993-1996, Poland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force, Portugal . . . . . . . . . . Regularisation programmes of immigrants in an irregular situation by country of origin, 1992-1993 and 1996, Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current migration gures, Romania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current migration gures, Slovak Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
77 81 85 93 94 97 100 103 111 114 118 119 124 126 127 129 130 132 132 134 137 138 142 143 145 148 152 155 158 161
TABLE OF CONTENTS
II.31. II.32. II.33. II.34. II.35. II.36. II.37. II.38.
Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force, Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . Regularisation programmes of foreigners in an irregular situation, 1991 and 1996, Spain . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Sweden . . . . . . . . Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Turkish workers sent abroad by the National Employment and Placement Ofce, by country or region of destination, 1993-1996, Turkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force, United Kingdom . . . Employment-based immigration, by preference, scal years 1993-1996, United States . . . . . . . Non-immigrants admitted by class of admission, scal years 1994-1996, United States . . . . . .
163 165 167 170 173 175 180 182
Part III IMMIGRATION AND SOCIAL TRANSFERS: ANALYTICAL ISSUES AND RECENT RESULTS Tables III.1. Inows of temporary skilled workers by main category in selected OECD countries, 1992-1996 189 III.2. Inows of seasonal workers in selected OECD countries, 1992-1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 III.3. Inows of foreign trainees in selected OECD countries, 1992-1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
STATISTICAL ANNEX
A.
Cross national tables
A.1.
A.1.1. A.1.2. A.1.3. A.1.4. A.1.5. A.1.6. A.1.7.
Foreign and/or foreign-born population: stocks and ows

Inows of foreign population into selected OECD countries, 1986-1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Outows of foreign population from selected OECD countries, 1986-1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Net migration of foreign population in selected OECD countries, 1986-1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inows of asylum seekers into selected OECD countries, 1987-1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stocks of foreign-born population in selected OECD countries, 1990-1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stocks of foreign population in selected OECD countries, 1986-1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Acquisition of nationality in selected OECD countries, 1988-1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222 222 222 223 223 224 225 226 226 227
A.2.
A.2.1. A.2.2. A.2.3.
Foreign or foreign-born labour force: stocks and ows

Inows of foreign workers into selected OECD countries, 1986-1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inows of seasonal workers into selected OECD countries, 1986-1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stocks of foreign and foreign-born labour force in selected OECD countries, 1986-1996 . . . . . .
B.
Tables by country of origin
B.1.
B.1.1.
Foreign and/or foreign-born population: stocks and ows

Inows of foreign population by nationality Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228 228 229 229 230 230 231 231 235 236 236 237 237 239 240 240 241 241 243 244 244 244 Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232 232 232 233 233 234 234 235 237 238 238 239 239 242 242 242 243 243 245 245 245
B.1.2.
Outows of foreign population by nationality Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
B.1.3.
Net migration of foreign population by nationality Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
B.1.4.
Inows of asylum seekers by nationality France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10
TABLE OF CONTENTS
B.1.5.
Stock of foreign-born population by country of birth Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246 Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246 Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247 Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247 Stock of foreign population by nationality Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Czech Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Korea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 250 250 251 251 252 252 253 253 253
Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
B.1.6.
Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254 Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254 Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254 Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255 Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255 Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
B.1.7.
Acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257 Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257 Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258 Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258 Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260 Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260 Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
261 261 261 262 262 262 263 263 263
B.2.
B.2.1.
Foreign or foreign-born labour force: stocks and ows

Foreign-born labour force by place of birth Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264 Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264 Stock of foreign labour by nationality Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 265 266 266 266 267 267 267 United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
B.2.2.
Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268 Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268 Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269 Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269 Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270 Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270 United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271
Notes related to the tables of the Statistical Annex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
272
11
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
The analysis of the recent trends in migration movements conrms that a reduction in legal immigration ows has taken place in the majority of the OECD Member countries over the past four years. Immigration for family reasons continues to predominate although temporary migration is gaining in importance, notably that concerning the highly qualied; for the OECD area considered as a whole, the number of requests for asylum has been diminishing. The persistence of irregular migration indicates clearly, however, that host and origin countries are encountering difculties in controlling migration ows (see Part I.A). Migration plays a decisive role in the annual population growth of many OECD countries. However, given the uctuational nature of migration movement volumes and the large scale of net migration that would be required to maintain constant old-age dependency ratios, sole reliance on the contribution of net migration to reduce or stem demographic decline is inherently problematic. Foreign labour is becoming increasingly present in the service sector. The proportion of foreigners in self-employment has also increased in some of the Member countries. The supply of foreign labour has adapted in response to the needs of the labour market. Female labour immigration has grown, as have foreign womens participation rates, in particular of those born in the host country. However, despite the upturn in economic activity, foreigners vulnerability to unemployment remains higher than that of nationals. The forthcoming enlargement of the European Union to include countries from Central and Eastern Europe has aroused some concern regarding the possibility of uncontrolled immigration ows which could result from it. These fears would be abated somewhat were the membership process to be accompanied by transitional measures postponing the free movement of persons to a date beyond that of the countries entry into the Union; such arrangements have been made in the past. In the meantime, it is likely that further bilateral agreements governing the movement of persons will be signed, not only with the prospective members but also with their neighbours. Many Central and Eastern European countries are endeavouring to put into place migration policies which, with regard to the entry of refugees, the stay and employment of foreigners, and the control of borders, conform to EU standards (see Part I.B). The objectives of regulating and controlling ows form the basis of an important part of migration policy (see Part I.C). The Member countries of the OECD have adopted a more restrictive attitude regarding the entry and stay of foreigners, notably by tightening the rules governing family reunion and by establishing more selective criteria for new immigrants. Through the implementation of stricter border controls, by the conducting of workplace inspections and by the practice of identity checks inside the country, the ght against illegal immigration has taken on a greater dimension. As a complement to such measures, programmes for regularising undocumented foreigners have taken place recently in Italy, Spain, Greece and France. Alongside the control of ows, OECD Member countries have reafrmed their desire to accelerate the integration of immigrants already present. Language instruction and aid towards orienting new arrivals feature among the priority measures. Job training and easing the access of youths and the unemployed into the labour market are other fundamental elements of integration policies, likewise are measures designed to combat the discrimination which immigrants might encounter. In the area of international co-operation, beyond that directed at gaining a better control of migration ows, measures have been carried out with the objective of involving a larger number of Member countries in activities likely to prevent conict in politically volatile regions. Regional economic integration and trade liberalisation also feature among those measures which, over the long term, under the impetus of sustainable development accompanied by signicant employment creation, could reduce the incentive to emigrate in
13
those countries with high emigration potential. The Association Agreements signed by the European Community with the Central and Eastern European countries and with the countries of the Maghreb were drawn up in this context. This is equally the case with the process of economic integration under way in North America within the framework of NAFTA. * * *
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: the temporary employment of foreigners. Such employment enhances labour market exibility and favours the movements of trainees, managers and specialists. This chapter includes a comparative analysis of the conditions relating to the recruitment and stay of the principal categories of temporary workers. The regimes which prevail in the eight Member countries examined are shown to be quite diverse.
14
Part I
MAIN TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

The following analysis of the main trends in international migration has been divided into three sections. The rst 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 ows and to promote the improved integration of immigrants in host countries are examined. Finally, particular attention is accorded to the links between migration and economic development. A. MIGRATION, POPULATION AND THE LABOUR MARKET is widening. 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 analysis of migration movements conrms that a reduction in legal immigration ows has taken place in the majority of OECD countries over the past four years. The number of requests for asylum declined over the entire OECD area. Immigration for family reasons continues to predominate although temporary migration is gaining in importance. However, the persistence of irregular migration, the volume of which is by denition impossible to determine with precision, indicates clearly that host and origin countries are encountering difculties in controlling migration ows. In spite of the reduction in the ows, immigration still plays a signicant role in annual population growth. The proportion of foreign births in total births is high and the foreign or foreign-born population is growing and diversifying. Even though the inows are displaying a declining tendency, foreign or immigrant labour nonetheless 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 a gap between the unemployment rates of foreigners and of nationals. Indeed, this disparity
Recent developments in migration movements in OECD countries conrm two trends that began in 1993. After the increase in immigration ows during the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s, one observes (with the exception of a few countries) a reduction in the number of immigrant entries. In addition, the diversication of the modes of entry used by immigrants and the increase in the number of nationalities involved continues. At the same time, however, traditional ows persist and the regional character of migration is intensifying. Three additional characteristics of recent migration trends merit attention: the decline in the number of asylum claims, the predominance of ows linked to family reunion and the increasing relative importance of temporary and highly-skilled workers in the total ows.
a)
Decline of legal immigration ows
During the 1980s and at the beginning of the current decade, inows increased in almost all OECD countries (see Statistical Annex, Table A.1.1). However, for several of them, 1993 marked a turning point: the ows levelled off (Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Luxembourg, Norway and the United Kingdom) or fell back sharply (Germany, Sweden, Switzerland and France). In Japan, Australia, Canada and the United States, after a marked decline in the ows in 1993 and 1994, a mild recovery began, most noticeably in Australia and the United States. Nevertheless, the documented inows registered by
15
these four countries remained inferior to the peak recorded in 1992. Germany emerges as Europes principal immigration country with inows of foreigners approaching 700 000 in 1996. However, the size of these inows merits qualication: not only do these ows include close to 120 000 asylum requests, the regulations governing inclusion in Germanys population registers are framed in such a way that many people who spend only a short period in the country are entered onto the registers. These two reasons largely explain, moreover, Germanys high levels of outows which in 1996 totalled 560 000. The volume of immigration ows in the other European countries which possess the relevant statistics is markedly lower in absolute terms, ranging from between 200 000 entries for Austria and the United Kingdom to 75 000 for the Netherlands, Switzerland, and France. Of the non-European Members of the OECD, the United States has experienced the most signicant increase in inows (close to 30 per cent between 1995 and 1996). Australia, Japan and Canada registered much smaller increases, of respectively 13, 7 and 6 per cent. In Chart I.1, the countries of the OECD are ranked (in descending order) by their immigration ows per thousand of the total population for the most recent available year. The years considered are 1986, 1996 (when the data are available) and the peak year of the preceding ten. The countries are clearly divided into four groups. The rst group consists of Japan, Finland, France and Hungary, countries where inows of foreigners have accounted over the period 1986-96 for a very small percentage of the total population, uctuating according to the year at between 1.25 and 2.50 per 1 000 inhabitants. In the second group, which comprises Norway, the United Kingdom, the United States and Sweden, inows of foreigners or immigrants as a proportion of the total population vary according to the year at between 2.50 and 4 per thousand. In Norway, this proportion varied considerably between 1986 and 1988 due to a huge inow of asylum seekers; in Sweden the same phenomenon occurred in 1994. In the United States, a similar rise took place between 1989 and 1992 as a result of the upsurge in entry registrations following the implementation of the amnesty programme enacted in 1986. In Denmark, Australia, Belgium and the Netherlands, countries in the third group, inows of foreigners or immigrants as a proportion of the total population hovered around 5 per thousand over the
period. Finally, the remaining countries included in the chart share the common feature of having received over the course of the last fteen years, as a proportion of the total population, the largest immigration ows. These ows have ranged between 5 and 10 per thousand in the case of Germany, 10 and 15 per thousand in that of Switzerland, and 20 and 25 per thousand in that of Luxembourg. Concerning this last group, one notes that although, in absolute terms, Germany receives the greatest number of foreigners, it is in Luxembourg and Switzerland that the inows of foreigners, as a proportion of the total population, are the largest. In 1996 (or in the most recent year for which data are available), for the majority of the countries under consideration, entry ows as a proportion of the total population stood at a level equal to or below that recorded ten years earlier. The exceptions are Luxembourg, Canada, Denmark and Japan. Denmark is the only country where the volume of inows for the most recent available year (1995) was higher, in relative terms, than during any of the preceding ten. If one relates the inow data to the foreign or immigrant population rather than to the total population (see the left-hand side of Chart I.1), the rankings alter slightly. This is most notably the case for Finland, Japan, Denmark and Norway, countries where the proportion of foreigners in the total population was relatively small prior to the rapid growth in inows which occurred between 1986 and 1992. In these four countries, the volume of foreign inows relative to the foreign population has varied widely over the period: in Denmark and Norway it has ranged from between 10 and 20 per cent; in Japan (1992) and Finland (1991) it has reached peaks of respectively 22 and 47 per cent. With the exceptions of Luxembourg, Denmark and Hungary, all the OECD countries which appear in this chart experienced in the mid-1990s their highest volume of inows as a proportion of the foreign population. For European countries with a long-standing history of immigration and where the percentage of foreigners in the total population is relatively high (Luxembourg, Switzerland, Germany and Sweden), it is only in Germany due to the magnitude of immigration ows between 1987 and 1992 that the volume of entries has been relatively high as compared to the foreign population, varying between 10 and 20 per cent over the period, a sharp decline having taken place from 1992 onwards.
16
Chart I.1. Inflows of foreign population relative to the stocks of foreign and total population in selected OECD countries over the last 10 years1 Per 100 foreigners and per 1 000 inhabitants at the beginning of the year2
Per 100 foreigners/immigrants 20 10 0 Per 1 000 inhabitants 10 20 Per 100 foreigners/immigrants 20 10 0 Per 1 000 inhabitants 10 20 1986 1993 1996 Norway
1986 Luxembourg 1992 1995 1986 Switzerland 1992 1996 1986 Germany 1992 1996 1986 Canada 1993 1996 20 10 0 10 20 20 10 0 10 20
1992 United Kingdom 1996
1986 1991 United States 1996
1986 1994 1996 Sweden
Per 100 foreigners/immigrants 20 1986 Denmark 1991 1995 1986 Australia 1991 1996 1986 Belgium 1994 1996 1986 Netherlands 1993 1996 20 10 0 10 0
Per 1 000 inhabitants 10 20
Per 100 foreigners/immigrants 20 10 0
Per 1 000 inhabitants 10 20 1986 1992 1996 Japan
(47.1)
1991 1996
Finland
1986 1992 1996 France3
1988 1990 1996 10 20 20 10 0 10 20 Hungary4
Note: Countries are ranked by decreasing order of the inflows per 1 000 inhabitants during the latest available year. Data for Australia, Canada and the United States refer to inflows of permanent settlers, for France, to issues of certain types of permits and, in 1996, 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. Counts for the Netherlands, Norway and especially Germany include substantial numbers of asylulm seekers. For more details on sources, refer to the introduction to the Statistical Annex. 1. The selected years are 1986 and 1996, if available, and the year in the 90s with the highest inflows. Fiscal years for Australia (July to June of the given year) and for the United States (October to September of the given year). 2. For Australia and Canada, inflows of permanent settlers as a per 100 foreign-born people during the last 3 censuses (1986, 1991 and 1996). For the United States, inflows of permanent settlers as a per 100 foreign-born people in 1980 and 1990 (Censuses) and in 1996 (estimates from the Current Population Survey). 3. The inflows of foreign population relative to the stock of foreign population ratio is calculated using the two last censuses stock data (1982 and 1990) and the estimates from the 1996 Labour Force Survey. 4. The inflows of foreign population relative to the stock of foreign population ratio is not calculated for 1988 and 1990 because stock data on foreign population are only available from 1994 on. Source: National Statistical Offices.
17
b)
Predominance of family immigration
The proportion of total immigration accounted for by each of the component ows (workers, accompanying families, family reunion and refugees) differs widely from one country to another. That said, in almost all the countries of the OECD, inows related to family reunion and to family members accompanying workers predominate. Chart I.2 conrms this trend and shows that the family component has gained in importance in Australia, France, the United Kingdom, the United States and Sweden. In Canada, the relative share of family members accompanying foreign workers accounts for approximately half of the total family-linked immigration ows. In Denmark and Sweden refugee ows account for the greatest proportion of the total inows. In Switzerland, Australia, Denmark and the United Kingdom, refugee ows account for a greater proportion of the total inows than they did in 1990. As for labour immigration, it is in Switzerland and in Australia (countries where workers and their accompanying family members are grouped together) that this category of inow represents a sizeable per-
centage of total inows at respectively 45 per cent and over 30 per cent in 1996. This percentage is close to 20 per cent in Canada and France (where the gures cover only foreign workers). In other countries, including the United States, the gure is rather lower. In fact, in Sweden labour immigration accounts for only one per cent of total inows.
c)
Diversication in regions of origin and the continuation of traditional ows
A comparison of permanent migrant entries into certain OECD countries for the most recent available year by country of origin reveals three trends (see Chart I.3 and Statistical Annex, Tables B.1.1). The rst of these is the conrmation of a new predominance or of an increase in the part played by certain nationalities in recent inows. The importance of immigrant arrivals from Asian countries is a case in point, particularly from the Philippines, China, Hong Kong (China), India, Pakistan and Vietnam for the United States, Japan and Canada. The latter country received in 1996 close to 30 000 Hong Kong
Chart I.2. Immigration flows into selected OECD countries by main categories1 in 1990 and 1996 Percentages of total inflows
Workers
Family reunification Refugees
Family members accompanying workers 0 United Kingdom2 92 96 Switzerland 90 96 91 97 90 96 91 96 90 96 20 40 60
80
100
Australia3
Canada4
France5
Denmark6
United States7 92 96 Sweden6 90 96 0 20 40 60 80 100
18
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 Denmark, 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, Denmark 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 years (July to June of the given year). Excluding the Special Eligibility programme. The category Workers include the accompanying dependents. 4. Excluding retirees. 5. Inflows of family members of EU citizens are estimated in 1996. 6. Excluding Nordic and EU citizens . 7. Data refer to fiscal years (October to September of the given year). Excluding immigrants who obtained a permanent residence permit following the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act. Source: National Statistical Offices.
Chart I.3. Inflows of migrants by country of origin to selected OECD countries, latest available year1 As a per cent of total inflows2
Australia
0 5 10 15 20 Netherlands (7.8) France (6.6) Morocco (4.0) Germany (3.2) United States (3.0) UK (2.8) Italy (2.7) Turkey (2.5) Former Yug. (2.5) Portugal (1.8) 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 0 5
Belgium
10 15 20 H K (China) (29.9) India (21.2) China (17.5) Chin. Taipei (13.2) Philippines (12.9) Pakistan (7.7) Sri Lanka (6.1) United States (5.8) Iran (5.8) UK (5.6) 0 5 0 5
Canada
10 15 20
New Zeal. (13.1) UK (9.6) China (7.8) Former Yug. (5.3) H K (China) (3.9) South Africa (3.2) Vietnam (3.0) Philippines (2.8) India (2.7) Chin. Taipei (2.2)
10
15
20
Denmark3
0 Former Yug. (16.6) Somalia (1.5) Iceland (1.2) Germany (1.0) Iraq (1.0) Norway (0.9) UK (0.9) Turkey (0.8) Sweden (0.8) United States (0.6) 0 5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20
50.9
Finland
0 Russian Fed. (2.0) Estonia (0.7) Sweden (0.6) Iraq (0.5) Bos. Herz. (0.4) Somalia (0.3) United States (0.2) UK (0.2) Iran (0.2) Germany (0.2) 0 5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20
26.9
France
0 Algeria (7.8) Morocco (6.6) Turkey (3.4) United States (2.7) Tunisia (2.2) Former Yug. (1.3) Japan (1.1) Zaire (0.9) Sri Lanka (0.9) Haiti (0.8) 0 5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20
Germany
0 Poland (77.4) Turkey (73.2) Italy (45.8) Former Yug. (42.9) Portugal (32.0) Russian Fed. (31.9) Greece (18.8) Romania (17.1) Hungary (16.6) United States (16.3) 0 5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20 China (45.6) Philippines (30.3) 0 5
Japan
10 15 20 Portugal (2.4) France (1.5) United States (27.9) Brazil (22.4) Korea (17.1) Thailand (6.6) UK (6.4) Canada (4.5) Chin. Taipei (4.4) Germany (4.1) 0 5 10 15 20 United States (0.3) Spain (0.1) 0 5 Belgium (0.9) Germany (0.6) Italy (0.5) Netherlands (0.3) 0 5
Luxembourg
10 15 20
25.1
10
15
20
19
N Chart I.3. (cont.) Inflows of migrants by country of origin to selected OECD countries, latest available year1 As a per cent of total inflows2
Netherlands
0 Turkey (6.4) Germany (5.7) UK (4.3) Morocco (4.3) Former Yug. (3.4) United States (3.1) Surinam (2.8) Belgium (1.9) France (1.7) Poland (1.4) 0 5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20 Sweden (2.9) Denmark (1.6) Bos. Herz. (1.0) UK (0.9) United States (0.9) Germany (0.6) Pakistan (0.5) Somalia (0.4) Sri Lanka (0.4) Turkey (0.3) 0 5 0 5
Norway
10 15 20 Finland (2.6) Iraq (2.1) Norway (1.5) Denmark (1.4) Bos. Herz. (1.2) United States (1.1) Turkey (1.1) UK (0.9) Former Yug. (0.8) Iran (0.8) 10 15 20 0 5 0 5
Sweden
10 15 20
10
15
20
Switzerland
United Kingdom4
15 20 United States (43.2) Australia (25.1) India (13.0) South Africa (12.9) New Zealand (11.0) Japan (10.8) Pakistan (7.8) Canada (7.4) Philippines (6.8) Poland (3.6) 0 5 10 15 20 Mexico (163.6) Former URSS (62.8) Philippines (55.9) India (44.9) Vietnam (42.1) China (41.7) Dom. Rep. (39.6) Cuba (26.5) Jamaica (19.1) Haiti (18.4) 0 5 10 15 20 0 0
United States
5 10 15 20
0 Former Yug. (14.1) Germany (8.7) Portugal (5.5) Italy (5.4) France (5.0) Turkey (3.4) United States (2.9) UK (2.4) Spain (2.0) Netherlands (1.4) 0
10
10
15
20
10
15
20
Notes: The top ten source countries are given by decreasing order. The abbreviation H K (China) means Hong Kong (China); New Zeal.: New Zealand; UK: United Kingdom; Chin. Taipei: Chinese Taipei; Bos. Herz.: Bosnia Herzegovina; Dom. Rep.: Dominican Republic; Russian Fed.: Russian Federation; Former Yug.: Former Yugoslavia. 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 others countries, figures are from population registers or registers of foreigners. Counts 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 1996 to June 1997) and the United States (October 1995 to September 1996), 1995 for Denmark and Luxembourg and 1996 for the other countries. 2. The figures in brackets are inflows in thousands. 3. Including 16 000 former Yugoslavs already in the country who have been recognised as refugees. 4. 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). Source: National Statistical Offices.
20
(China) nationals; although the gure was slightly down on those of the previous two years, Hong Kong remains at the top of Canadas list of source countries for new entrants.
In the case of Germany, Austria and the four Scandinavian countries (if we abstract from the movements of these countries nationals, particularly those of Norway and of Sweden), East-West
ows account for the greater part of the total ows, 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 1996, the United States experienced, for the second consecutive year, an increase in the number of entrants from the former Soviet Union (63 000, an increase of almost 15 per cent on 1995) for it to retain its position as the second most important source country, after Mexico. In 1996, nationals of Australia and the United States comprised the overwhelming majority of entrants to the United Kingdom. The second obvious trend is the persistence of traditional migration ows. This is the case notably in Switzerland where new immigrants come mostly from the former Yugoslavia, Germany and Southern Europe. In France, nationals from North Africa (Maghreb) account for an important share of ows, although their numbers are lower than in the previous two years. Entries of Algerians were the most signicant in 1996, followed by Moroccans. In the United Kingdom immigrants from Pakistan, India and Bangladesh no longer feature at the top of the list of source countries. Nevertheless, the volume of entries from these three countries increased in 1996 in comparison with the previous year. In the case of Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, Canada, the Netherlands, Switzerland and France, the United States appears in the list of the top ten source countries. The third and nal key trend, the reduction in the relative proportion of ows to Australia, Canada and the United States originating from Europe, began in the 1980s; the new data merely conrm it (see Statistical Annex, Tables B.1.1).
nent basis. For example, in a number of OECD countries an ad hoc status was granted to Bosnians, accompanied generally by social assistance and the right of access to the labour market. In France, 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). Chart I.4 illustrates the changes over the last decade in the average annual inows of asylum seekers, respectively over the periods 1986-90, 1991-95 and for the year 1996. During the rst half of the 1990s the average annual inows of asylum seekers was relatively high, most notably in Germany and the United States; in Canada, France and Austria the same phenomenon was observed during the previous period. In 1996, Germany and the United States had, in absolute
Chart 1.4. Average annual inflows of asylum seekers to OECD countries in 1986-90, 1991-95 and 1996 Thousands
1986-90 0 25 50 1991-95 75 100 125 1996 150
United States (254.4) Germany United Kingdom Canada
d)
Asylum claims continue to decline for the OECD area as a whole
Netherlands Switzerland France Belgium Austria Australia Others 0 25 50 75 100 125 150
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 perma-
Sources: United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees and OECD.
21
terms, the highest number of asylum seekers, followed by the United Kingdom and Canada. In fact, looking at asylum applications across the OECD area as a whole, one observes that Germany received proportionately the largest number of asylum seekers. The available data for 1996 indicate that in relative terms the United States has overtaken Germany. Modications to the German constitution implemented in 1993 rendering its provisions relating to asylum seekers more restrictive have indeed led to a sizeable decline in the number of asylum applications addressed to Germany from that date. 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 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 provided they have not previously passed through a country that has signed them. The measures taken to stem the ow 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, led to a sharp fall in the number of asylum requests since 1993 (see Statistical Annex, Table A.1.1). The Netherlands, which had registered continuous growth in the number of requests accepted, witnessed substantial declines both in 1995 and 1996. In 1997, however, applications increased. In the United Kingdom, asylum requests increased in 1994 and 1995. Although the 1996 implementation of new legislative measures was accompanied by a sharp reduction in applications, they rose again in 1997. Finally, as several countries of Central and Eastern Europe have signed the Geneva Convention they recognise and can therefore accord refugee status to applicants. Alongside the end of the civil war in the former Yugoslavia, this also explains the decline in requests observed across the whole of the OECD area.
demand for temporary foreign workers is growing. The use of temporary foreign labour enhances host countries labour market exibility 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. Given the scale that temporary movements of labour have recently taken (this includes those of qualied and highly qualied workers), Part III of this report is devoted to this phenomenon. 2. Immigration and population growth in OECD countries
Migration plays a signicant 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 signicant 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 conrm its trend towards increasing diversication.
a)
The components of total population growth
e)
Temporary labour migration and the migration of highly-qualied workers
22
The admission of permanent foreign workers is currently very limited, particularly into the European Member countries of the OECD. However, 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 1961-96. 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 time-series 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 ows in Europe, noticeable between 1989 and 1992, failed to reverse the demographic decline. In the United States (and also in Canada), the natural increase in the population (per 1 000 inhabitants) 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 Australia, the natural increase in the population has steadily declined over the past three decades but, as in the case of the United States (and Canada), it still remains the principal component of total population growth. In 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. 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 ows. The trend was then reversed. However, over the whole of the European Union 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 too is experiencing a relatively high natural rate of population growth, approximately 15 per thousand in 1996, a sharp reduction, however, on the 1970s gure 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 1996 (see Chart I.6) reveals that Ireland, Iceland and Japan have registered negative net migration; in the case of Japan 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 1996. 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. Mexico and Turkey are the OECD countries with the highest natural rates of population growth (28 and 15 per thousand respectively). Turkeys slightly positive net migration indicates that return movements of Turkish expatriates outweigh the emigration ows. By contrast, due to the sizeable volume of emigration ows in 1996, Mexico recorded 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) and by cross section (by country, in 1996), 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 ows, such as Ireland, Portugal, Spain, New Zealand, Turkey and Mexico, but also in settlement countries such as Canada and the United States and to a lesser extent Australia. This is also the case in other European countries (France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom) where immigrants have tended to prolong their stay and settle and where entries 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 by those of foreign origin (see below), to the increase in the dominant role of the natural increases contribution to population growth. 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
23
Chart I.5. Components of total population growth in selected OECD regions and countries, 1960-1996 Per 1 000 inhabitants at the beginning of the year
Natural increase rate
Net migration rate
European Union (15 members)

15
Poland
15
10
10
Per 1 000
-5
-5
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
Australia
15
United States
15
10
Per 1 000
10
Per 1 000 Per 1 000
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
Japan
25 20 15
Per 1 000
Turkey
25 20 15 10 5 0 -5
10 5 0 -5
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
24
Source: Labour Force Statistics, OECD, 1997.
Per 1 000
Chart I.6. Natural increase and net migration in OECD countries,1 1996 Per 1 000 inhabitants as of 1 January 1996
3
Net migration (per 1 000)
3 Denmark Netherlands
Greece Austria Portugal Norway France United Kingdom Belgium Finland Switzerland 4
New Zealand 10 Luxembourg Canada

Net migration (per 1 000)
Spain
Sweden 5 Germany Italy 0 Czech Rep.
Australia United States
0 0 Turkey
Poland 1 2 3 Natural increase (per 1 000)
0 Japan Ireland Iceland -5 Note: The net migration figures are calculated using annual population estimates and national figures for births and deaths. 1. The data for Korea and Hungary are not available. 2. The data are for 1990. Source: Labour Force Statistics, OECD, 1997.
-5
Mexico -10 0 5 10 15 20 Natural increase (per 1 000) 25
30
-10
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 family immigration among total inows 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 that migration movements uctuate signicantly in volume. Indeed, this component of population growth is very much dependent on migration policy and modications to it in each country. The uctuational nature of migration movement volumes explains why it would be difcult to rely on the contribution of net migration to reduce or stem the marked demographic decline currently occurring in many of the OECD countries (see below).
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 sustained halt to new immigration could eventually lead to a marked reduction in these benecial effects insofar as the fertility rate of foreign women tends to converge with that of nationals. Measuring foreign births It is difcult 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 denition, 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
b)
Foreign births: a brake on demographic ageing
In several European OECD countries, births to foreign nationals and to persons of foreign origin
25
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 reect the contribution to total births linked to the presence of the foreign population or that of foreign origin. Moreover, 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 occasionally very high (see Chart I.7). This is the case, for example, in
Luxembourg (nearly 42 per cent in 1996) and Switzerland (23 per cent in 1996). In France, Germany, Sweden and the United Kingdom (England and Wales only), foreign births in 1996 accounted for between 10 and 13 per cent of all births. In Sweden, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Germany and, albeit to a lesser extent, in Japan the foreign share of total births was greater in 1996 than in 1980; the reverse was true for the four other countries examined. Except in Belgium and Japan, in 1996 the foreign share of total births 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
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 1996
Share of foreign births in total births (%)
1980 0 Sweden 1
1996 2
10.2 13.0
Increase
France Switzerland Japan
10.2 10.1 15.3 22.8 0.6 0.9
United Kingdom2 Germany3

Decrease
13.3 12.6 10.9 13.3 7.5 6.1 37.1 41.9 15.5 7.8
Netherlands Luxembourg Belgium4
26
Foreign births are births of children of foreign nationality for Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland. For France and Sweden, foreign births are births to a foreign mother, for 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 and the United Kingdom to 1995 instead of 1996. 2. Data refer to England and Wales. Births are relative to the share of the foreign-born in the total population. 3. Data cover Germany as a whole in 1991 and 1996. 4. Between 1980 and 1996, the drop 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 register; data on population are from population registers for all countries except for France (1982 census and 1995 Labour Force Survey), and the United Kingdom (Labour Force Survey).
1.
Switzerland, the Netherlands, Germany and Luxembourg (see Chart I.7). A number of explanations can be put forward to account for the variations observed over the past 16 years, the relative importance of which depend on the country concerned: higher or lower levels of net migration; differences in 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.
working-age population by 2020 would be limited. If anything, this type of scenario presents the prospect of a period of even greater social costs through increased education and child care requirements. That said, the long-term benets of permanent increases in fertility are obvious in that they eventually shift the age structure of the population back towards younger and more economically active age groups. 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-run population growth. However, there are a number of practical and political constraints in formulating an immigration policy aimed at achieving demographic change. A number of these difculties were outlined in Migration; The Demographic Aspects (OECD, 1991). This publication drew three broad conclusions: i) immigration policy cannot easily be ne-tuned to precise demographic objectives due to difculties in controlling the volume and composition of net migration; ii) simulations of the impact of immigration typically show that extremely high volumes of immigration, much greater than at present, would be required to completely offset ageing processes, such as growth in old-age dependency ratios; and iii) immigration policy is only one of a number of ways in which the economic burden of the elderly can be reduced and is unlikely to rank rst among the possible means of tackling the problem. Turning to the rst of these issues, the most obvious point is that policy usually has control over the volume of immigration and no control over the volume of emigration, thus making control of net migration difcult. In addition, a number of factors both limit and complicate the ability to control immigration: the existence of free-circulation agreements, the persistence of illegal immigration, humanitarian commitments and other obligations such as the admission for residence on the basis of family ties. Whilst a number of these issues could be factored into policy design it is clear that a degree of uncertainty would remain as to the nal outcome. Finally, practical means for monitoring net migration vary across countries. Populations registers (maintained by many European countries) provide a frequent and relatively accurate account of international migration, although not without difculties. In other countries regular estimation is more problem-
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 the 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 only capable of partial alleviation of the problem. In the following, the reasons for this view are investigated. Also, some of the practical and political issues in implementing an effective demographic cum labour market orientated immigration policy are reviewed. Ageing populations are caused by declining fertility and 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. Shares of the elderly in the total population, which are already at high levels, are set to increase further, particularly after around 2010 when the rst of the baby-boom generations begins to retire. There are two feasible ways of slowing down or reversing these demographic trends: increases in fertility or net migration of relatively young (and preferably economically active) individuals. A reversal in the long-term decline in fertility trends would gradually provide a slow-down and even reverse ageing by increasing the number of births. However, the effect would only be gradual and would do little to offset the rapid growth in elderly populations. For example, were fertility to increase rapidly from the year 2000 onwards, only the population of those aged under 20 would have been affected by 2020. As a result, the impact on the
27
atic, inows are often measured by entry permits (thus excluding those who do not need a permit) and outows are commonly estimated from a variety of sources. Although net migration usually has a relatively young age-prole, policymakers may wish to emphasise this further in pursuit of demographic objectives. However, there are limits on the extent to which this can be achieved. For example, commitments on refugee intakes cannot (by denition) be selective on demographic and economic grounds and the ability to be selective with regard to dependants and relatives may be limited. In addition, it has been suggested that the targeting of immigration by age or fertility behaviour could be viewed as a form of discrimination. How seriously this point would be taken in policy debate is likely to vary, depending on the philosophy and character of existing immigration policy. One way of avoiding some of these issues would be to use a strictly applied temporary worker programme as a more direct means of providing increased employment during periods of rapid growth in elderly populations or decline in workingage populations. However, historical precedents suggest that such programmes are difcult to manage. Although most countries have mechanisms which cater for temporary labour migration, ex post many immigrants entering under these programmes remain in the country on a permanent basis, either by change of status, or through continual renewal of temporary permits, or as illegal residents. In addition to these practical difculties, simulations of population scenarios have shown that the volume of net migration required to completely offset growth in elderly populations is typically very large, much greater than historic levels of immigration. For example, hypothetical demographic scenarios which calculate the volume of migration required to maintain a constant old-age dependency ratio often show that there would be periods during which extremely large volumes of immigration would be required. By way of illustration, Table I.1 shows projected old-age dependency ratios for 2010 and 2020, a period where many countries are predicted to experience large increases in elderly populations due to the retirement of babyboom generations. The third column in Table I.1 is a calculation of the additional working age population that would be required in 2020 for the old-age dependency ratio to remain at the 2010 value. For example, in France, an additional 11 million persons
of working-age would be required for the dependency ratio in 2020 of 33 persons aged 65 and over for every 100 persons aged 15 to 64 to be at the 2010 ratio of 26. In comparison, the fourth column of this table shows that over the 10 years between 1985 and 1995 total net migration in France was around 600 000. This suggests that even if migration only increased the working-age population (e.g. through a short-term temporary worker program), the number of immigrants required to offset growth in the dependency ratio would have to be very large compared with current migration levels. In addition to the likelihood of large volumes of net migration being required to maintain constant old-age dependency ratios, such targets often require wide uctuations in immigration over time, implying a stop-go type of immigration policy which would be difcult to manage. As a nal note, simulations also illustrate the fact that at a certain point in the projection, signicant numbers of immigrants themselves begin to reach retirement age, providing another boost to growth in the share of the elderly in the population. In sum, immigration policy could only act as a partial and somewhat imprecise means of reducing the ageing process in populations. In addition to these practical constraints, the motivation for such a policy may be rather weak. First, a signicant shift in immigration policy to increase employment levels and reduce the economic burden of the elderly on the population is only likely if labour-supply shortages are widespread and self-evident to both the government and the public. In this regard, the existence of high levels of structural unemployment and the potential for increased female labour force participation in a number of OECD countries suggests that employment growth could remain fairly strong without recourse to increased immigration intakes. The report Maintaining Prosperity in an Ageing Society stressed, among other recommendations, the reverseal of trends towards early retirement. Second, immigration policy is often politically sensitive and even if all evidence points to a desirable shift in stance, this may be thwarted by a fear on the part of governments to engage in debate or by the debate itself destroying the prospect of executing timely and effective policy. However, there is usually some exibility within existing legislation that allows variation in the volume and composition of immigration intakes as well as choice in the distribution of resources across the range of activities related to immigration policy.
28
Table I.1.
Projected old-age dependency ratios1 for 2010 and 2020 in OECD countries
Ratio of those aged 65 and over to those aged 15 to 64 (%) 2010 2020 Additional working age population required in 2020 for old-age dependency ratio to remain at 2010 levels (thousands) Estimates of net migration for period 1985 to 19952
Australia Austria Belgium Canada Czech Republic Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey United Kingdom United States
19.0 22.9 25.1 20.4 18.8 24.5 24.2 25.6 27.7 29.6 21.7 18.3 18.4 30.4 32.3 12.7 23.0 9.0 22.4 18.1 22.7 16.6 25.1 26.2 27.9 24.6 9.9 25.0 19.2
24.6 27.8 31.3 28.0 26.4 29.9 34.2 33.0 30.0 33.6 26.8 23.7 24.8 36.4 42.0 16.7 27.9 11.7 31.0 22.4 28.8 22.9 29.0 30.6 34.2 31.7 12.4 30.1 25.4
4 1 1 8 2 1 10 4 1 6 22 11 24 4 10 4 1 1 13 7 66
380 210 620 600 650 750 340 950 700 900 420 60 840 760 350 670 60 970 040 720 780 090 980 280 290 430 940 640 410
930 310 150 1 490 20 90 60 630 4 560 420 130 10 190 850 140 .. 30 .. 340 20 80 280 290 80 280 370 1 290 720 5 800
1. Old-age dependency ratios calculated from medium variant projections in United Nations (World Population Prospects, the 1996 Revision). 2. Estimates of net migration calculated as residual of population change and natural increase published in Labour Force Statistics (OECD). Sources: World Population Prospects, the 1996 Revision, United Nations; Labour Force Statistics, OECD, 1997.
Third, the potential for either increased fertility or migration as instruments for reducing the economic burdens generated by the effects of rapid increases in elderly populations in the next two or three decades is fairly limited. That said, concern about this issue, combined with a more general desire to offset longer-term demographic trends may induce a change in policy. One advantage immigration has over fertility is that it has the potential to provide a relatively rapid and timely response to shorter-term demographic and economic concerns. 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 to immigration, including explicit age-related selection criteria for some categories of immigrant. Other countries may nd that
new immigration programmes, and a change in approach to immigration policy would be 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 the nationality of residents, be they in the host country or abroad. 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 thus 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
29
abroad (foreign-born) and those born in the country (native-born). This approach enables the number 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 B.1.5). Variations over time in the number of immigrants or foreigners do not follow a uniform pattern across 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 political and economic changes which have taken place over the last decade, is reected in the diversication 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 share of foreigners and foreignborn in the total population has increased in the majority of OECD countries, the exceptions being Belgium and France (due in part to sizeable levels of naturalisations). In Australia and Canada, immigrants accounted for a high percentage of the resident population in 1996 at close to 25 per cent and over 17 per cent respectively. In the United States the gure was 9 per cent (see Table I.2). 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.2). It is relatively high in Luxembourg and Switzerland 33 per cent and 19 per cent respectively in 1995. In the other traditional immigration countries, the proportion of foreigners in the total population varies between 3.5 per cent (the
United Kingdom) and 9 per cent (Belgium). In the new immigration countries such as Spain, Italy, Portugal and Finland, the proportion of foreigners remains small (between 1 and 2 per cent) the large increase in entries over the last decade notwithstanding. The foreign population has grown considerably in Germany (an increase in excess of 60 per cent over the period 1986-96) due principally to a marked acceleration from 1989 onwards in the immigration ows 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 per cent between 1985 and 1996, the percentage of foreigners in the total population remains low (just over 1 per cent). 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 per cent) one of the lowest of the OECD Member countries. ... and is becoming more diversied In general, the composition by nationality of the foreign or immigrant population (see Statistical Annex, 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 Central and Eastern Europe and in Asia). In particular, they have led to the emergence of new ows 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 modied. In the countries of the European Union, the proportion of foreigners who have come from non-EU 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
30
Table I.2.
Foreign or foreign-born population and labour force in selected OECD countries

Thousands and percentages
Foreign population and labour force Foreign Thousands 19863 19964 population1 % of total population 1986 1996 Thousands 19865 19966 Foreign labour force2 % of total labour force 1986 1996
Austria Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Ireland Italy Japan Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom
315 853 128 17 3 714 4 513 77 450 867 97 568 109 95 293 391 956 1 820
3 7 1 1
1 1
728 912 238 74 597 314 118 096 415 143 680 158 173 539 527 338 972
4.1 8.6 2.5 0.4 6.8 7.4 2.2 0.8 0.7 26.3 3.9 2.6 1.0 0.8 4.7 14.7 3.2
9.0 9.0 4.7 1.4 6.3 8.9 3.2 2.0 1.1 34.1 4.4 3.6 1.7 1.3 6.0 19.0 3.4
155 270 60 .. 1 556 1 834 33 285 .. 598 169 499 46 58 215 56710 815
328 341 84 19 1 605 2 559 52 332 6307 1188 218 559 87 162 218 70910 878
5.3 6.8 2.1 .. 6.5 6.8 2.5 1.3 .. 35.6 3.2 2.3 1.0 0.4 4.9 16.4 3.4
10.0 8.1 3.0 0.8 6.3 9.1 3.5 1.7 0.9 53.8 3.1 2.6 1.8 1.0 5.1 17.9 3.4
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. 5. 1988 for Norway, Portugal and Spain; 1991 for Italy. 6. 1995 for Denmark. 7. Data are estimates and include Japanese descents, 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.
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 reect not only the changes in the origins of the ows but also the
31
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 ows differ markedly in nature: the former, partly clandestine, is essentially (unskilled) labour migration; the latter is linked to multinational rms and to foreign direct investment together with ows 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 second largest group is comprised of European Union and United States nationals. Regarding the European countries of the OECD (see Table I.3), 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 1996, in decreasing
order of importance, in Luxembourg (89 and 94 per cent), Ireland (73 and 80 per cent) and Switzerland (61 and 67 per cent). At the opposite end of the scale, with the corresponding percentages of 11 and 8, 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 United States, the number of European residents has fallen while that of immigrants from Asia (see the later section on Asian migration) and from the American continent have increased. Between 1980 and 1990 the number of Asian and Central American nationals grew very rapidly; the Mexican community doubled. In Canada, the number of Europeans fell sharply between 1981 and 1996 while the immigrant population of Asian provenance doubled. The same phenomenon has been observed in Australia: conspicuous growth in immigration ows from Asia, New Zealand and Africa, while those of European provenance remained stable.
Table I.3.
Stocks of European Union citizens and total foreigners in the European OECD countries, total population and labour force, 1996
Total foreign population % of total population % of foreign labour force in total labour force
of which: European Union

% of total foreign population % of foreign EU labour force in total foreign labour force
Thousands
Thousands
Austria Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Norway1 Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland2 United Kingdom
3 7
1 1
681 841 158 46 390 109 133 116 162 140 701 158 105 262 449 338 930
8.6 8.3 3.0 0.9 6.0 8.8 1.3 3.3 0.3 34.1 4.6 3.6 1.1 0.7 5.1 19.0 3.3
9.8 8.1 2.2 0.8 6.3 8.9 1.8 3.6 0.4 40.4 3.8 2.6 1.1 0.8 4.4 17.9 3.5
99 513 36 8 1 103 1 855 15 84 27 125 205 64 21 129 122 817 778
14.5 61.0 22.8 17.4 32.5 26.1 11.3 72.4 16.7 89.3 29.2 40.7 20.0 49.2 27.2 61.1 40.3
12.9 72.4 38.7 15.8 38.4 31.4 10.7 79.2 15.3 89.9 46.4 .. 17.0 41.9 46.7 67.7 43.9
32
Note: Except for Norway and Switzerland, data are based on the Community Labour Force Survey (Eurostat) and are not strictly comparable to data published in Table I.2 and in the Statistical Annex. 1. Data are from population registers. Data on labour force exclude unemployed and self employed. 2. Data are based on the register of foreigners. Data on labour force exclude seasonal and cross-border workers. Sources: Community Labour Force Survey, Eurostat, 1996; Statistics Norway; Ofce fed eral des etrangers (Switzerland).
The dispersion of immigrants of the same origin across the range of host countries Certain immigrant communities have tended to increase in countries where they were not strongly represented previously. The following section will focus on immigrants from certain countries of the Southern and Eastern shores of the Mediterranean Basin (this aspect of migration ows from the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and of Asia will be examined in Section B). The apportionment 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 1996 the principal host country for Maghrebians (in total, close to 1.4 million residents) 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 1996, far behind France, it was in Italy, followed by Germany, that the largest Tunisian communities were located (see Table I.4). Migrants from the former Yugoslavia, due to the spreading of the conict in the region, have increasingly gone to new host countries. Although in 1996 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 fth host country after Switzerland, Austria, and France. The Nordic countries 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 million, the Turkish community in Germany accounts for almost 30 per cent of the resident foreign population in that country. Although Turks are far less numerous in the Netherlands than in France they account for almost one quarter of the total foreign population there; the corresponding percentage in France is less than 6 per cent. In Switzerland the gure is also 6 per
cent, in Belgium 9 per cent and in Denmark 16 per cent. In Austria, one in ve 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 1996, 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 merits 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 ows: changes in the foreigners labour force participation rate, alterations in their demographic prole and modications to naturalisation policies are potentially no less important. Over the course of the past fteen 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 signicant repercussions on the employment of foreigners. The foreign labour force has grown in almost all the OECD countries and its characteristics have changed, although 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 signicant 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 evident that foreign workers have penetrated all sectors, thus showing the same general
33
Table I.4. Maghrebian, Turkish and former Yugoslavian residents in selected European OECD countries, total population and labour force, 1996
Foreign population1
of which:
Total foreign population Algeria
% 1.0 .. 17.1 0.2 .. 0.2 .. .. .. .. ..
Morocco
% 15.2 1.4 15.9 1.1 10.9 20.4 0.9 14.3 .. .. ..
Tunisia
% 0.6 .. 5.7 0.4 4.1 0.3 .. .. .. .. ..
Turkey
% 8.6 15.5 5.5 28.0 .. 18.7 2.5 .. 3.6 5.9 2.1
Former Yugoslavia
% 0.9 13.5 1.5 17.7 8.6 4.8 11.1 .. 7.0 22.8 ..
Belgium Denmark France Germany Italy Netherlands Norway Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom
3 7 1
1 1
911.9 237.7 596.6 314.0 095.6 679.9 157.5 539.0 526.6 337.6 972.0
9.2 .. 614.2 17.2 .. 1.1 .. .. .. .. ..
138.3 3.4 572.7 82.9 119.5 138.7 1.4 77.2 .. .. ..
5.1 .. 206.3 25.7 44.8 1.9 .. .. .. .. ..
78.5 36.8 197.7 2 049.1 .. 127.0 3.9 .. 18.9 79.4 42.0
8.1 32.2 52.5 1 296.72 94.6 32.8 17.5 .. 36.6 305.0 ..
Foreign labour force3
of which:
Total foreign labour force Algeria
% .. 0.9 15.8 .. .. 1.9 .. .. 0.1
Morocco
% .. 12.8 12.7 .. 14.7 36.5 .. .. 0.2
Tunisia
% .. 0.6 4.7 .. .. .. .. .. 0.2
Turkey
% 20.3 6.3 4.5 29.7 15.1 .. 3.2 4.8 1.3
Former Yugoslavia
% 55.0 0.9 2.0 17.8 .. .. 10.6 19.2 0.8
Austria4 Belgium5 France Germany6 Netherlands Spain8 Sweden9 Switzerland10 United Kingdom
1.
257.2 335.3 1 604.7 2 559.3 218.0 161.9 218.0 709.1 1 031.7
.. 3.1 253.3 .. .. 3.1 .. .. 0.8
.. 42.9 203.1 .. 32.0 59.2 .. .. 1.8
.. 1.9 75.2 .. .. .. .. .. 1.9
52.2 21.0 72.5 759.1 33.0 .. 7.0 34.3 13.7
141.5 3.0 31.8 454.57 .. .. 23.0 136.2 8.5
Data are from population registers for all countries except for France (census), Italy and Spain (residence permits) and the United Kingdom (Labour Force Survey). 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. 4. Annual average of valid work permits. Unemployed and self-employed are not included. 5. Data are for 1995. 6. Data (as of 30 September) refer to salaried workers only. Figures cover only western Germany. 7. Data are for Serbia and Montenegro. 8. Valid work permits. Workers from the European Union are not included in total. 9. Annual average. Data are from the annual Labour Force Survey. 10. 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.
evolution as total employment over the past decade.
a)
The proportion of foreigners in the labour force
34
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, Germany, and the United States (see Table I.2). By contrast, throughout the period the proportion has slightly declined in
France and Australia. Classied by the size of the foreign or foreign-born share of total employment, three groups of countries could be distinguished in 1996: a rst group comprised of (in descending order) Luxembourg, Australia, Canada and Switzerland, with shares between 54 and 18 per cent; a second group, comprised of Austria, the United States, Germany, Belgium, France, and Sweden where the share was at a much lower level, between 10 and 5 per cent; and a third group comprised of Norway, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Denmark, Italy, Spain and
Portugal with foreign shares of total employment at less than 5 per cent.
b)
The increase in the female participation rate
The participation rate of foreign women is typically lower (in the case of the foreign-born, much lower) than that of nationals. In certain OECD Member countries, however, foreign womens participation rates, in particular of those born in the host country, have tended to increase over the course of the last fteen years alongside female labour immigration. Nevertheless, the existence of differences depending on the countries and nationalities considered notwithstanding, analysis of the most recently available data (see Table I.5) reveals that
the participation rates of women (nationals and foreigners) born in the countries where they currently reside are still at least equal to those of women born abroad, except for Italy and Spain (new immigration countries) and Luxembourg (where labour immigration is heavily predominant). As for men, the same kind of comparison reveals less pronounced divergences between nationals and foreigners and between foreigners born in and outside the country. In addition to the three countries noted above, the participation rates of foreign-born men actually are greater than those of nationals in Austria, Canada and France. Participation rates also evidence a marked dependence on the length of stay: the differences according to place of birth and nationality tend to reduce considerably beyond a period of stay greater than ten years.
Table I.5. Participation rates and unemployment rates in selected OECD countries by sex, place of birth and nationality, 1995
Women Born in the country Born overseas Foreigners Nationals Born in the country Born overseas Men Foreigners Nationals
Participation rates
Australia Austria Belgium Canada Denmark France Germany Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Portugal Spain Sweden United Kingdom
67.6 63.1 53.2 70.9 74.2 62.2 .. 42.9 40.6 59.7 61.4 45.2 80.3 67.7
58.0 62.5 42.0 71.0 56.4 54.6 .. 51.1 51.8 48.1 47.0 52.2 64.0 58.3
.. 64.5 38.1 .. 48.3 46.8 50.8 49.8 51.2 39.8 35.1 48.6 60.2 56.1
.. 62.9 53.2 .. 74.2 61.8 62.8 42.9 40.7 59.4 61.4 45.3 80.0 67.4
86.8 81.4 72.8 86.5 86.8 75.5 .. 73.5 72.7 81.9 80.7 74.8 84.6 85.3
82.5 84.8 71.2 89.2 80.0 79.2 .. 88.6 83.2 70.4 66.4 80.4 73.3 80.0
.. 86.1 68.9 .. 78.7 76.3 79.3 84.7 80.3 64.1 64.3 85.1 69.7 76.5
.. 81.3 73.1 .. 86.7 75.2 80.4 73.5 74.1 81.7 80.5 74.9 84.5 85.2
Unemployment rates
Australia Austria Belgium Canada Denmark France Germany Italy Netherlands Portugal Spain Sweden United Kingdom
7.7 4.6 11.2 10.0 8.4 13.5 .. 16.2 7.7 7.5 30.3 6.5 6.6
10.0 7.4 23.8 10.7 16.7 19.0 .. 27.3 19.8 .. 30.1 18.5 10.9
.. 7.8 31.5 .. .. 24.4 14.8 22.6 24.3 .. 27.0 15.6 11.7
.. 4.6 11.0 .. 8.4 13.6 9.2 16.2 8.2 7.7 30.3 7.0 6.7
8.5 3.6 6.3 10.2 5.3 9.1 .. 9.2 4.8 6.3 17.9 7.7 9.8
9.8 6.5 16.9 9.7 13.2 16.5 .. .. 19.4 .. 24.1 24.8 14.0
.. 6.2 19.8 .. 16.2 20.2 15.1 .. 23.1 .. 20.7 23.5 16.4
.. 3.7 6.0 .. 5.4 9.2 6.1 9.2 5.3 6.5 18.0 8.1 9.8
Sources: Community Labour Force Survey, Eurostat, 1995; Labour Force Survey 1996 (Australia); 1991 census data (Canada).
35
Chart I.8. Foreign-born and foreign labour force, 19951 As a per cent of self-employment and total employment
Share of self-employment in total employment (%)
as a % of self-employment
as a % of total employment
Foreign-born labour force

20 Australia2 Belgium United Kingdom Sweden Denmark Spain Luxembourg (27.8) (38.5) (25.8) (24.4) 15 10 5 0 5
Foreign labour force

10 15 20
14.6
Foreign-born labour force over-represented in self-employment
17.6 13.0 10.9 9.2 24.9
(27.8) (39.1)
Foreign-born labour force under-represented in self-employment
11.2 13.3 7.4 10.2 13.6 12.2
France
United States
2
Germany3 Austria Netherlands 20 15 10 5 0 5 10 15
20
Note: Countries are split into those for which foreign-born labour force is under- or over-represented in self-employment. In each group, countries are ranked by decreasing order of the percentage of foreign-born self-employed in total self-employment. 1. 1990 for the United States, 1996 for Australia. 2. Data on foreign labour force are not available. 3. Data on foreign-born labour force are not available. Sources: Labour Force Survey except for the United States (1990 census).
c)
The proportion of foreigners in self-employment
36
Chart I.8 sets out the proportions of the foreign and foreign-born labour forces in self-employment. It also allows one to draw the comparison with these two labour force sub-groups share of total employment. The countries are themselves divided into two sub-groups according to whether the foreignborn labour forces share of non-salaried occupations is greater or less than their corresponding share of total employment. In the rst sub-group, one observes that in Belgium, the United Kingdom, Sweden and Denmark the foreign-born labour force is over-represented in non-salaried employment. This gap is much more marked than in the case of the foreign labour force.
On the whole, the reasons why the foreign-born labour force is over-represented in self-employment differ according to the country considered. It would, for example, be extremely difcult to explain the revealed tendencies without effecting a more detailed analysis of each countrys independent structure of employment. Allied to this are historical factors: immigration into the United Kingdom, for instance, is a much older phenomenon than in Denmark (Nordic nationals excepted) and is related the countrys colonial past. For diverse reasons, many immigrants to the United Kingdom either arrived already in possession of British nationality or have since resided there long enough to be able to obtain it; this greatly facilitates their access to independent employment. In Denmark, the foreign-born labour forces disproportionately high tendency to
take up self-employment could well be explained by the fact that recent immigration has been comprised largely of refugees who characteristically tend to meet with particular difculties in integrating into the labour market. It should be noted equally that the economic signicance of the gures is limited to the extent that the number of workers concerned is much lower than in the United Kingdom, and likewise the ratio of independent workers to total employment. In the second sub-group, the foreign-born labour force is under-represented among the selfemployed, with the most marked gaps in Austria, the Netherlands and Luxembourg. The same is true of their foreign labour forces. Comparisons within this group are equally difcult to draw as in the former. In Austria, for example, for the economy as a whole the proportion of self-employment is greater than in France and the Netherlands yet the legislation currently in force (designed with salaried employment principally in mind) renders more difcult foreigners access to self-employment.
restructuring. It was observed that despite economic difculties, in certain sectors the degree of dependence on foreign labour remained broadly constant. In other terms, during periods unfavourable to the supply side of the labour market the employment of foreign labour is not homogeneously fragile. To what extent has foreigners employment been sensitive to uctuations in labour demand during the period 1993-97 over the course of which all the countries studied with the exception of Germany (see Chart I.9) have experienced growth in employment? Chart I.9 indicates that for all workers, nationals and foreigners considered together, the reductions in employment in the industrial sector have been more than offset by increases in the tertiary sector. Although the employment of foreigners has followed the broad overall tendency, employment creation in the tertiary sector has not been sufcient to outweigh the massive job losses in the industrial sector in Belgium, France and Germany. The extent of the fragility of foreigners employment reveals itself clearly when one proceeds to a more detailed sectorial analysis (see Table I.6). It is possible to calculate by branch and by country an indicator comparing the changes over time in foreigners employment with that of foreigners and nationals combined. One can then compare the respective variations in employment over the course of a given period. The higher the indicators value (superior to 0), the more fragile is foreigners employment, either because it diminishes faster than total employment in times of a deteriorating employment situation or because it increases at a slower rate or diminishes during periods of net employment growth. Table I.6 brings out the very different results in the industrial and tertiary sectors. Overall, the degree of fragility is particularly high in the construction sector in Belgium and to a lesser degree in France and the United Kingdom. This fragility also concerns mining and quarrying activities and/or manufacturing in Germany, Luxembourg, France and the Netherlands. In those sectors (shaded grey in the table) where foreign labour is at present especially concentrated, the degree of fragility is correspondingly more signicant. The situation in the service sector is similarly contrasted. In certain branches foreigners have beneted 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
d)
Recent developments in the employment of foreigners and the increasing presence of foreign labour in the service sector
In the last edition of Trends in International Migration (1997), 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 countrydependent variability. In the overwhelming majority of the countries examined, public administration (posts in which are generally open 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 this edition the focus is placed on changes in total employment and the employment of foreigners between 1993 and 1997 in six European countries where foreign labour accounts for a relatively high percentage of the total labour force. An earlier study (see Trends in International Migration, OECD, 1995) covering the period 1983-92 revealed the complexity of the complementary or substitutive links between foreign and native labour in times of recession and
37
Chart I.9. Change in total and foreign employment by major industry division between 1993 and 1997 in selected European OECD countries Percentages
Total employment
1 = Agriculture -30 -20 -10 0 2 = Industry 10 20 3 = Services -30 -20 -10
Foreign employment
Total = All industry divisions 0 10 20 11 2 3 Total Belgium
Belgium
1 2 3 Total 1 2 3 Total 1 2 3 Total
Germany
1 2 Germany 3 Total 1 2 3 Total France
France
1 United Kingdom 2 3 Total 11 Luxembourg 2 3 Total 1 Netherlands 2 3 Total -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20
1 2 United Kingdom 3 Total 11 2 Luxembourg 3 Total 11 2 Netherlands 3 Total
Note: The data are based on the annual Labour Force Survey. Part of the fluctuations may be due to sampling error. The data refer to persons in employment (i.e. employers, self-employed, employees and family workers). 1. The data on Agriculture are not statistically significant. Source:Community Labour Force Survey, Eurostat.
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 of the period 1993-97, foreign labour has shown itself in the countries considered to be more exible than in the previous period (1983-92). In certain sectors, the
employment of foreigners has grown faster than that of nationals, in others the opposite is true. The trend of increasingly widespread use of foreign labour across the various sectors of the economy has continued. The prole of the present cohort of foreign workers is different to that of the immigrants of the previous generation. However, although the nature of the services which they offer has modied in response to the needs of the labour market, they nevertheless remain more vulnerable to unemployment than members of the native labour force.
e)
Foreigners are more vulnerable to unemployment than nationals
38
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
Table I.6. Comparative development of total employment and employment of foreigners between 1993 and 1997 (percentages) and fragility indicator for foreign employment (FIF) in selected European OECD countries
Belgium Growth rate of employment (%) Total Foreigners United Kingdom Growth rate of employment (%) Total Foreigners France Growth rate of employment (%) Total Foreigners
FIF1
FIF1
FIF1
Agriculture Mining and quarrying Manufacturing Electricity, gas and water supply Construction Wholesale and retail trade Hotels and restaurants Transport and communication Financial intermediation Real estate and business activities Public administration Education Health Other services Private households with employed persons Extra-territorial organisations and bodies Total
.. .. 6.4 .. 1.9 3.7 19.2 8.4 4.7 11.0 7.7 3.0 10.3 1.4 .. 25.5 2.5
.. .. 28.9 .. 16.9 0.4 23.3 10.2 31.5 13.4 109.7 36.1 8.6 3.6 .. 76.4 3.8
Germany
.. .. 3.5 .. 9.8 0.9 0.2 2.2 5.7 0.2 13.2 11.1 0.2 1.5 .. 2.0 2.5
4.7 .. 5.3 .. 7.8 4.0 12.2 7.5 1.4 26.8 3.7 9.2 11.4 13.9 11.6 13.9 4.7
9.1 .. 7.1 .. 3.2 15.4 19.4 8.1 20.1 70.0 3.8 10.4 0.9 30.9 35.5 33.9 9.9
Luxembourg
2.9 .. 0.3 .. 0.6 2.9 0.6 0.1 13.7 1.6 0.0 0.1 1.1 1.2 2.1 1.4 1.1
13.9 .. 1.7 .. 3.1 0.4 1.5 1.4 6.7 5.2 0.7 2.1 12.2 10.8 39.6 1.1 1.2
4.4 .. 8.6 .. 8.7 7.5 6.2 3.3 3.7 10.6 25.0 10.3 8.0 15.0 32.2 12.5 1.7
Netherlands
0.7 .. 4.1 .. 1.8 19.4 5.1 1.4 0.4 1.0 35.2 3.9 0.3 0.4 0.2 10.4 2.3
Growth rate of employment (%) Total Foreigners
FIF1
FIF1
FIF1
Agriculture Mining and quarrying Manufacturing Electricity, gas and water supply Construction Wholesale and retail trade Hotels and restaurants Transport and communication Financial intermediation Real estate and business activities Public administration Education Health Other services Private households with employed persons Extra-territorial organisations and bodies Total
17.7 28.4 16.1 .. 11.1 1.2 23.3 13.8 4.8 .. 0.5 3.9 47.4 11.4 11.4 41.6 2.2
6.1 33.7 22.3 .. 13.0 5.3 35.2 2.8 11.9 .. 20.9 9.0 36.4 45.5 60.8 42.8 4.6
0.7 0.2 0.4 .. 0.2 5.5 0.5 1.2 3.5 .. 41.6 1.3 0.2 3.0 4.3 0.0 1.1
.. .. 8.7 .. 8.7 8.8 7.9 12.4 21.4 15.0 .. 21.0 24.0 2.8 20.8 11.2 2.9
.. .. 19.1 .. 11.3 9.0 3.7 75.1 53.8 46.9 .. 45.1 34.9 15.5 26.7 20.1 7.9
.. .. 1.2 .. 0.3 0.0 1.5 5.1 1.5 2.1 .. 1.2 0.5 4.5 0.3 0.8 1.8
.. .. 4.4 .. 7.6 3.4 14.9 3.5 .. 15.7 2.0 1.1 9.6 16.6 .. .. 4.3
.. .. 14.0 .. 3.0 3.0 11.4 1.4 .. 8.1 5.4 11.0 31.2 5.1 .. .. 5.5
.. .. 2.2 .. 1.4 0.1 0.2 0.6 .. 1.5 3.7 9.4 2.3 1.3 .. .. 2.3
Note: The symbol . . in this table means that the sample is not statistically signicant. 1. The indicator is computed as follows: FIF = (dEti dEi)/|dEti| where dEti represents the trend in percentage terms of total employment between the two dates in a given branch i and dEi the trend in foreign employment in the same branch i. This indicator compares the relative rate of growth or decrease of foreign employment to that of total employment. The gures in bold correspond to the branches where the percentages of foreign employment are greater than their share in total employment in all branches in 1997. Source: Community Labour Force Survey, Eurostat.
39
most recently available data, presented in Chart I.10, it is in the Netherlands that this discrepancy is the greatest: on average, a foreign member of the labour force is there three times more likely to be unemployed than a national. The situation is also critical in Denmark, Belgium and Sweden. 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. Over the course of the last decade (see the previous edition of Trends in International Migration, OECD, 1997), as a proportion of total unemployment that of foreigners has tended to increase in Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and, more recently, in Austria, Sweden and Switzerland. During the same period the proportion has stabilised at a high level in Germany and France, and at a distinctly lower level in Denmark. It has declined slightly in the United Kingdom. That there exist differences between the unemployment rates of foreigners and nationals and 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 prole 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 nonnegligible 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 low-skilled manual jobs in precarious sectors, have little likelihood of nding new employment. Family immigrations preponderance in total immigration ows, the increase in female participation rates (see above) and, in certain cases, the
Chart I.10. Share of foreigners or foreign-born in total unemployment relative to their share in the labour force, 19951
4
0
a ia es nad ral tat Ca Aust ted S i Un in aly rg nd ce nd ria m ce ny en m rk ds Spa It bou Irela Gree Finla Aust ingdo Fran erma wed elgiuenma erlan B D th S em G dK Lux Ne ite Un
40
1996 for Australia, 1991 for Canada and 1990 for the United States. For these countries, data refer to foreign-born citizens. In all other countries, data refer to foreign citizens. Sources: For EU countries: Community Labour Force Survey, 0 Eurostat; Australia: Labour Force Survey, Australian Bureau of Statistics; Canada: census data, Statistics Canada; United States: census data, US Department of Commerce, Census Bureau.
1.
importance of labour immigration explain the recent trends of increasing employment and unemployment among female foreigners or immigrants. In Table I.5, one observes that the rate of unemployment among foreign women is, with the exception of Spain, greater than that of nationals in all of the countries considered. Except in Sweden and the United Kingdom, foreign womens vulnerability to unemployment also exceeds that of men. In general, the rate of unemployment of women born abroad is lower than that of foreign women. 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 looking for work, foreign youths encounter the same difculties as young nationals. However, even though the level of education of immigrants children tends to come close that of nationals, the convergence is necessarily progressive and in the vast majority of cases there remains a gap, at least for the rst generation. The time spent unemployed being an inverse function of the level of educational attainment, foreign youths are, therefore, typically more vulnerable to unemployment than young nationals. To the differences due to the level of educational attainment are probably added racial and cultural discrimination which increase their vulnerability and aggravate the difculties they face in successfully entering the labour market. It is, however, difcult to quantify the effect of discriminatory practices and no less so to determine clearly whether or not the quality of the young foreigner or youth of foreign extraction plays a decisive role in deciding the labour market outcome. The recent arrival of large numbers of immigrants has also contributed to the swelling of foreign unemployment, especially since labour market conditions are far from favourable in many OECD countries, particularly for unskilled workers. Moreover, 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 sufciently 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 nding and retaining a job.
B.
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN ASIA AND CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE
In the two most recent editions of Trends in International Migration (OECD, 1995 and 1997), particular attention was given 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 extension: Asia and Central and Eastern Europe. Characterised by a diversication of the nationalities involved and the growing importance of ows 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 has been taking place within a context characterised until very recently by strong economic growth, increasing trade and capital ows, and a strong momentum towards further regional economic integration. East Asias 1997-98 nancial crisis has affected countries simultaneously concerned with both immigration and emigration. The initial impacts of the crisis on migration ows within the region will be discussed below following a brief review of the immigration ows of Asian provenance into the OECD area. Finally, special attention will be accorded to the impact of the reunication of Hong Kong (China) with continental China on migration movements within the region. In Central and Eastern Europe, the recent economic and political changes reinforced by social and 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 of the likely impact on migration ows of certain of the CEECs forthcoming membership of the European Union. An analysis of the contents of the association agreements concluded between the European Union and several of the CEECs will be developed further in the third section of this synthesis.
41
1.
Migration ows of Asian origin to OECD countries and the impact of the nancial crisis in Asia on migration ows between Asian countries
in the majority, accounting for almost two thirds, those of Asian origin now account for just over a quarter of the total. The increase in Asias importance as a region of origin is brought into sharp relief by an examination of the composition of the inows. Whereas in 1982/83, approximately 30 per cent of the immigrants authorised to settle in Australia were Asian, by 1991/92 that gure had reached 50 per cent. Since then, however, this upward trend has been moderated somewhat by increased ows from Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. Nevertheless, in 1996 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 per cent 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 and in the top ten source countries for new immigrants seven Asian countries (including Hong-Kong [China], India, the Philippines, China and Sri Lanka) have featured consistently. This trend has continued in 1996 (see Chart I.3). In that year the inow from Chinese Taipei surpassed those originating from the Philippines, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. This progression in the rankings accompanied fallbacks in the ows from Europe and the United States. The same phenomenon a decline in European migration and an increase in ows from Asia is clearly in evidence in the United States. Immigrants of Asian origin (including the Middle East) numbered 5 million in 1990, twice the gure of 1980. In 1996, four Asian countries (in decreasing order of importance, the Philippines, India, Vietnam and China) were among the top ten source countries for permanent immigrants. The intensication of traditional ows from Asia is also apparent in the United Kingdom and France. In the latter country, the proportion of Asian residents increased between the two censuses of 1982 and 1990 from 4 to 6 per cent of the total foreign population. Cambodia, Vietnam and Laos are the principal sending countries. Over the same period, the number of Asians possessing French nationality doubled. As for the inows by nationality, in 1993 only Vietnam featured in the top ten countries of origin; by 1995 China and Japan were
Over the last decade, Asia has experienced the highest rate of economic growth of any region. This growth has been accompanied by an increase in capital ows, trade and international migration. 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 diversication.
a)
Asian migration to OECD countries continues to increase and diversify
Several OECD countries, in particular the United States, Canada, Australia, France and the United Kingdom, have for many years received ows of immigrants or refugees from Asia. Since the early 1960s, such ows 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 ows from Asia surpass those from Europe From the early 1980s onwards, ows from Asia to the United States, Canada, Australia and several of European countries have intensied. In North America and in Australia, the increase in these ows has gone hand in hand with the reduction in the numbers of those coming from Europe. In Australia, residents born in Asia accounted for less than 6 per cent of the total foreign-born population in 1971; the corresponding gure for those born in Europe was 85 per cent. Over the last fteen 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 gure in excess of one million in 1996. Although as a proportion of the foreign population those of European origin remain
42
also present, the latter country retaining a place in the top ten in 1996. In the United Kingdom, despite the stabilisation, indeed the decrease in ows 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 1996, Malaysia, India and Korea featured among the top ten sending countries for new immigrants. The diversication of Asian migration ows Alongside the intensication of traditional ows, the trend of the origin countries increasing diversication is conrming itself and likewise the enlargement of the range of receiving countries. In the United States during the 1980s, immigrant ows 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 1996, 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 number of immigrants of Vietnamian and Indian origin have continuously increased. This diversication 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 per cent (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 qualied and highly qualied 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 diversication. The diversication in migration ows 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 northern) and Japan. Whereas intra-European migration, notably from Spain, Italy, Greece and Portugal, has declined since the 1970s, ows from Asia have increased. Thus, Germany receives, after France and the United Kingdom, a high number of refugees from Indo-China. In 1996, of the 7.3 million foreigners resident in Germany, 92 000 were from Vietnam, 58 000 from Sri Lanka, 35 600 from India and roughly the same number from China and Pakistan (see Table I.7). During the 1980s, the number of immigrants of Pakistani and Sri Lankan origin received by the Netherlands similarly increased. In 1996, the Indonesians (abstracting from the fact that most of them possess Dutch nationality) remained the largest Asian community, followed by the Chinese, the Vietnamese, the Pakistanis and the Sri Lankans. 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 largely 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 ows, essentially feminine, 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 1996 this number had more than doubled. The most numerous national groups, in decreasing order of size, were Filipinos (57 000), Chinese (29 000), Sri Lankans (25 000) and Indians (19 000). In Spain, Filipinos comprise the largest Asian community, followed by Chinese and Indians. From the beginning of the 1980s, migration to Japan has increased signicantly. Although nonAsian 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 per cent) of foreigners settled in Japan were Korean. In 1996, Koreans still formed the largest group of foreigners, but other nationalities were also present, in particular Chinese, Filipinos, Vietnamese, Indonesians and Indians. In addition, illegal immigration in Japan, estimated on the basis
43
Table I.7.
Japan2 Thousands
A.
Stock of Asian nationals1 in selected OECD countries in 1996

Denmark France Germany Italy Korea
% 100.0 0.4 16.6 0.4 0.6 46.4 0.4 6.0 .. 0.7 71.5
Thousands
% 100.0
.. 0.8 0.5 .. .. 2.8 0.8 2.3 2.1
Thousands
% 100.0 .. 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.9 2.2
Thousands
% 100.0
.. 0.5 0.5 .. 0.3 .. .. 0.8 1.3
Thousands
% 100.0 1.0 2.7 1.8 .. .. .. 5.2 2.3 .. 12.9
Thousands
% 100.0 4.2 18.0 .. 6.5 0.7 7.3 1.9 6.9 45.5
Total foreigners of which: Bangladesh China India Indonesia Korea Pakistan Philippines Sri Lanka Vietnam Total for the above nine countries
1 415.1 5.9 234.3 6.3 8.7 657.2 5.1 84.5 .. 10.2 1 012.2
237.7 .. 1.9 1.1 .. .. 6.7 1.9 5.4 5.1 22.1
3 596.6 .. 14.1 4.6 1.3 4.3 9.8 1.9 10.3 33.7 80.0
Spain
7 314.0 .. 34.6 35.6 .. 21.6 .. .. 58.3 92.3 242.4
1 095.6 11.1 29.1 19.4 .. .. .. 57.1 24.9 .. 141.6
148.7 6.3 26.7 .. 9.6 1.1 10.8 2.9 10.3 67.7
9.3
3.3
Netherlands Thousands
Norway Thousands
Sweden
Switzerland
United Kingdom Thousands
% 100.0 0.1 1.1 0.4 1.1 .. 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.5 4.5
% 100.0 .. .. 1.5 .. 0.2 5.5 1.1 2.8 2.9 14.0
Thousands
% 100.0 .. 2.0 1.3 .. .. .. 2.2 .. .. 5.5
Thousands
% 100.0 0.2 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.8 2.9
Thousands
% 100.0 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.6 2.3
% 100.0 2.2 0.8 6.5 .. .. 4.0 0.6 1.2 .. 15.2
Total foreigners of which: Bangladesh China India Indonesia Korea Pakistan Philippines Sri Lanka Vietnam Total for the above nine countries
725.4 0.5 7.9 2.7 8.2 .. 3.7 2.4 3.2 3.8 32.4
157.5 .. .. 2.4 .. 0.2 8.6 1.8 4.4 4.6 22.1
539.0 .. 10.8 6.9 .. .. .. 11.8 .. .. 29.5
499.1 1.2 2.8 1.7 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.7 1.3 4.0 14.6
1 243.6 0.3 3.4 4.4 0.9 0.8 1.2 3.0 7.0 7.4 28.4
1 972 43 15 128 .. .. 78 12 23 .. 299.0
B.
Stock of immigrants born in an Asian country3 in Australia, Canada and the United States
Australia (1996) Thousands Canada (1996) United States (1990)
% 100.0 2.8 1.8 2.0 .. .. .. 1.9 .. 2.4 1.2 .. 3.9 16.0
Thousands
% 100.0 4.6 4.8 4.7 .. .. .. .. .. 3.7 .. 1.0 2.8 21.8
Thousands
% 100.0 2.7 0.7 2.3 .. 1.5 2.9 .. .. 4.6 .. 1.2 2.7 18.6
Total foreign-born of which: China Hong Kong (China) India Indonesia Japan Korea Malaysia Pakistan Philippines Sri Lanka Chinese Taipei Vietnam Total for the above twelve countries
1.
3 908.3 111.0 68.4 77.5 .. .. .. 76.2 .. 92.9 47.0 .. 151.1 624.1
4 971.1 231.1 241.1 235.9 .. .. .. .. .. 184.6 .. 49.3 139.3 1 081.2
19 767.3 529.8 147.1 450.4 .. 290.1 568.4 .. .. 912.7 .. 244.1 543.3 3 685.9
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 Sweden and Switzerland and 1995 for the Netherlands. 2. Data for China include Chinese Taipei. 3. Census data. Source: National Statistical Institutes.
44
of the number of foreign nationals who have not left the territory upon the expiration of their visa or work permit, is mostly from Asia (Korea, Thailand, China, the Philippines and Malaysia). A reduction in the 1996 inows notwithstanding, Japan now appears to be becoming a regional migration pole. An analysis of its 1996 immigration gures reveals that of the ten leading countries of origin, ve 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 one per cent of the total population in 1996, comprised principally of Chinese, Taipei Chinese, Japanese, Filipino and Vietnamese nationals.
ing 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 work contracts. Recent trends in labour migration Several of the developing South-east Asian countries have emerged as both sending and receiving countries for skilled and unskilled workers. China, which is experiencing shortages of highly skilled labour and which is now receiving sizeable inows of foreign direct investment, counted approximately 90 000 highly skilled foreign workers in 1996, one third of whom were from Japan, 20 per cent from the United States and 15 per cent from Germany. In Korea, an OECD Member country since 1996, the number of foreign workers has grown over the past six years: according to some estimates, they now number approximately 225 000 of whom 13 000 are registered skilled workers and 68 000 are trainees; the remainder are working illegally. Malaysia is a source of labour for Singapore. At the same time, Malaysia receives very considerable numbers of foreign workers, over 1.5 million according to ofcial estimates. The majority are employed (legally and illegally) in plantations, construction and public works, manufacturing and domestic services. The overwhelming majority come from Indonesia, Bangladesh, the Philippines and Thailand. In the case of Indonesia, Sri Lanka and the Philippines, women account for an important share of the overseas labour force: over two thirds for the rst two countries and a half for the third. Most work as domestic helpers, nurses or entertainers. China, which has supplied labour to other countries in the region for centuries, now possesses large overseas communities and seeks to export a greater number of workers, notably to Japan, Korea and Singapore. In the latter country, foreign workers now account for more than 10 per cent of the labour force. This immigration has allowed employers to preserve manufacturing jobs not only for immigrants, but also for those nationals who are limited in their professional
b)
Intra-Asian migration and the impact of the recent nancial crisis on migration movements within the region
Migration ows 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 ows 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. In addition to the factor of rapid economic growth, intra-Asian ows have attained their importance as a result of structural change in the regions labour markets and developing regional integration in a context characterised by substantial inter- and intra-national economic and demographic imbalances. Data on labour migration in Asia are scarce and not always reliable. International comparisons are therefore difcult to draw. Moreover, in several countries the estimated number of illegal immigrants far exceeds ofcial 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 reection of the shortages of unskilled labour: since these countries restrict the entry of unskilled workers, the number of illegal foreign workers, for the most part staying after the expiry of their permits, is growing. Several countries, includ-
45
mobility and who would therefore in all likelihood become unemployed were manufacturing activities to be relocated abroad. The impact of the nancial crisis on international migration The crisis, and policy measures effected in response to it, have affected the economies of the region with varying severity. Similarly, within the regions economies not all sectors have been equally affected export oriented sectors, for example, are suffering much less than the construction sector. Labour market conditions have already deteriorated markedly in certain economies and can be expected to worsen further as large scale restructuring proceeds. The consequences for immigrant workers, who prior to the crisis were believed to number approximately ve million (quantication is extremely difcult given the widespread phenomenon of illegal immigration), have been severe and are set to deteriorate further. One can expect a sharp reduction in the demand for foreign labour. Indeed, the authorities in many of the regions economies have already decided not renew the permits of those legally registered and to expel undocumented workers. Largescale repatriation is, however, improbable for not only is such a measure potentially extremely costly both nancially and in terms of external relations, it is also exceedingly difcult to implement: the immigrants will not return to their countries of origin voluntarily. (Indeed, some countries have already experienced varying degrees of protest by immigrants faced with the prospect of repatriation.) Furthermore, the existence of rmly embedded networks of illegal workers are a considerable asset to those who wish to stay and work for employers keen to hire clandestine workers in order to hold down costs in the face of increased competitive pressure. In several South-east Asian economies, remittances from overseas workers, in addition to having made an important contribution to maintaining balance of payments equilibrium, have also been an important contributory factor in reducing income inequalities. Migrant workers working in countries whose currencies have suffered a marked devaluation (or depreciation) against the dollar have witnessed a sharp fall in the value of their remittances. Moreover, those countries whose currencies have undergone the largest depreciations are also those whose economies are in the greatest difculty; the slowdown in labour intensive sectors exacerbates the initial currency impact. Countries confronted by
a sharp fall in the sums remitted by their overseas workers will have to intensify their efforts towards ensuring that these funds are directed towards those sectors of economic activity most likely to create employment. The return of Hong Kong to China The return of Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty as a Special Administrative Region (SAR) has led to two key changes in its immigration policy: British citizens may no longer enter visa-free and the status of permanent resident with the right of abode in Hong Kong has been redened to include, subject to a numerical restriction on the daily inow, children of Hong Kong parentage born on the mainland. With the exception of being unable to choose the immigrants it receives from mainland China however, the number of whom is xed at 150 per day (45 of these places are allocated to the aforementioned children, a limitation which is currently the subject of a legal challenge), Hong Kong retains control over policy relating to international migration. This includes, most notably, the administration of labour importation schemes (generally linked to large-scale construction projects) and the issuance of employment visas to skilled professionals. The economic impact on Hong Kong of the emigration of skilled professionals has not been as severe as earlier reports had predicted. The vacancies have generally been lled with little difculty by internal promotion and fresh recruitment from overseas. A signicant proportion of those who left the province prior to the handover have returned, albeit in possession of a second travel document. Their long-term commitment to the province appears to be contingent on future political and economic developments. The new arrivals from mainland China generally have poor qualications (or qualications which are not recognised in Hong Kong). These new immigrants are therefore competing directly with those most deeply affected by the recent wave of industrial restructuring, namely, unskilled and semiskilled workers. The fears of Filipino domestic helpers (who constitute over 80 per cent of this category of worker) that they would be replaced by mainland Chinese have not been realised. This is almost wholly due to the fact that Chinese nationals cannot enter under that status. To this factor can be added the desire of the Hong Kong Chinese to retain English speakers in their households for the linguistic benet of their children.
46
2.
Recent migration trends in Central and Eastern Europe
a)
Sizeable inows and outows since the opening of the borders
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 ows, 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 nally, Turks (in Bulgaria). Another trend is that of transit migration towards western European countries. These ows 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 ows, most often in the context of international co-operation at the regional level, which frequently involves OECD Member countries. Since 1989, Central and Eastern Europe has constituted a new migration area. Due to the importance of ows 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 ows have declined markedly since 1993 despite the fact that migration ows 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.
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 ows merit highlighting: these new ows 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 ows); 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 ows. Other East-West migration ows, 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 1996 or for the most recent year for which data are available (see Table I.8), 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 foreign-born. 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 (just) 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 1996, 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 former Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and then Hungarians. The recent inows 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
47
Table I.8. A. Foreign residents who are nationals of central and eastern European countries in selected European OECD countries, latest available year
Thousands
Austria 1991 Belgium 1996 Denmark 1996 Finland 1996 France 1990 Germany 1996
Bulgaria Former CSFR Hungary Poland Romania Former USSR Former Yugoslavia Total foreigners Countries mentionned above (as a % of total foreigners)
3.6 11.3 10.6 18.3 18.5 2.1 197.9 517.7
0.7 0.8 0.9 5.7 2.2 2.6 8.1 911.9
.. .. .. 5.3 1.1 2.6 32.2 237.7
.. .. 0.4 0.7 .. 17.0 4.0 73.8
0.8 2.0 2.9 46.3 5.7 4.3 52.5 3 596.6
36.0 29.6 55.7 283.4 100.7 54.3 1 296.7 7 314.0
50.7
Hungary 1996
2.3
Italy 1996
17.4
Netherlands 1995
29.9
Sweden 1996
3.2
Switzerland 1996
25.4
Bulgaria Former CSFR1 Hungary Poland Romania Former USSR Former Yugoslavia Total foreigners Countries mentionned above (as a % of total foreigners)
1.5 3.7 0.1 4.3 61.6 .. 14.9 142.5
.. .. .. 27.4 31.7 .. 94.6 1 095.6
0.6 0.9 1.1 5.9 1.5 5.0 32.8 725.4
.. .. 2.9 15.9 3.8 .. 36.6 526.6
.. 4.6 3.5 4.4 .. .. 305.0 1 337.6
60.4
14.0
6.6
11.2
23.7
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 1995 Sweden 1996 United States 1990
Former CSFR Hungary Poland Romania Former USSR2 Former Yugoslavia Total of foreign-born Countries mentionned 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 43.8 1 407.1
.. 14.7 39.5 11.2 .. 72.8 943.8
87.0 110.3 388.3 91.1 389.9 141.5 19 767.3
6.0
10.4
16.9
5.5
14.6
6.1
1. Slovak Republic for Hungary. 2. Including Baltic States for Australia. Sources: Census for Austria, France, Australia, Canada and the United States and population registers for the other countries.
terms as a proportion of the total population and of the labour force. 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 (47 000 of the latter according to the 1990 Census) are the most numerous. In Italy, Albanians predominate followed by nationals of the
48
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. In 1996, the Poles were the most numerous (approximately 70 000, not including subcontract workers and seasonal workers), followed by the Romanians (25 000). In Austria in 1996, Polish foreign workers (close to 9 500) only just outnumbered the Hungarians and Romanians (8 900 and 8 300 respectively).
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 ve of the foreign nationals in possession of a short-term work permit, but barely one in ten of those with a permanent permit.
b)
From permanent to temporary migration
c)
After having developed rapidly from 1989, the emigration ows of CEEC nationals to western countries have slowed down. For example, in absolute terms the 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 ow of Romanian nationals has been negative. The emigration ow 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 signicant migration inows 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 originating from that region obtaining refugee status. 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. 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 1996, the majority of Poles in temporary employment did so under inter-governmental agreements for seasonal work and subcontract employment. In
* 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
Central and Eastern Europe: a regional migratory pole
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 modied their nationality laws, in particular to allow expatriates who had been deprived of their citizenship to recover it. A second set of changes has concerned the 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 ratication of the Geneva Convention on refugees. Immigration ows are increasing. Indeed, in some of the CEECs and likewise in Russia, immigration ows probably exceed those of emigration. Unfortunately, the ofcial data available do not permit the accurate measurement of the magnitude of immigration ows.* On the basis of partial information concerning the numbers of foreigners in the CEECs, it would appear that the Czech Republic and Hungary are host to the largest numbers of foreigners in possession of a long-term or permanent residence permit (in the case of the Czech Republic, 45 800 and 153 000 respectively; in the case of Hungary, 77 400 and 65 000 respectively). In addition, data on the initial registrations for short-term permits and the renewals thereof point to the sizeable volume of the temporary migration ows to these countries. In the Czech Republic in 1996, approximately 152 800 foreigners held a residence permit valid for
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.
49
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 25 000 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 continued to be so thereafter. In 1996, a total over 70 000 foreigners held a work permit there; the available statistics show that in addition to the Slovakian workers who benet from free access to the labour market, a number of Ukrainians and Poles are also registered. In Hungary, Romanian workers account for just under half of those in possession of a valid working permit (the total in 1996 was 18 800). Immigration is also developing in Poland and Bulgaria. Regional for the most part, and largely involving members of ethnic minorities, the immigration ows also originate from more distant regions such as Asia (for example, Vietnam and China) and the Middle East. 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 of ows from the Slovak Republic in those to the Czech Republic and similarly those from Romania in Hungarys inows. 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 conicts in areas such as the former Yugoslavia, also contribute to explaining migration ow patterns. The number of refugees from the former Yugoslavia in the CEECs 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 ourishing is a countrys informal economy, the greater the pace at which the employment of immigrants in an irregular situation develops. Poland and the Czech Republic are the main poles of attraction, largely as a result of their relatively higher average wages, the convertibility of their currencies and the relatively low unemployment rate in the Czech Republic. The majority of transit migrants to the Czech Republic come from the former Yugoslavia; those to Poland are largely from Bosnia-Herzegovina and the former Soviet republics. Gypsy migrants come mainly from Bulgaria, Romania and the Slovak Republic. These latter countries also serve as transit countries for migrants, most of whom come from the former Soviet Union, seeking to enter Greece or Turkey in the south and the Czech Republic to the north and onwards towards other Western European countries. Far from all transit migrants actually 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 ows. Various forms of cooperation have been established with OECD coun-
50
tries in order to develop such policies. At the same time, the CEECs have also begun to co-operate among themselves and co-ordinate their actions in order to better dene the regulations governing the movement of persons within an enlarged European migration space. Four conclusions emerge from this overview of recent migration trends in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. First, East-West migration ows are continuing and reveal the predominance of certain nationalities and the relative importance of certain host countries. One notices next that these ows are currently at levels lower than those registered between 1989 and 1992; this illustrates the desire on the part of OECD countries to control EastWest ows 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 ows to the CEECs, considered in their entirety, are growing.
the EUs enlargement towards the East, the prospect of sizeable uncontrolled immigration ows is somewhat more imagined that real. It therefore follows that although the migration issue should be taken into account in the present and forthcoming debates concerning the calendar and procedures for the EUs enlargement, it should not be overemphasised. The reasons for this cautious optimism result from the considerations outlined below. Whilst it is clear that the migration issue is one of the challenges linked to the integration, over the long term, of the CEECs into the EU, other factors of an economic, political and social nature are no less important. Moreover, the membership process could very well be accompanied by certain transitional measures such as those which might postpone the free movement of persons to a date beyond that of a particular countrys entry to the Union such measures were taken at the time of Greeces, Portugals and Spains membership. In the meantime, bilateral agreements could be made between the CEECs and member countries of the EU. For example, Austria and Germany have already signed bilateral agreements with Ukraine, the Slovak Republic and the Czech Republic. It is likely that other agreements governing the movement of persons will also be signed. Next, the requirements exacted prior to membership could also contribute to reduce incentives to emigrate. Indeed, these requirements focus on the key economic and social indicators. In so far as certain of the candidate countries are predicted to attain the required performance levels, this procedure towards convergence could lead to a reduction in standard of living disparities and likewise therefore the incentives to emigrate. Moreover, the EU has initiated a process leading to the harmonisation of labour standards; this should translate into a reduction in the number of hours worked and an increase in the minimum wage. Whatever the delays in the implementation of this policy, the CEECs will be obliged to conform to the accepted norms. The resulting improvements in working conditions will lead to a corresponding reduction in the incentives to emigrate. As the migration trends (presented above) reveal, in the hypothetical situation whereby the memberships of a number of the CEECs occur simultaneously, their emigration ows would not become uniquely directed towards the existing member counties of the EU. Given the economic imbalances which exist at the heart of the CEECs [which are
d)
The forthcoming enlargement of the European Union to include countries from Central and Eastern Europe: the likely impact on migration ows
The process of economic and social transition which the CEECs are undergoing is accompanied by a desire to join the European Union. Between 1994 and 1996, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia presented their candidacy. This group of countries covers an area of just over one million square kilometres (in other terms, one third of the size of the current European Union) and count over 100 million inhabitants (that is, 30 per cent of the present total population of the member countries of the EU). Of these countries, Poland and Romania together contain over half of the total population of the CEECs. The member countries of the EU are concerned about the consequences that the enlargement of the Union might have on the immigration ows originating from or transiting through the CEECs. A preliminary assessment based on research carried out under the auspices of the OECD leads one to the conclusion that although migration merits attention as an important question in the context of
51
Table I.9.
Central and Eastern Europe: economic indicators, 1997

Czech Republic Hungary Poland Slovak Republic Bulgaria Romania
Population (millions of inhabitants) Total employment (thousands)1 Unemployment (thousands)1 Unemployment rate (%)1 Industrial production (Index 1990 = 100)2 Labour productivity (Index Q4 1992 = 100)3 Monthly earnings (US dollars)4 Exports (billions of US dollars)5 Index 1991 = 100 Imports (billions of US dollars)5 Index 1991 = 100 Sum of FDI, net6 (billions of US dollars)
10 299 4 905 242 5 81 118 357 23 271 27 308 8
10 135 3 610 349 9 101 131 305 20 211 21 235 14
38 660 15 177 1 923 11 139 146 267 27 213 39 303 8
5 388 2 194 287 12 82 111 279 9 .. 10 .. ..
8 283 3 090 491 14 62 130 81 5 169 5 198 1
22 526 11 050 707 6 68 142 118 8 261 11 254 2
1. 1997 Labour Force Survey data. 2. Slovak Republic data refer to 1996; Bulgaria data refer to Q3 1996. 3. Labour productivity in industry; Czech Republic data refer to Q4 1993; Bulgaria data refer to Q3 1996. 4. Total gross average wages; applying average period exchange rate; 1996 data for Czech Republic and Bulgaria. 5. Bulgaria data refer to 1996. 6. Sum of foreign direct investments from 1992 to 1997; 1997 data are estimates. Sources: OECD-CCNM Labour Market database; Short-term Economic Indicators: Transition economies, OECD; OECD National Accounts database; EBRD, The Economics of Transition, Vol. 6, No. 1.
reected in different standards of living, real wage levels and unemployment rates (see Table 1.9) important factors inuencing the decision to emigrate] it is quite likely that a large part of any migration ows will be directed towards the more developed of the new members.
C.
AN OVERVIEW OF MIGRATION POLICIES
Migration policies in OECD countries can be grouped into three broad areas. The rst consists of measures adopted nationally to strengthen the control of ows (including those of asylum seekers) and to more effectively ght against illegal immigration. The second covers all measures that aim to ensure a better integration of migrants in the host country. The third concerns international co-operative measures taken on a bilateral or regional level in order to improve the management of migration ows. Due to the nature of contemporary migration, international population movements raise a number of common challenges for public policy: inow and outow control (both quantity and selection criteria), labour market regulation with respect to the new foreign labour force, and the integration of increasingly diverse categories of migrants (including immigrant workers, their families, temporary and permanent migrants). But the responses of individual countries differ substantially according to the
52
nature of the migration system (whether oriented more towards settlement or labour), the countrys geopolitical situation, and the its willingness (which has been shown by most OECD countries) to exercise its sovereign right in matters of admission, exit, and stay of foreigners. Certain Member countries of the OECD which have recently had to establish policies in order to control migration ows (southern European countries and certain countries of Central and Eastern Europe) nd their policy options heavily inuenced by the dominant migration systems already in place in the traditional immigration countries of Western Europe. Those that are already Members of the European Union (EU), like Greece, Italy, Portugal, and Spain, have modelled a signicant portion of their legislation on the policies in force among other EU Member countries. Those who have more recently joined the EU, such as Austria, Sweden, and Finland, nd themselves obliged to implement directives of the European Commission or provisions on immigrants rights that are contained in co-operative agreements between the Commission and a number of non-Member countries. Those Central and Eastern European countries (CEECs) which have already begun negotiating their possible entry into the EU, are endeavouring to establish new migration policies that conform to EU standards in the areas of the entry of refugees, the stay and employment of foreigners, and the control of borders.
1.
Policies for regulating and controlling ows
Policies intended to better control ows concern essentially i) the redenition of the conditions of entry and stay for foreigners, ii) the revision of legislation and procedures pertaining to the right to asylum, and iii) the reinforcement of control systems both at the border and within the country in order to prevent and combat illegal migration.
model in favour of the distinction between EU and non-EU countries. Polands Parliament replaced the Aliens Act of 1963 with a new Aliens Law, effective as of 25 June 1997, in response to the increased inow of undesirable immigrants. Other agreements, including the European Social Charter (with the exception of article 20) were ratied as part of increasing co-operation with neighbouring European countries. Poland is one of several countries that have adopted a formal policy of repatriation of its ethnic nationals. In the wake of the dissolution of the former Soviet Union, the Baltic States, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania, have been similarly engaged in reintegrating displaced nationals and their descendants. For the moment, return ows have been minimal and have met with more integration problems than anticipated. Language and cultural estrangement are often a consequence of prolonged separation, and it is not uncommon for only one spouse to be of the target ethnic tradition. In Belgium, the Vande Lanotte Law, enacted in July 1996, amends the Act of 15 December 1980 on the entry, stay, settlement and deportation of foreigners with the aim of tightening immigration controls and limiting the entry and settlement of nationals from non-EU countries. The Act also contains provisions placing greater responsibility on transport operators, conferring on them the duty to check not only the entry papers required of certain categories of foreigners but also that passengers have the means to support themselves during their stay in Belgium. Foreign students must prove that they have sufcient funds to live on and any person found to be excessively prolonging their studies can be refused permission to stay. Also, family members of students may receive orders to leave the territory if their income and living conditions are considered unsatisfactory. One of the more contested components of the Law is the extension to eight months of the administrative detention period for foreigners found to be in an irregular situation, with the possibility of prolongation. In other OECD countries, changes and revisions to migration policy have been prompted by specic events. After a documentary on gypsy integration in Canada was broadcast on Czech TV in August 1997, Canada received a ood of applications from Czech gypsies (Roma) wishing to emigrate there. Concerned by the possibility of a mass inux of Roma, Canada responded in October of the same year by restoring visa requirements for Czech tourists.
a)
The regulation of ows and the implementation of new legislation
Recent trends show that OECD countries have adopted a more restrictive attitude towards the entry and stay of new immigrants. Several countries have introduced signicant changes to their legislation [see above and in the detailed country notes (Part II)]. In most cases the changes aim to tighten the rules governing family reunion and to establish more selective criteria for permanent immigration. For many European OECD countries, where unemployment levels remain high, the wish to place stricter limits on immigration ows (while still permitting family reunion and refugee movements) is in part due to the necessity of meeting new requirements imposed by adherence to the Schengen Agreement and, for certain countries, the EU. Most non-OECD European countries, principally those of Eastern Europe, have embarked on the complete revision of their legislation on immigration, either in the hope of facilitating their entry into the EU or simply in order to improve their control of migration ows. In the case of nations once associated with the former Soviet Union, these migration phenomena may represent new challenges not adequately covered by existing legislative regimes. The Schengen Zone has been enlarged from seven (Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain) to ten countries with the inclusion in 1997 of Austria, Greece, and Italy. Participating countries have been revising legislation in order to accommodate the requirements of the Agreement. At the same time, certain difculties remain regarding these countries implementation of this Agreements and Frances overriding concern about the circulation of illegal drugs which has led it to provisionally re-establish border controls with some participating countries. In Switzerland, the Federal Commission is currently engaged in drafting a new Law on the Residency and Settlement of Foreigners that moves away from the three circle
53
Following a signicant increase in illegal immigration and large inows of migrants from Albania and the former Yugoslavia, Italy has been occupied with revising its immigration legislation. The new law, which is intended to promote the integration of regular immigrants, also introduces an entrance quota system and seeks to curtail illegal immigration, notably through a policy of immediate expulsion. In Austria, quotas on the number of available residence permits were reduced in 1996. Austrias accession to the European Economic Area (EEA) in 1994 and to the EU in 1995 has led to important policy changes. Austrias policy has been brought into conformity with EU regulations: citizens of EU member countries are no longer included in the quotas set on residence visas, and Austria must now comply with special agreements made between the EU and non-EU countries (in particular, that concluded with Turkey). In addition, the allowances granted to foreign residents whose children were living abroad were abolished in October 1996. Parents wishing to get round this restriction by bringing their children into Austria are, over the short term, largely prevented from doing so by the quota limits established on family reunion. In the Netherlands, the Aliens Employment Act (1 September 1995) has replaced the Foreign Workers Employment Act with the goal of better regulating the employment of non-EEA foreigners in the Dutch labour market. In Switzerland, seasonal permits have been limited to the nationals of traditional recruitment countries from the EU and EFTA, and only in special cases will be granted to nationals of other traditional recruitment countries. Prior to the new Act on the entry of seasonal workers (19 October 1994), only new work permits had been subject to this rule. Recent measures in Germany have also been designed to restrict entries of new workers from countries outside the EU. The United Kingdom government put forward a Special Immigration Appeals Bill (21 May 1996) in response to the decision of the European Court of Human Rights according to which existing appeals procedures did not fully meet the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights in cases where deportation had been made on national security grounds. Canada, Australia, and the United States continue to seek immigrants for permanent settlement. The selection policies of these three countries differ signicantly from those of EU member countries. In the United States, one provision of the Illegal Immi-
gration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, passed in September 1996, increases the sponsoring income for legal immigration and strengthens its enforcement. This new legislation will particularly affect people who may have difculty meeting the new income-level criteria and who will therefore no longer be able to legally bring in their non-US citizen relatives, including spouses and children. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of August 1996 (often referred to as the Welfare Act) restricts benets for nearly all categories of legal permanent residents to two major Federal assistance programmes (refugees and asylum seekers are exempt from these restrictions). In Canada, general regulations have also been tightened and family sponsorship criteria stiffened, making it more difcult for low-income Canadians to bring in their relatives. In Australia, where in 1996 the government made it clear that it intends to tighten entry rules for immigrants, reduce overall immigration levels, and reduce the burden on the state budget by ensuring that immigrants and their sponsors meet their fair share of initial costs, the introduction of similar restrictions is being discussed. Greater emphasis is being placed on skillbased rather than family-based immigration in the issuance of residency visas. Canadas Adjustment Assistance Programme was rebaptised the Resettlement Assistance Programme in April 1998, and will no longer be providing direct assistance to immigrants; it will instead fund services provided by other institutions on a contractual basis. The Australian government has adopted an integration strategy that provides grants to ethnic and other community organisations involved in the settlement of immigrants. Japanese migration policy continues to focus exclusively on the entry of foreigners with technical expertise, special skills or knowledge, or who engage in business requiring knowledge of a foreign culture not possessed by Japanese. The criteria for entry under the category of entertainers was tightened out of concern that those entering through that category were often not fully qualied. The stricter criteria has led to a fall in their entries. National preference in the labour market Most OECD countries have legislation in place to protect the domestic labour market. This legislation, often referred to as the priority rule, requires that nationals or resident foreigners be given the opportunity to apply for jobs before permits are
54
issued to newly entering foreigners. In Luxembourg, 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 the EEA. In Finland, an amended Aliens Act came into force in March 1994 which implemented a new procedure for issuance work permits to employers. This procedure links the issuance of work permits to foreigners with the local labour market situation. In the Netherlands, the legislation of September 1995 re-afrms the priority rule for the Dutch labour market. In Bulgaria, high unemployment and increasing inows of foreigners claiming to be in transit (many of whom, it is suspected, enter the labour market) led to the addition of new selection criteria for work permits in 1996 requiring foreigners to have special skills or a specic educational background completed by professional experience. In addition, employment contracts must be full-time and Bulgarian employers must rst attempt to hire Bulgarian workers. In Hungary, the employment situation may constitute grounds for refusal to employ any foreigners wishing to work there. The same has been true of the Slovak Republic since 1995. The United States is considering a variation on the priority rule in the area of H-1B visas, normally issued to professionals and intra-company transferees working temporarily in the United States. The Department of Labor is proposing reforms which would require employers to attest that they had not laid off US workers in the occupations for which they are seeking foreign staff for the six months prior to and after the request. They would further have to attest that they had rst tried to hire US workers. A reduction in the authorised stay from six to three years has also been proposed in order to better reect the permits temporary nature. Facilitating the ows of the highly skilled Several countries have implemented policies to facilitate the ows of highly skilled immigrants. In France, labour market access has been facilitated and employment eligibility requirements relaxed for highly skilled foreigners through new provisions designed to streamline the procedures for renewing temporary work and residence permits. In Switzerland, legislation of October 1995 facilitates the immigration of skilled workers by allowing family members access to the labour market and permits the entry of service providers on a temporary basis.
An important policy initiative in Australia has been directed at developing mechanisms to encourage both permanent and temporary business migration. Provisions allow business people who are temporarily in Australia to more easily apply for permanent residency and to establish a business with greater ease. Canada and Australia continue to use point systems as a means of selecting highly skilled immigrants. This may, however, be a factor contributing to the phenomenon of urban settlement, as the skills accorded the highest importance are usually exercised urban areas. The United States allots a xed number of visas to foreigners of exceptional ability and who possess international recognition in their eld of activity, including sports. NAFTA has increased the ease with which workers (business investors, traders, intra-company transferees, and professionals) can temporarily move between the United States, Mexico, and Canada. At present, however, most circulation has been limited to the United States and Canada. NAFTA provisions, it should be noted, do not concern permanent settlement. Immigration policies in the new host countries Over the course of the past decade, a number of countries which were not accustomed to receiving sizeable inows of immigrants have found themselves ill-equipped to effectively control these ows. They have responded by enacting new legislation in order to clarify vague or inadequate policies and to establish authorities responsible for migration. New legislation addressing, inter alia, the conditions for the entry, residence, departure, and expulsion of foreigners was enacted in Poland (1997) and in the Slovak Republic (1995, 1996). In the face of ever-increasing numbers of immigrants, the Czech Republic is preparing a new law on the entry and stay of foreigners which will resemble legislation currently existing within the EU. Specic changes will be made in the areas of category of stay and visa practices, and Czech embassies and consulates will henceforth handle the issuance of residence permits. Romania might likewise be described as a country of immigration. Its liberal regulations governing entry, such as visa-free entry for tourists, and the fact that managers do not need work permits, favour international migration. Romanias liberal policies have also contributed to its role as a transit country in East-West ows. Entering the country is relatively easy; transit migrants are usually only detected when attempting to exit
55
Romanias western border. The government is trying to closely model its legislation on the norms of the EU. Increased numbers of foreigners in Mexico, especially refugees from Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras, has led to a revision and redenition of migration policy within the larger framework of the General Law on Population. On 26 February 1996, Mexico and Guatemala signed a joint declaration recognising the necessity of establishing a legal framework for Guatemalan temporary agricultural workers in Mexico, who at present have no legal status to ensure protection of their rights. The Baltic States have become countries of emigration, in their case to the East rather than to the West. Under the Soviet regime they received considerable numbers of immigrants from other Soviet republics: from the end of the Second World War to 1989 their foreign populations increased from 20 to 48 per cent. With the dissolution of the former Soviet Union they have begun experiencing problems with the integration of these foreign-born populations, who usually do not speak the local language. There have been sizeable return ows of these immigrants to their countries of origin. Regarding immigration, the basic policies of the Baltic States remain restrictive: only return migration of ethnic nationals dispersed throughout the former Soviet republics is actively encouraged. Nevertheless, mirroring the situation which prevails in certain CEECs countries, they have also become transit countries for migration towards western and northern Europe for nationals of Asian countries, mainly India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Measures to encourage voluntary return Several European OECD countries have established policies to encourage the voluntary return of immigrants to their countries of origin, especially those who were granted a temporary status for humanitarian reasons. This primarily concerns nationals of the former Yugoslavia. In Spring 1998, the Dutch Parliament discussed a proposal for a new Act on return migration. It was proposed that nancial support be made available to immigrants wishing to return to their country of origin. Most of the potential beneciaries are nationals from former labour recruitment countries (Morocco, Turkey, Cape-Verde Islands, states of the former Yugoslavia) or from Surinam, as well as refugees. The proposed subsidies would cover travel
costs and moving expenses. In certain cases, moreover, a special allowance would be granted in order to help defray the initial resettlement costs. The Ministry of Development Co-operation has already set up pilot projects with the same goal. These projects target both legal immigrants and rejected asylum seekers. They provide support similar to that set out in the proposed Act. Both the Act and the initiatives of the Ministry have been met with some support from NGOs and refugee associations.
b)
Laws and procedures concerning asylum seekers
56
In all OECD countries, the procedure for granting refugee status is regulated by the Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951 and by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967 which dene the criteria for determining the validity of asylum requests and for according refugee status. In reaction to the strong growth in the number of requests for asylum since the early 1990s, most countries have introduced new legislation and implemented new administrative procedures, in particular to speed up the processing of applications and to deal more quickly with manifestly spurious requests. The objective of these policies is to prohibit entry to persons whose request is clearly unfounded and to avoid giving unsuccessful applicants the time to familiarise themselves with the society of the host country and plan an illegal stay. In addition, many countries have introduced the principle of safe countries into their asylum legislation, enabling asylum seekers to be rejected on the basis that they have come directly or have passed through a country considered safe. Recent measures have also had the goal of improving services provided to refugees and to asylum seekers whose requests are deemed legitimate. Due to the growing number of asylum seekers (and temporary refugees) over recent years, the issue of voluntary repatriation is high on the agenda in many OECD host countries. Another interesting development has been the recourse to sophisticated technology in order to facilitate the identication of foreigners. An amendment (June 1997) to Denmarks Aliens Act authorises the taking ngerprints and pictures of foreigners, and using DNAtesting in cases of family reunion. The Dutch Ministry of Justice has announced a number of measures to curb inows of asylum seekers (principally from Iraq and Afghanistan). These include the use of ngerprints as a means of checking identity. Several Nordic countries are currently discussing the possi-
bility of sharing information and making it available, as technology permits, to other EU countries. Hungary recently passed a new Asylum Act. It took effect in March 1998 and recognises several categories of refugees: refugee for reasons of race, national status, social group, or political conviction; asylum seeker eeing foreign invasion, war, or ethnic confrontation; and, accepted refugee facing death, torture, or inhuman or humiliating treatment. A draft of Bulgarias Refugee Law was discussed with representatives of the UNHCR and the Bulgarian National Assembly in Geneva in December 1996. The creation of transit centres at Soas international airport and near border checkpoints is being considered. In July 1996, the United Kingdom passed a new Asylum and Immigration Act which denies social benets to asylum seekers who do not immediately make their request on entering the country and to those appealing a rejection. Moreover, in addition to designating safe countries from which asylum applications are now unlikely to be successful the Act also contains provisions designed to speed up the processing of asylum appeals by extending the accelerated appeals procedure to a wider range of cases. The Dutch Parliament introduced the principle of safe countries in August 1994, enabling asylum seekers to be rejected on this basis. In order to better implement this policy, new asylum centres were opened at the Belgian and German borders for the immediate rejection of applications coming from any safe country. The Netherlands is expected to ratify an amendment to the 1994 Law (specically, article 15c) which would introduce the possibility of deeming a claim unfounded when it can be proved that the asylum seeker is responsible for the destruction of identifying documents. As a result, some airlines now collect passenger documents and retain them until arrival. In Germany, tougher legislation introduced on 1 July 1993 to clarify the eligibility criteria for asylum applications has drastically reduced the number of requests regarded as justiable and also increased the recognition rate. In the United States, asylum seekers who make their request from US territory are no longer allowed immediate access to the labour market, a decision which should reduce the attractiveness of this entry channel. Also in the United States, the stafng levels of the departments that process asylum applications have been increased. In Denmark, several changes concerning asylum seekers were made in 1995 to the Aliens Act. The earlier introduction of a procedure to
enable applications to be refused if unfounded or based on insufcient information has contributed to the streamlining of the administrative procedures and has not only resulted in an overall decline in the number of asylum seekers since 1994 but also a reduction in the number of applications from nationals of countries considered safe. Since January 1995, most Bosnian war refugees have been granted a residence permit enabling them to benet from the same integration programmes available to recognised refugees (housing, social benets, education, and work permits). Ireland is currently experiencing unusually high numbers of asylum requests, although the numbers are still small in comparison with those of other EU countries. This may be due in part to a spill-over effect resulting from the more restrictive stance recently adopted by traditional receiving countries. This new interest in Ireland may also be due to the passage of the 1996 Refugees Act which makes asylum procedures more transparent and broadens the denition of refugee as established by the 1951 Geneva Convention and the 1967 Protocol: Ireland recognises persecution for reasons of gender, sexual orientation, or membership of a trade union. The Act is the rst signicant legislation in this area since 1936, establishing an Applications Commissioner to independently assess applications for asylum as well as an Appeals Board. It contains provisions that ratify the Dublin Convention on the rules for examining asylum applications within the EU. In Belgium, legislation of 10 and 15 July 1996 (the Vande Lanotte Law) extends the period of detention for undocumented foreigners. During this period, the relevant authorities are responsible for making the necessary arrangements for return to the home country. Another measure introduced by the Act requires that all applicants for asylum be accommodated in a reception centre. Certain Belgian communes have been refusing to register applicants for refugee status. Several countries have abolished the temporary protection categories created to handle requests for asylum by nationals of the former Yugoslavia. In Sweden, the new immigration law passed in November 1996 went into effect in January 1997. The law applies a broader interpretation of the Geneva Convention with regard to the provision of protection to asylum seekers. At the same time, however, the right to asylum was restricted to war refugees and the protection category of de facto refugee was
57
abolished. In Belgium, the displaced person status, created in 1992 to handle requests for asylum from nationals of the former Yugoslavia, was abolished. In Norway, according to the White Paper on Refugee Policy debated by Parliament in June 1995, the instrument of collective protection will be used only in the case of large-scale refugee ows and will offer temporary protection, after consultation with the UNHCR and the affected country. The police will no longer conduct interviews with asylum seekers; instead, the Directorate of Immigration will take over that function. In addition, appeals on their decisions can now be made to the Ministry of Justice. Following the recommendations of the UNHCR, a number of countries are seeking to repatriate convention refugees when conditions in their countries of origin permit. With the improved situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina since the Dayton Agreements (1995), the Czech Republic decided in November 1996 to implement a programme of voluntary repatriation of refugees from those countries. This programme required all refugees not in jeopardy of losing their lives and t for travel to leave the Czech Republics territory by 30 September 1997. Harmonisation of asylum policy Most EU countries have already taken measures to harmonise their policies on asylum seekers and to bring them into conformity with the protocols of the Schengen Agreement. In most cases, changes concern the denition of asylum seeker and the right to residence and work for those whose status is recognised. Measures facilitating the expulsion of those not granted asylum status are also common points in recent legislative developments. Greece has recently sought to bring its legislation into accordance with EU directives, Council of Europe conventions, and the Geneva Convention (which Greece signed in 1959, but with reservations concerning the right of refugees to work and circulate freely). Laws passed in 1996 set out the procedures regulating the bestowal of political refugee status, the processing of asylum requests as well as the granting of work permits to recognised refugees. The Czech Republic adopted a new law in March 1997 that expedites the processing of applications for asylum and provides greater protection for refugees. Although it receives relatively few applications, Romania passed new legislation on asylum seekers in 1996. At the end of 1997, the Baltic States
adopted laws on refugees and asylum seekers which bring them within the norms established by the Geneva Convention and the New York Protocol. For the moment, only Lithuania has begun practical application of these procedures. Faced with increasing ows from Iraq and Afghanistan, the Dutch government is attempting to increase co-operation and harmonisation with Germany and other EU Member countries. Sweden, on the one hand, and Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania on the other, have decided to co-operate in order to improve control of Swedens eastern border and prevent transit migration. The increasing emphasis on harmonisation should ultimately allow countries to place more condence in the practices of neighbouring countries that share common policies. Yet signs of reluctance to grant that condence persist. At the same time that Ireland has made its procedures concerning asylum seekers more transparent and straightforward, it has reserved the right to examine persons (other than EU citizens) arriving from the United Kingdom in order to determine their eligibility to enter (Statutory Order enacted on 29 June 1997) and in so doing pick out the bogus refugees. Although Mexico has not yet ratied the Geneva Convention, a new programme for Guatemalan refugees was initiated in August 1996. Refugees will be able to obtain documents allowing them to live and work legally in Mexico. The programme also enables refugees to acquire Mexican nationality if they have children born in Mexico or are married to Mexicans.
c)
The ght against illegal immigration
OECD countries continue to combat illegal immigration by means of stricter border controls, workplace inspections, and identity checks within their countries. These measures are intended respectively i) to make it more difcult for people to illegally enter the country (with falsied or invalid documents, or by illegally crossing the border, ii) to reduce illegal participation in the workforce, and iii) to discourage illegal residence, particularly by persons who overstay their visas or residence permits. This latter infraction is of particular concern to the United States, where some 40 per cent of illegal immigrants in 1996 were visa overstayers. Most OECD Member countries continue to experience illegal immigration, indeed its growth. It is quite apparent that this activity is organised on an
58
international level, with increasingly sophisticated methods being employed by trafckers. Of particular note is the use of high technology equipment for the production of forged documents that are virtually undetectable using conventional verication procedures. These trafcking activities have also extended to new countries, which are often illequipped to respond because they have only recently become receiving or transit countries and consequently lack preventative experience. They may also lack the resources to provide an adequate response. Certain countries have already taken measures in response to the recent surge in trafcking. Such measures include increasing the polices authority, increasing the penalties for convicted trafckers and developing new technologies for the detection of forged documents and for tracking migrants movements. At the same time, co-operation among the affected countries with the aim of dismantling the trafckers networks has grown. Given the substantial fees charged by trafckers, there is a considerable risk that ties will develop with other types of organised crime, including Maa networks and prostitution rings. Poland has become one of the principal transit countries for illegal migrants heading towards the West from Asia, the Middle East, and the former Soviet Union. According to a special report prepared by the Department of Migration and Refugee Affairs published in 1997, there has been a dramatic increase in the trafcking of migrants since 1996 and likewise the number of illegal transporters associated with this trafc. Hungary too is concerned by this phenomenon which is also connected with the recruitment of young women for prostitution networks. The Czech Republic continues to be a transit country for migrants attempting to enter Western Europe, especially nationals of the former Yugoslavia. These ows have, however, decreased from the highs reached in the early and mid-1990s, possibly as a result of changes made in 1994 to visa policies regarding the Balkan Peninsula and the NIS. In the Baltic States, control of the eastern boarders remains difcult. There is an urgent need for collaboration between the East and West in order to stem these illegal activities. Traditional receiving countries have also been affected by the rise in illegal migration. Germany attributes an increase in the illegal entry of foreigners to the criminal activities of trafcking organisations that charge as much as DM 40 000 for smuggling and forged documents. The Finnish Ministry of
the Interior appointed a working group which began on 1 November 1997 to study the problem of illegal immigration. The United States continues to experience a high volume of illegal immigration (undocumented workers are estimated at 5 million, with a projected annual growth of 275 000). Mexico is the leading country of origin for illegal immigration to the US. In recent years the United States has paid increasing attention to visa overstayers. They account for over 90 per cent of the undocumented immigrants who do not originate from Mexico or Central America. The principal and perhaps most obvious response to illegal immigration is tightening borders and toughening entry legislation. In Canada, legislative changes which became effective on 10 July 1995 deny access to the refugee status request system for multiple or fraudulent claimants and for criminals. In the United States, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 includes a provision barring admission to the country for up to 10 years for individuals found to be unlawfully present. In order to combat the efforts of organised trafckers, Japans Immigration Control Act was amended to establish new penalties for the collective smuggling of aliens (effective 11 May 1997). The Immigration Bureau is also requesting that sending countries severely prosecute persons involved in smuggling activities. In Belgium, a government report on the trafcking of humans (March 1996) concluded that current policies are infrequently or poorly applied in combating the problem. It further noted the inefciency of the organisations charged with assisting victims of these activities. Sweden has raised the maximum penalty for organising illegal immigration from two to four years of imprisonment. Norway raised their penalty from two to ve years in 1997. A further penalty of up to two years was established for individuals who provide their passport or any similar travel document for the purpose of aiding a foreign national to enter Norway. Such actions are now considered criminal rather than civil offences. The majority of Norways asylum seekers initially entered the country illegally. Mexico amended its General Law on Population on 8 November 1996 to increase the penalty for individuals who trafc in persons without papers. Penalties were also increased for cases where the life or health of migrants, especially minors, is put at risk. In addition to increasing penalties for trafckers, several countries have directed efforts towards
59
developing new technologies to be used in the detection and prevention of illegal transit. Of particular concern to Canadian ofcials was the discovery of high quality counterfeit and altered Canadian visitor visas. Enhanced verication technologies and special training programmes are being designed in response to this development. Canadas work on the development of carbon dioxide detectors for shipping containers has been effective in reducing that form of clandestine immigration. The United Kingdom published a consultation paper demonstrating the governments intent to prosecute unscrupulous immigration advisers and to develop new techniques for detecting lorries carrying illegal immigrants and bogus asylum seekers. New detection procedures introduced in 1994 have already resulted in the discovery of a higher number of illegal migrants. Once detected, illegal immigrants typically make an application for asylum. In the United Kingdom a provision of the July 1996 Asylum and Immigration Act makes it a criminal offence to employ a person not having the right to work. The possibility nevertheless remains open to employers to offer as a statutory defence the proof that they had tried to establish the immigration status of their employee. Regularisation of undocumented foreigners Since the regularisation programmes launched in 1996 by Italy, Portugal and Spain, two new initiatives have been taken in France and in Greece. The results and effects of these recent regularisation programmes, however, have not yet been fully assessed. In addition, the United States and Germany have given amnesties to specic categories of immigrants and asylum seekers. Italys most recent amnesty, begun in late 1995, did not actually go into effect until passage of the relevant Law on 9 December 1996. As a result, data on requests previously accepted by the Ministry of Internal Affairs are recorded in the 1997 statistics. This decree has led to a remarkable increase in the number of foreigners legally resident in the territory, with a total of approximately 259 000 residence permits issued, in comparison with 235 000 during the 1990 amnesty and 118 000 in 1986 (see Table I.10). To qualify for this programme, applicants had to have been employed (and prove that they had worked during at least four of the previous twelve months) or have a relative they wished to join who had lived in Italy for over two years and who had sufcient income to adequately accommodate them.
Portugal recently conducted a second exercise to regularise undocumented foreigners in irregular situations, which proceeded over a period of six months beginning on 11 June 1996. The eligibility requirements were less stringent than those of the previous exercise (October 1992-March 1993), in particular with regard to the proof of the foreigners economic situation. In addition, labour organisations, management, and immigrant associations were widely involved in the procedures. Amnesty was granted based on the date of entry in Portugal: before 31 December 1995 for nationals of Angola, Cape Verde, Guinea-Bissau, Mozambique, and Sao Tome and Principe; and before 25 March 1995 for those of other non-EU countries. Available data show that approximately 35 000 applications were accepted for review and nearly 22 000 were granted (see Table I.10). Spains new Aliens Act of February 1996 contained a regularisation component that was implemented between April and August of that year. The programme largely beneted foreigners who entered the country legally during the period 1986-91 but who had not been able to renew their residence or work permit. Some 20 000 foreigners participated in the programme. France decided to carry out an exceptional regularisation programme starting in June 1997 and nishing in May 1998. The campaign was aimed primarily at regularising the unlawful status (with regard to entry or residence) of people married to French citizens, of foreigners having entered France legally outside of the family reunion procedure, of spouses of people with refugee status, and of long established foreign families. It also applied to certain categories of children who had entered France outside of the family reunion procedure and, under certain circumstances, to other clearly specied categories of foreigners (foreigners with no family responsibilities, foreigners who were very ill, students pursuing higher-level studies, and people denied asylum). As of the end of January, approximately 150 000 applications had been reviewed, and 23 450 residence permits granted. Most of these (85 per cent) were for family related reasons. In Greece, a regularisation process was implemented on 1 January 1998. The process will be completed in two phases. During the initial phase, the undocumented workers must submit an application to their local Employment and Manpower Organisation (OAED) before 31 May 1998. This involves supplying information regarding their occupation, level
60
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)2 (1987-1988) Italy (1990) (1996)3
Tunisia Morocco African countries Portugal Algeria Turkey Other Total
17.3 16.7 15.0 12.7 11.7 8.6 39.1 121.1

Portugal
Algeria Morocco China
7.0 5.5 5.0
Other Total
31.4 48.9
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

Spain
Morocco Tunisia Senegal Former Yugoslavia Philippines China Other Total
49.9 25.5 17.0 11.3 8.7 8.3 97.1 217.7
Morocco Albania Philippines China Peru Romania Other Total

United States5
23.0 20.2 18.6 8.9 8.8 5.9 62.4 147.9
(1992-1993)
(1996)
(1985-1986)
(1991)
(1996)4
(1986)
Angola 12.5 Guinea-Bissau 6.9 Cape Verde 6.8 Brazil 5.3 Sao Tome and Principe 1.4 Senegal 1.4 Other 4.8 Total
1. 2.
Angola 6.8 Cape Verde 5.0 Guinea-Bissau 4.0 Sao Tome and Principe 2.0 Brazil 0.3 Other Total 3.7 21.8
Morocco Portugal Senegal Argentina United Kingdom Philippines Other Total
7.9 3.8 3.6 2.9 2.6 1.9 21.1 43.8
Morocco Argentina Peru Dominican Republic China Poland Other Total
49.2 7.5 5.7 5.5 4.2 3.3 34.7 110.1
Morocco Peru Argentina Poland Dominican Republic Algeria Other Total
6.1 1.7 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.6 7.6 18.8
Mexico El Salvador Caribbean Guatemala Colombia Philippines Other Total
2 008.6 152.3 110.5 64.0 30.3 25.7 293.5 2 684.9
39.2
Excluding seasonal workers (6 681 persons) and around 1 200 small traders not broken down by nationality. A total of 150 000 applications were received at the end of January 1998. Data refer to persons granted a residence permit among 108 515 examined applications at the end of April 1998. By July, 73 000 permits had been delivered (out of 142 000 examined applications) but the breakdown by nationality is not available. 3. A total of 258 761 applications were received but the provisional results, broken down by nationality, cover only permits granted for reasons of work; including their spouses and children, a total of 227 300 permits were granted. 4. Provisional data. The regularisation programme was carried out from 23 April to 23 August 1996. 5. Data refer to all persons granted a permanent residence permit (excluding the dependents) during the period 1989-1996 following the 1986 Immigration and Reform Control Act. Data are broken down by country of birth. Sources: France: OMI; Italy, Portugal and Spain: Ministry of the Interior; United States: INS.
61
of education, skills, employment experience, age, family status, nationality, and country of origin. Upon completion of these formalities, the applicant will receive a temporary residence permit card (white card). During the second phase, which will last until the end of July 1998, the applicants must demonstrate that they have earned an income equivalent to 40 working days of unskilled labour. After consideration of the applicants record, the needs of the labour market and those of the Greek economy, an OAED Committee may then grant a residence card (green card) of limited duration (1 to 3 years). At the end of June 1998, approximately 374 000 applicants had been registered. The United States enacted the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act on 19 November 1997 which provided amnesty to nationals of Nicaragua and Cuba who had been in the United States for at least two years. It also allowed nationals of El Salvador, Guatemala, the former Soviet Union, and certain Eastern European countries to apply for suspensions of deportation orders under the more lenient rules that existed before the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (see above). In Germany, a programme for legalising the status of asylum seekers who reside in Germany and who requested asylum more than ve years ago has been in place since the end of March 1996. 2. Policies for integrating immigrants
It is impossible to describe the full range of processes and policies likely to increase the propensity of immigrants to integrate. This section will therefore focus rst of all on the challenges faced by the various models of integration found in OECD countries and then on two factors key to any successful integration effort: a naturalisation policy and access to education. Finally, certain of the measures recently taken to facilitate the integration or social insertion of immigrants will be presented.
a)
Models of integration
62
Along with the control of ows, one of the principal objectives of migration policy is the integration of immigrants already settled or who wish to reside in the host country for an extended period. However, assessing the success of the integration of foreign populations or immigrants in each of the host countries is problematic. In the rst place, integration strategies tend to vary from country to country, and the cultural traditions of immigrant groups are themselves diverse. Furthermore, migration ows are not of the same magnitude everywhere. Integration sets into play complex social relationships that cannot be reduced to estimates of a few select indicators (e.g. employment, sector of activity, income level, place of residence, family situation, etc.). In addition, differences between nationals and immigrants with respect to a number of indicators do not necessarily imply inequality between the two groups, nor does a convergence of behavioural patterns necessarily reect a successful integration process.
For many years, changes in the nature of the migration process and in the societies of host countries have modied the conditions for integrating foreign or immigrant populations. Although they have not been called into question, models of integration have nevertheless become more fragile. In most European OECD countries, immigrants are extending their stay and, when possible, are tending to settle permanently. In some countries a second and even a third generation has resulted from the original immigration wave. Recent changes are related, in part, to a greater diversity in both the geographical origin of migrants and in the prevailing modes of entry (notably, family reunion and asylum requests). The economic recession and the persistence of high levels of unemployment (especially in Europe) have magnied the difculties in integrating certain groups of foreigners and of aiding subsequent younger generations in their transition into the labour market. In Australia, Canada, and the United States, the underlying model of integration rests mainly on the absence of any contradiction between the maintenance of cultural and social links with the community of origin, or the claim of membership in an ethnic minority, and adherence to the ideals and interests of the nation. As immigration is viewed from the onset as long-term or permanent, the acquisition of the host countrys nationality is relatively easy and ethnic minorities are ofcially recognised. In the United States, for example, the integration of various successive waves of immigrants was carried out under this model. Political and associative networks of immigrants have existed for over a century, and ethnic minorities are sometimes concentrated in certain regions or city districts as well as in certain activities and socio-professional categories. These groups often have political representation and have their own media (press, radio, and television). Over the years, immigrants have
been able to progress in the labour market and to integrate into society, all the while maintaining an afliation to an ethnic group. Countries like Norway and Sweden, which have only recently become host to large immigrant populations, seem to be opting for a multicultural model. In September 1997, a Bill entitled Sweden, the future of a plural society from immigration policy to integration policy was proposed. The Bill requires that future legislation take into consideration the societys ethnic and cultural diversity. The Government has also proposed to review the use of the term immigrant in statutes and other documents. A report submitted to the Norwegian parliament in 1997 noted that Norway is developing more and more into a multi-cultural society and that it needs to make the most out of this diversity in order for the society to benet from immigrants resources and experience. No specic policies were proposed, but the importance of language instruction and job training was underlined. The active policies of many of the CEECs reect a primary interest in the reintegration of ethnic nationals rather than in the integration of resident immigrants. The Czech government is currently interested in assisting the return of some 40 000 individuals of Czech origin who have been dispersed in regions of the former Soviet Union. At the end of 1996, with the aid of a private foundation working with the Ministry of the Interior, several dozen compatriots and their families were brought to the Republic from regions considered dangerous (Azerbajdzan, Armenia, Georgia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kazakhstan, Kirgizia, Russia, Tadjikistan, Turkmenia, and Uzbekistan). Poland, Bulgaria, and the Baltic States are currently engaged in similar operations.
to lose the nationality of the country of origin or certain rights in that country, such as property rights. Birthplace and kinship (jus soli and jus sanguini) play a fundamental role in the procedures for the acquisition and granting of nationality. They are equally important to the integration process, as they establish a dividing line between foreign and national populations. Changes in naturalisation procedures, notably reforms that make it easier for children and grand-children of immigrants to become naturalised, have recently affected the naturalisation rates in Belgium, the Netherlands, France, and Germany. The modications have generally expanded the possibilities for the acquisition of nationality in cases where the law was restrictive, and introduced limits where the law was more liberal (for more details see the special chapter on the acquisition of nationality in Trends in International Migration, OECD, 1995). The naturalisation rate, i.e., the number of persons acquiring the nationality of the country as a percentage of the number of foreigners resident at the beginning of the year, is also a signicant indicator of integration. The Netherlands naturalised over 11 per cent of its resident foreign population in 1996, by far the highest percentage among European nations. This high rate, compared to the other European Member countries of the OECD, is not due to increased levels of net immigration but rather to the 1992 change in the regulations governing naturalisation rendering the possession of dual nationality possible. Debate in the Dutch Parliament on the high levels of naturalisation has since resulted in restrictive measures being adopted: as from in mid-1997, only nationals of countries that do not allow the loss of nationality in the case of the acquisition of another (like Morocco) will be eligible. Naturalisations have as a result decreased in 1997. Among other European OECD countries, naturalisation rates remained steady in 1996. Most countries show only a moderate increase over last years rate, or else an actual decrease, as is the case for Belgium, Germany, Italy and Sweden (see Statistical Annex, Tables B.1.7). In absolute terms, the number of naturalisations continues to be the highest in the United States, which has more than doubled its number of naturalisations, reaching over one million. This astounding gure can only partially be attributed to an overall increase in levels of immigration, being more likely due to the implementation of a green card replacement program that may have prompted immigrants to simply apply
b)
Naturalisations and the social integration of immigrants
The granting or the acquisition of the host countrys nationality can improve the prospects for integrating foreigners, just as it can reect the outcome of a gradual process of social or economic integration. The number of naturalisations essentially depends on the magnitude and date of migration waves, the more or less liberal nature of the legislation concerning the acquisition of nationality, and the incentives for obtaining the nationality of the host country. Another issue that may affect the desire to be naturalised is whether by acquiring the nationality of the host country the immigrant stands
63
for citizenship rather than renew their card. Legislation passed in 1996 restricting access to federallyfunded social programmes may also be contributing to the desire of immigrants to become citizens. (It should be noted that Social Security Income and Medicaid eligibility were restored to legal immigrants under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 for those who were eligible prior to the 1996 Welfare Reform Bill.) In Germany, the sharp rise in the number of naturalisations that began in 1994 after amendments were made in July 1993 to the Aliens Act has nally tapered off, taking a downward turn in 1996. The amendments facilitate the naturalisation procedure for long-standing foreign residents and notably for individuals able to prove their German origin. Ethnic Germans have constituted the vast majority of naturalisations over the past decade. Others are granted German nationality on a discretionary basis, with knowledge of German heavily inuencing the decision. Turks continued to be the main group naturalised by discretionary decision in 1996. Legislation passed by Turkey in 1995 may further support this trend. Now all Turkish nationals who acquire the nationality of another country may continue to own property in Turkey. Similar amendments were recently made to Mexican legislation concerning nationals living abroad. In addition, as of August 1996 a new programme allows refugees to acquire Mexican nationality if they have children born in Mexico or are married to Mexicans. Bulgaria and Turkey are discussing the possibility of giving Bulgarian Turks who presently live in Turkey the choice of citizenship in either country. In Spain, the Act of 2 November 1995 amended the legislation regarding the recovery of Spanish nationality. Prior to this Act, returning emigrants who wished to recover their Spanish nationality had to obtain an exemption from the ten-year legal residence requirement. That formality is no longer required. In France, the 1994 naturalisation gures were exceptionally high, mainly because the authorities were expediting the processing of pending cases before the 1995 implementation of more restrictive legislation (voted in 1993). A new Law on nationality has since been adopted (March 1998). It reafrms the principle of jus soli and claries the age categories and periods of residency required to acquire French citizenship for children born in France of foreign parents. In the case of marriage to a French national, the new Law returns the period of cohabi-
tation required for naturalisation to one year (it had been raised to two by the 1993 legislation). In several OECD Member countries, marriage with a national continues to be the primary means by which foreigners attain citizenship. The rates of these marriages may also be seen as an indicator of the degree of integration of immigrant groups with the wider society, as they create permanent ties with the host country. The Home Secretary of the United Kingdom has changed a component of the Immigration Rules that had previously required applicants to prove that their marriage was not one of convenience, i.e. simply a means of gaining entrance to the country.
c)
The schooling of immigrant children and their integration
64
Education is of vital importance to the integration of immigrants children. Both the level of schooling achieved and the diplomas obtained are determining factors in their success in the labour market and their integration into the society of the host country. With regard to education and integration into the school system, all governments insist on the need for instruction in the host-country language. Current debate in some countries concerns instead the issue of teaching the language of the country of origin. In a number of countries, including Germany, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands, immigrant children can receive instruction in the native language of their family either in school or in classes given outside of school. Portugal and Norway have recently instituted similar programmes. In all cases, the directing principle of one school for all is still upheld. In most OECD countries, regardless of how integration and the role of the school in this process are conceived, support and orientation services are available to foreign pupils, particularly for new arrivals who are not immediately able to enter mainstream education. The range of educational and special help facilities available usually includes introductory classes, remedial classes and extra-curricular activities (through associations or institutions). Greeces special schools established for the children of migrant Greeks from Europe and elsewhere abroad have now been renamed intercultural schools, and have been opened to non-Greek foreign pupils regardless of their legal status. The German government has decided to make the education of foreign children a high priority, recognising that at present over 40 per cent leave general edu-
cation schools with only lower secondary school certicates (compared to 25 per cent for German pupils). A directive issued in Portugal in June 1996 authorises the creation of alternative education streams to ensure that immigrants and their children have equal access to education and academic achievement. A later directive made it possible to develop projects for priority education zones that would improve the quality of education and promote innovative approaches in areas with special needs. In Sweden, the National Agency for Education recently commissioned a research centre at Stockholm University to evaluate the efciency and effectiveness of Swedish language instruction for foreigners. Norway is concerned that immigrant children are not benetting from pre-school education and day care facilities because of cost and limited availability, which consequently hinders immigrant childrens ability to learn Norwegian. Luxembourg remains committed to producing students who are completely uent in its three national languages, even in the case of immigrant children who have a different native language. While not immigrants in a strict sense, gypsy children represent a particular integration and educational challenge. The Czech Republic approved a document on 29 October 1997 prepared by the Government Council for Foreigners that underscores the urgent need to take specic steps towards their integration. The government plans to directly intervene in the area of education, establishing preparatory classes for gypsy children in order to bring them to a level of equality with other primary school children. Incentives for employers to hire gypsies are also planned. Portugals Council of Ministers, responding to similar concerns, had already passed a Resolution in October 1996 establishing a Working Group for the Equality and Integration of Gypsies.
programmes to provide immigrants with at least basic language instruction. A new trend has appeared in the nancing of integration initiatives among several of the traditional receiving countries. The governments of Germany, Australia, and the United States are reducing the direct involvement of national or federal organisms in the integration process, preferring to provide public funds to private organisations and local associations. Assistance for new arrivals In Canada and in Australia, support to immigrants is provided immediately upon their arrival in the country in the form of assistance with administrative procedures and formalities, nancial assistance, and help with language problems (interpreting, translation, language courses). Citizenship and Immigration Canada sponsors several programmes which fund activities assisting the integration of new arrivals. Its Resettlement Assistance Programme provides for the basic needs of new immigrants by contracting with local service providers. The Immigrant Settlement and Adaptation Programme provides funds to a variety of entities, from businesses to local and regional governments, that provide essential services to immigrants such as reception, orientation, translation and interpretation, paraprofessional counselling, employment-related services, etc. The Host Programme provides funding to groups or individuals who put Canadian citizens into contact with new arrivals in order to help them on an individual basis with all aspects relating to their integration. Finally, Language Instruction for Newcomers to Canada, while sponsored by the Ministry, involves local and regional groups in the development of language training strategies. Australia provides 510 hours (or more, if necessary) of English instruction to new arrivals. Its National Integrated Settlement Strategy, designed to facilitate the integration of immigrants, involves various government departments. Part of the integration strategy consists in providing grants to ethnic and other community organisations involved in the settlement of immigrants. The programme also provides a number of services which assist immigrants with administrative formalities. In Europe, integration policies are aimed at educating immigrant children, providing vocational training and host-country language instruction, as well as housing assistance and access to health care. Aid is oriented either to specic target groups in the foreign population (ethnic minorities, women, young immigrants,
d)
Integration policies and the social integration of immigrants
Integration policies vary according to the country and the nature of the integration problems encountered. According to the model of integration, policies are either designed for all immigrants or are targeted at particular groups, for assistance to new arrivals or those already settled in the host country. Of foremost concern to the governments of all receiving countries is the immigrants rapid mastery of the national language, the prerequisite to all other aspects of integration. Most countries have
65
second-generation immigrant children) or to the disadvantaged in general, foreign or otherwise. One of the principal concerns of many OECD countries has been to adapt integration policy in such a way as to respond to the large inows of asylum seekers over recent years. The Swedish government has acted upon the recommendations of the Parliamentary Commission on Immigration Policy by introducing a new Integration Bill in 1997. The Bill addresses the need for improvements in introduction programmes for new arrivals, specically in the area of Swedish language tuition, practical work experience, and orientation to social and working life in Sweden. It further establishes that the introductory programme should be followed on a fulltime basis for a limited period of time and that subsidies should be allocated by the relevant municipalities. The Bill also proposes the creation of a new authority to oversee the implementation of the integration policy in all sectors and at all levels of society. In Norway, faced with the task of settling large numbers of refugees and asylum seekers, the government requested that a report be made on immigration and multi-cultural nature of the country. This report, published in 1997, proposes that language and job training for immigrants be strengthened and that increased efforts be made to combat racism and discrimination. It is hoped that these special measures will prevent increased social and economic differences between persons of immigrant background and the rest of the population. Finlands Council of State approved proposals on 16 October 1997 made by the Committee for Policy on Immigration and Refugees that noted the need to take steps over the long-term to improve the integration of immigrants into Finnish society. A new phase in the integration policy for newly arrived immigrants began in the Netherlands in January 1996. Newcomers who receive social welfare benets may now have their benets cut if they do not participate in integration programmes. These programmes are designed to provide Dutch language skills and information likely to help foreigners integrate into Dutch society. Historically, Portugal and Greece have had high levels of emigration; they are now experiencing substantial return migration. Accordingly, both have developed policies tailored to this situation. Migration policy in Portugal has two facets, one concerning Portuguese residing abroad and the other concerning immigrants within Portugal. The two axes of
Portuguese policy have similar objectives with regards to migrants: the protection of their civic rights, their political and social integration in the host country, and the collection of information concerning their contribution to development. In addition to the many programmes that already exist to maintain links between Portugal and Portuguese nationals abroad (associations, language grants, legal and nancial assistance, special bank accounts, etc.), the Parliament passed a law in September 1996 establishing the Council of Portuguese Communities. The Council has the mission of advising the government on policies regarding emigrant communities; it represents all Portuguese living abroad who wish to be involved. Portugal also seeks to guarantee assistance to its immigrant populations and to combat social exclusion by offering full political rights (subject to reciprocity) and a straightforward naturalisation process. In order to facilitate the integration of ethnic Greek and foreign pupils, the Greek Government has put into place three types of educational institutions: reception classes for ten or more pupils, tutorial sections for three to nine pupils, and special schools for the children of returnees from English speaking countries. Albanian pupils constitute the largest group in both reception classes and tutorial sections. The special schools located in Northern Greece (Salonica) have gradually become dominated by ethnic pupils chiey Pontians from former Soviet republics. Greece is currently encouraging ethnic Greeks from Albania to return to that country and has given Southern Albania preferential treatment in order to assist its economic development. The policies of CEECs are different from those of traditional destination countries. They are generally not interested in developing integration programmes for immigrants who are likely to be in the country only temporarily. Countries such as the Czech Republic prefer to integrate and provide nancial assistance to individuals and families on a case by case basis. Integration in the labour market Vocational training and access to the labour market for young people and the unemployed, including immigrants, is another key component of integration policy. Many programmes have been implemented by Member countries at both the national and local levels. These generally target
66
high-unemployment groups (older and long-term unemployed, low skilled women, unskilled youths who did not nish secondary education) and offer either training or government-subsidised jobs in private rms or employment in the public sector. Numerous new initiatives seeking to combat discrimination in the workplace address an unfortunate problem associated with the integration of recent immigrant ows, particularly in countries that are not accustomed to permanent foreign resident populations. The Finnish Government is in the middle of a four-year project (1995-99) called Pathway to employment for the socially excluded, nanced by the European Social Fund. This project focuses on specic measures to help those who are at risk of being marginalised and establishes new co-operation between the authorities concerned and organisations. In April 1995, the Ministry of Labour established a working party to develop measures to increase the participation rate of foreigners in the labour market. In its 1997 report it identied insufcient language competence as one of the most signicant barriers to employment. The German Federal Ministry of Labour has launched schemes to help second-generation immigrants nd employment by enhancing their technical and language skills. Those completing the courses are awarded a diploma from the Chamber of Commerce and Industry and are eligible for a training course in their country of origin. Nineteen new projects involving Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal, and Turkey are under consideration. Belgium undertook a number of measures in 1996 and 1997 designed to improve the integration of immigrants and to increase their chances of entering the labour force. The Flemish region of Belgium implemented a strategic plan for immigrant policy in 1996. It focuses primarily on three important issues: improving the access of immigrants to local programmes and institutions, developing a reception policy for new arrivals, and promoting the acquisition of linguistic competence, professional training and counselling in order to facilitate job placement. In Japan, reports submitted by employers in 1994 showed that the difcult employment situation is having particularly adverse effects on the employment of foreign workers, especially those employed in manufacturing or large enterprises. In response, guidelines were drawn up by the Ministry of Labour to ensure proper working conditions for foreign workers and to provide them with special services,
for example, interpreters. The United States is not only concerned that recipients of H-1B visas may be replacing qualied native workers, but that they may also be receiving inadequate remuneration for their services. Unscrupulous companies may be hiring foreign workers as a means of evading payrolltaxes. The Nordic countries have recently introduced legislation which aims to combat racism and discrimination in the workplace. Sweden fears that discrimination may be an important factor in the disproportionately high rate of unemployment among immigrants, which has risen from just under 5 per cent in 1990 to stand currently at 30 per cent. In response, the government has appointed a commission of inquiry to revise the law against ethnic discrimination in order to stem the trend towards a segmented labour market and to increase diversity in the labour market. Norways improved economic situation has been of overall benet to its immigrant population, but they still have higher rates of unemployment than Norwegians. Studies on the attitudes of public and private employers suggest that discrimination is partly responsible, even when the immigrants experience is potentially valuable. In order to reduce discrimination, the government proposed an amendment to the Working Environment Act in Spring 1997 that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, colour, or national or ethnic background. Criteria for the recognition of foreign diplomas also poses a problem. The Ministry of Local Government and Labour, in co-operation with several other Ministries, is revising the Plan of Action against Racism and Ethnic Discrimination (1992). The new Plan will be completed in 1998. An Interdisciplinary Advisory Group on Community Relations and Anti-Racist Work has also been constituted. They advise local authorities in the prevention of conicts and the handling of acute situations where racial violence and harassment appear to be at the root of the problem. Particular attention has been given to providing assistance to parents whose children (occasionally less than 14 years old) have been recruited by extreme right-wing groups. The Finnish Ministry of Labour has also taken action against discrimination in hiring practices. The Criminal Code, amended in September 1995, states that it is illegal to practise discrimination in announcing a job vacancy, in recruitment, or in the workplace, on the basis of race, nationality, ethnic
67
origin, language, sex, age, family relations, religion, or political opinion. In Switzerland, a Federal Anti-Racism Commission was set up in March 1995 to combat all forms of racial discrimination. The Belgian Centre for Equal Opportunity and the Fight Against Racism co-ordinated the Belgian activities devoted to the EUsponsored European Year Against Racism, which took place in 1997. In November of that year, it organised a general assembly on equal opportunities and the combating of racism. The Centre formulated a series of proposals which were presented to the inter-ministerial conference on immigrant policy. These proposals ranged from simple recommendations for modifying existing legislation on racism and xenophobia to programmes designed to ght against racial discrimination in employment and housing and to further advance continuing vocational training. Foreigners political participation and other rights Full civil rights are increasingly viewed as one of the surest ways to achieve integration goals. This is illustrated by new policies adopted in several countries. The Finnish constitution was amended in 1995 to extend coverage of fundamental rights to foreign nationals. Both Norway and Sweden have recently re-afrmed the principle that all persons with the right to permanent residence must have equal rights and opportunities, no matter whether they have immigrated to the country or were born there. In Luxembourg, the Act of 23 December 1994 constituted a decisive event in the countrys political history; it amended a number of articles in order to allow foreign nationals to exercise certain political rights, in particular with regard to local elections. This constitutional amendment was reinforced by the Act of 3 July 1995, which abolished the requirement that candidates be of Luxembourg nationality in order to stand for elections to professional bodies. The earlier Act of 28 January 1994 laid down the procedure for electing representatives of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to the European Parliament and determined the conditions under which resident foreigners from EU countries would be able to participate in elections. Greece also now permits non-Greek EU citizens residing in Greece to become candidates and/or vote in European Parliament elections as well as run in local municipal and communal elections. Italys Proposed Law 3240 would give legally registered immigrants from other EU countries the right to vote
in local elections. In September 1996, the Portuguese Parliament unanimously passed a law enacting the EU Directive on the participation of nationals of other Member States in local elections; it grants the same right to other resident foreigners, subject to reciprocity. Other measures adopted in 1996 concern improving housing conditions, extending immigrants entitlement to social security benets, and the right of immigrant associations to intervene as assisting parties in penal procedures relating to racial and xenophobic crimes. The Austrian Supreme Court ruled in July 1996 that indigenous and foreign persons could not be treated differently with regard to means-tested welfare benets. These benets are typically provided to the long-term unemployed who have ceased to be eligible for insurance-based unemployment benets. At present, foreign workers only have a right to this benet if they have a permanent work permit and are then limited to one year of benet, whereas Austrian citizens have indenite entitlement to these benets. To further protect immigrant populations against xenophobic attacks, legislation recognising racism as an aggravating circumstance in criminal cases is becoming increasingly prevalent in OECD countries. After the preliminary results of Spains Plan for the Social Integration of Immigrants (1995-96) were presented to the Council of Ministers, the Penal Code was amended in such a way as to make racism and xenophobia aggravating circumstances in criminal cases. Judicial assistance and legal counsel will be provided to immigrants free of charge. Luxembourg passed a law on 19 July 1997 increasing the punishment for crimes motivated by discrimination based on ethnicity, nationality, race, or religion.
e)
Integration of immigrants in urban areas
The arrival of new immigrants, sometimes in sizeable numbers in the OECD Member countries with high unemployment and where economic growth remains weak, has created integration problems for the populations of cities where immigrants are already heavily concentrated. France has focused recent measures on improving living and working conditions in disadvantaged urban areas (Pacte de relance pour la ville). The stated objectives are to combat exclusion in urban areas and encourage the occupational, social, and cultural integration of people living in high-density housing
68
complexes or in distressed areas. The programme ranks vulnerable areas according to their economic and social problems and introduces positive discrimination in the areas of nance, taxation, education and housing. In Belgium, resolutions adopted in September 1995 by the Interministerial Conference to facilitate the integration of foreigners have notably signalled the future concentration of nancial and human resources on specic projects in large urban areas. In Sweden, along with the Bill submitted to Parliament entitled Sweden, the future of a pluralist society from immigration policy to integration policy (1997), the government also implemented an all-over-Sweden strategy for settling immigrants with the States nancial support. This is a response to the continuing concentration of foreigners in the countrys three principal cities that has the effect of segregating them from the Swedish population. In Denmark, some municipalities have established limitations on how many refugees or immigrants are allowed to settle in certain urban districts in order to avoid high concentrations of immigrant groups. In many OECD countries, immigration to cities has positively contributed to either maintaining the urban population or promoting to its overall growth. Immigrants may slow the disintegration of neighbourhoods as they ll the voids left by the middle classes. They can invigorate urban economies and promote economic development through the rehabilitation of housing and the creation of small business enterprises in older neighbourhoods, investing mostly their own capital. In addition, links between immigrants and their country of origin may also attract and facilitate investment by entrepreneurs residing in those origin countries. This will benet the urban areas in the receiving country where members of the same ethnic groups reside. At the same time, in a context of diverse scal pressures, debates inevitably arise about infrastructure impacts and the costs of social service provision for immigrants. While these debates touch on effects that can be felt at the national level, they are particularly relevant at the city level because of the concentration of immigrants in certain cities or districts. In most countries, general policy instruments at the national level, such as education or language training, play a signicant role in attempts at furthering integration. Local-level policy, however, is more likely to be innovative in targeting the specic needs of immigrant groups as it often involves work-
ing partnerships with the immigrant community. Unfortunately, local initiatives may only have limited success in thwarting the consequences of larger socio-economic developments. Consequently, they need to be linked structurally to policies developed at the regional or national level. In many cities or districts, the worsening economic situation has counter-acted residential mobility and in certain cases phenomena of desocialisation have appeared with the attendant risk of allowing an underclass to develop. Among the measures undertaken by many countries to improve the integration of immigrants in cities, the development of transportation systems, a structural feature key to urban development, features prominently. Indeed, the existence of an efcient transport network facilitates and encourages development and with it the creation of socioeconomic links. Other measures address the need for greater employment opportunities and a more developed public service sector in disadvantaged neighbourhoods. Finally, emphasis is often placed on the importance of bringing together immigrants, concerned elements of the larger population, and key local actors (entrepreneurs, local public service workers) in dening and implementing urban development and integration policies. 3. Migration, international co-operation and economic development
The challenges raised by immigration are numerous. The regionalisation and globalisation of ows has added a geopolitical dimension to migration that necessitates the implementation of effective measures and initiatives in the area of international co-operation. Partnerships among OECD Member countries and between Member and nonMember countries have been established since the beginning of 1990s. These partnerships seek to better control migration ows by encouraging sustainable development in emigration countries which will, in the long-term, reduce the incentive to emigrate. It is important for Member countries to share their experiences in all of these areas in order that the analysis of migration phenomena be improved, and the means of rendering migration policies presently being formulated or implemented more effective be discussed. In the 1995 edition of Trends in International Migration, the importance of international co-operation in gaining a better control of migration ows was given particular attention. Two topics were discussed at
69
length: the co-ordination of policy relating to the right to asylum, and the involvement of CEECs in efforts to the control migration ows. In the present report, after a brief discussion of several new policy developments in the area of ow control, attention will be given to an exploration of the links between migration and development.
a)
Co-operation in controlling ows
Recent developments in the area of controlling ows involves modication or harmonisation of the legislative framework (see the country notes presented in Part II for more details), notably in the case of the CEECs. They are seeking to gradually align their laws governing the entry, residence, and employment of foreigners with those in place in OECD countries, and in particular, those in EU countries. Other measures have been carried out with the objective of involving a larger number of Member countries in activities likely to prevent conict in high-risk regions. Moreover, bilateral co-operation remains an active policy area, whether regarding readmission agreements which provide for the return of illegal immigrants to their country of origin or the country of transit, or measures to assist with the return and re-integration of migrants who were temporarily admitted into OECD countries for humanitarian reasons (in particular, nationals from the former Yugoslavia). Finally, the number of training exchanges, notably for specialists, is growing. Carried out with a view to strengthening international co-operation, these exchanges provide an opportunity to reinforce the links between migration and the acquisition of skills and job experience abroad. They also play a fundamental role in the process of knowledge and technology transfer between developed and developing countries. The European Community recently reached Association Agreements with the CEECs and likewise with the countries of the Maghreb. These agreements cover both intergovernmental and purely Community spheres: for example, the status of workers, the free circulation of merchandise and the right to set up businesses and supply services (see below).
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 taking place, notably, through increased foreign direct investment by OECD countries both in the labour-intensive and high-technology sectors of the developing-country economies. This is being supported by these countries own investments in their social infrastructure (particularly health care and education). The OECD, following the proposals debated at the Conference on Migration and International Cooperation held in Madrid in March 1993 at the initiative of the Canadian and Spanish governments, organised two seminars in 1996 on migration, free trade, and regional integration. The rst focused on Central and Eastern Europe, the second on the Mediterranean Basin. The main conclusions of the two seminars were presented in the previous edition of Trends in International Migration, (1997). A third seminar on the same theme in North America took place in Mexico in January 1998 with the Mexican authorities and the support of Canada and the United States. The principal conclusions of this seminar are summarised below. They are followed by a review of the Association Agreements which the European Community recently signed with the Maghrebian countries and with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Migration, free trade and regional integration in North America The seminar provided an overview of economic developments and migration patterns in North America in the light of the recent implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). It also offered the opportunity to draw parallels with and make distinctions between North American regional integration and the regionalisation process currently unfolding in Europe. Immigration is a important source of population and labour force growth for Canada and the United States, while emigration and remittances have a sig-
b)
Migration and development
70
International co-operation to control ows is only a partial response to the intensication of migration movements. It is for this reason that the
nicant impact on the Mexican economy. Within the region, the United States is the hub of migration ows. Migration between Canada and the United States (and vice-versa) is mainly temporary and largely involves skilled workers, representing a major source of that labour category for each country. Whilst ows between Mexico and Canada are very low, those from Mexico to the United States are particularly intense and asymmetrical. They are largely comprised of unskilled workers and permanent migrants. The implementation of NAFTA (1994) reinforces the process of North American integration. With a market of over 387 million inhabitants and a combined GDP of $9 330 billion in 1996, the North American free-trade area has a prole comparable to that of the EU. The three NAFTA signatories are, however, quite dissimilar both socially and economically. Per capita GDP in Canada and the United States is respectively 6 and 8 times greater than that in Mexico. Mexicos GDP is only 4.3 per cent the United States and approximately half that of Canada. The issue of NAFTAs endorsement aroused much more controversy in the United States than in either Canada or Mexico. Most of the fears expressed in the United States (which were shared to some extent by Canadian opponents of the Agreement), concerned the possibility that production would be relocated southwards (and with it jobs) due to wage differentials and the weaker regulatory environment in Mexico. Since 1994, the US trade decit with Canada and Mexico has increased. Most of Canadas initial hesitations have abated, and there is currently strong support for NAFTA. Other concerns specic to the US focused particularly on the issue of migration. At the seminar, it was generally agreed that agreements opening trade and capital ows were effective in promoting greater economic integration through the intensication of intra-regional trade. Indeed, Mexico has clearly beneted from NAFTA, enjoying signicant inows of Canadian and US direct investment, increased technology transfer, and the diffusion of management expertise. Despite the fact that some US investment has, as a consequence of NAFTA, been diverted away from Canada towards Mexico, US investment in Canada has increased since 1994 as has that from Mexico to the rest of the world. Moreover, Canadian investment in Mexico (which has increased at a brisk pace since 1994), seems to be directed to serving Mexicos
domestic market; this is possibly the most important new pattern of capital ow in the region. Many supporters of the Agreement had argued that trade liberalisation would promote the acceleration of Mexicos economic development and that this would in turn facilitate the control of migration ows originating from there. Trade and capital ows would, it was suggested, substitute over the longterm for migration ows. Participants at the seminar noted, however, that migration ows to the United States, principally from Mexico, but also from Canada, preceded any formal trade agreements and also seem to be proceeding without, as yet, any noticeable difference. Regional integration can be accompanied by an environment which naturally counteracts the process of cumulative divergence that developing economies typically experience during trade liberalisation. The state of the infrastructure and the transport and telecommunications networks are the notable economic features in this environment. As for the social factors, they have an important inuence on the accumulation of human capital (the level of education and extent of vocational training). Legislation dealing with the protection of intellectual property rights promotes innovation and favourises technology transfer mechanisms. Co-ordinated measures must therefore be undertaken to promote technological catch-up, the development of physical infrastructure and investment in human capital. Against a background of sustained development accompanied by signicant employment creation the incentive to emigrate declines. Another issue which received a great deal of attention during the Mexico seminar was the link between trade liberalisation and migration movements. Can the free circulation of persons accompany the successive stages of regional economic integration or should it be considered as an important objective to be achieved only once economic convergence has reached a sufciently high level? The absence of free circulation does not constitute an obstacle to migration movements between the members of this regional trading bloc. The United States, like Canada, continues to accept each year a high number of new permanent immigrants, the majority of whom in the case of the US come from Mexico. NAFTA contains an annex which provides for the facilitation of movements by specic categories of personnel (businesspeople, investors and company transferees) within the North American area. That in the main agreement emphasis was placed on the liberalisation of trade and
71
capital ows, with no reference to the free circulation of workers, can be interpreted in two ways. On the one hand, this liberalisation is the product of the signatories desire to guard against the possibility that the sensitive subject of migration might hold back the deepening economic and nancial integration between the United States and Mexico. On the other, it reveals that one of the implicit objectives of trade liberalisation within the framework of NAFTA is to reduce the incentive to emigrate from Mexico towards the two other countries, principally to the United States. Migration has and will continue to play an important role in the process of regional integration. It occupies therefore a central place in the process of globalisation. Several of the participants underlined that immigrants bring with them a diverse range of resources to their host country and noted that policies directed towards promoting their integration were not only to the their benet but also help to assure the social cohesion of the country. If the lack of free movement does not constitute an obstacle to regional economic integration, it should remain however a long-term objective. It could be accomplished in phases for well-dened categories of workers. Conversely, a free-trade agreement cannot constitute a credible alternative to a proper migration policy.
ify in the 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 initiation 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-insertion of nationals in irregular situations who have been repatriated to their country of origin is considered a priority issue.
d)
Association Agreements between the European Community and the Central and Eastern European countries
c)
Association Agreements between the European Community and the Maghrebian countries
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 benets. Recent judgements of the European Community Court of Justice conrm the desire to provide enhanced protections at the Community level for immigrant workers from Maghrebian countries. Three new Association Agreements based on a uniform model have been established in place of the co-operation agreements of 1976. The Agreements with Tunisia and Morocco were signed on 17 April 1995 and 10 November 1995, respectively, and negotiations on an Agreement with Algeria are ongoing. 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 spec-
In 1991, the European Community concluded a series of association agreements of a new kind with the CEECs, known as Europe Agreements, which replaced existing co-operation agreements. The rst 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. 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 supply of services, payments and capital, competition and government subsidies, harmonisation of laws, and economic, nancial, and cultural cooperation. While free movement is enjoyed by nationals of the EEA, 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 Maghrebian countries as part of the Association Agreements they signed with the European Community. The Europe Agreements are part of an overall pre-accession strategy, which was adopted in principle at the Copenhagen European Council in June 1993 and more fully developed at the Essen Council in December 1994. The Commission opened accession talks in March 1998 with ve CEECs (Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Estonia, and Slovenia), as well as with Cyprus. At the same time, it decided to evaluate annually the preparedness
72
each of the ve countries that was not considered with this rst group of admissions (the Slovak Republic, Bulgaria, Romania, Latvia, and Lithuania) for future accession. The CEECs are currently in an intermediary and uncertain phase, between a closer association with the EU and a differentiated accession process that would entail a longer transition period. In this context, the movement of persons proves to be an important but sensitive issue.
e)
Rules on movement and employment in the European Union applicable to CEEC nationals
Right to entry and to a short visit Nationals of Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, the Slovak Republic, and Slovenia are not required to obtain a visa to enter the EU and/or the Schengen Area for a short visit (less than three months) or for transit. Once the three-month period has elapsed, however, CEEC nationals who have not obtained a long-stay visa are considered illegal immigrants in the EU or Schengen Area and are subject to expulsion. To make it easier to expel illegal immigrants, the Schengen States 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 zone. 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 Association Agreements do not alter that. Provisions of Europe Agreements regarding movement of workers, establishment and supply of services The provisions on workers and the selfemployed that are contained in each of the Europe Agreements concern the movements of workers, the establishment of business, and the supply of services. However, the Association 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 business and the supply of services are somewhat more liberal.
During the ten-year transition period, which is divided into two ve-year stages, CEEC nationals in an EU Member State remain subject to the countrys legislation on entry and stay. The Agreements contain an article encouraging Member States to preserve and improve existing facilities 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 improving 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 new association agreements with the Maghreb countries, 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 3 provides that the Member States will examine the possibility of granting work permits to Polish nationals already having residence permits 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 pair workers, among others. This paragraph, though, is essentially of a policy nature and is 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 own companies and nationals. Some activities, in particular nancial 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. Under Article 52, CEEC enterprises that freely establish themselves in a Community Member State
73
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 of the Europe Agreements on workers. Under Article 55 of the Agreements, the free supply 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. The Amsterdam Treaty introduces certain cooperation issues in matters of justice and internal affairs into the purview of the Union. Among other things, it integrates the Schengen Agreement into the European Union Treaty. Henceforth, all countries that are candidates for accession must adhere to Community decisions and will consequently be required to secure their external borders and respect international norms for asylum, 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 in the strengthening control of external borders. They are supported in these measure by technical assistance provided by the EU. They have also demonstrated their willingness to respect Schengen policies, and in the case of certain countries, to participate in the Agreement. The question of refugees and of the right to asylum raises particular challenges: transit countries for asylum seekers who wish to enter the EU, and candidate countries are themselves becoming destination countries. They have, for the most part, ratied the Geneva Convention of 1951 on refugee status as well as the international treaties concerning Human Rights. They still must endorse 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 EU. They must also adopt measures that will bring the asylum procedures of Member countries in closer alignment. 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.
74
Part II
RECENT CHANGES IN MIGRATION MOVEMENTS AND POLICIES

(COUNTRY NOTES)
AUSTRALIA Introduction The new government elected in March 1996 has initiated a number of changes to immigration policy. These include a greater focus on economic immigrants, stricter entry and selection polices and increased efforts to reduce illegal immigration. In addition, there have been reductions in the number of permanent residence visas issued. It is too early to assess the full impacts of the Asian crisis on travel and immigration to Australia. Besides the effect on short-term business and tourist travel, intakes of overseas students may be reduced and the economic difculties of the region may induce an increase in applications for permanent residence. Migration and settlement Australia requires the vast majority of foreign citizens entering Australia, for whatever reason, to have a visa. An overview of this universal visa system is described in the Box below. Issues of permanent residence visas have been reduced by about 20 per cent since 1995/96 with the planned number of issues for 1997/98 set at 68 000. There is also increasing emphasis on admitting immigrants under skills-based programmes rather than family-based programmes. In 1995/96 the total number of acceptances under the Preferential Family group was nearly 49 000, whilst in 1997/98 the planned intake is only 32 000, representing a reduction of about 35 per cent (see Table II.1). It should be emphasised that because these gures relate to the number of visas granted, not to the number of arrivals within the relevant timeframe, individuals may arrive in a year subsequent to that of the visas acquisition or they may never actually take up residence. This accounts for differences between the gures in Table II.1 and Table A.1.1 of the Statistical Annex, the latter referring to actual inows to Australia. Refugees and asylum seekers In 1996/97 about 12 000 permanent residence visas were granted under the Humanitarian Programme (around 9 700 off-shore and the remainder on-shore). Priority candidates were those from the former Yugoslavia, the Middle East and North Africa. For 1997/98 a similar number of intakes are planned but with more emphasis on the Refugee category. The number of applications for protection visas (formerly refugee status) lodged in Australia has fallen substantially from a high of 16 350 principal applicants in 1990/91. According to the gures of the United Nations Commissioner for Refugees, the number of protection visa applications lodged in 1996/97 was nearly 11 100 (see Table II.1). Note that both principal applicants and their dependants are included in the data from 1995 onwards. Illegal migration The lack of land borders in Australia and its universal visa system means that most illegal migrants are persons who entered the country legally, then remained beyond the period allowed by their visa. Recent estimates suggest the number of so-called overstayers has stabilised at about 45 000, having fallen from relatively high levels earlier in the decade. The decline indicates a degree of success in the detection and dissuasion of overstayers. However, some of the decline is attributable to legislative changes in September 1994 which resulted in individuals applying for visas no longer being counted as overstayers. A comparatively small but signicant number of people attempt to enter
75
An overview of the structure and approach of Australias immigration program The universal visa system Australia operates what is often referred to as a universal visa system, i.e. in the vast majority of cases, entry into the country (for whatever reason) can only be made by having an appropriate visa. There are two main ways of entering Australia for longer periods than those allowed under short-term tourist and business travel visas: i) with permanent residence status, administered by the Australian Migration Program (AMP) and the Humanitarian Program, and ii) with a temporary visa. In addition, there are some groups, notably New Zealanders, who are not subject to visa restrictions under the Trans Tasman Travel Arrangement. The main categories of entry under the AMP are: Preferential Family (family ties), Consessional Family (family ties with assessment by a points system), Independents (assessment by a points system), Employer Nomination and Labour Agreements, Business Skills (entry for top management, business owners and investors) and Special Talents. Each year, targets are set for the number of visas to be issued under the AMP. Achievement of these targets is facilitated by a provision for capping of visa issues over the course of the year. The Humanitarian Program provides opportunities for permanent residence to successful on-shore asylum seekers through the Protection Visa system. The off-shore programme consists of the Refugee Category, the Special Humanitarian Program and the Special Assistance Category. The latter two categories are characterised by providing assistance to those with close links with Australia, either through family or community. Unlike permanent immigration under the AMP, no specic quotas are generally applied to the number of temporary residents although visa issues are governed by a set of detailed regulations which specify the objectives of each visa class and the conditions of entry. In the case of the Skilled Employment visa class, these include safeguards to ensure that the employment rights of Australians are protected, labour market testing, employer sponsorship, and varying periods of stay, generally from two to four years. Other signicant entries under the temporary visa system are students and those entering under the Working Holiday Maker Program which consists of reciprocal agreements with other countries allowing young people to work whilst travelling or on holiday. In recent years a limit has been placed on the maximum number of entries allowed under this Program. Naturalisation and Integration Policy Similar to other settlement countries, Australian citizenship is generally awarded after a specied period of residence with permanent status. Specically, individuals must have been living in Australia as a permanent resident for two years out of the previous ve, including twelve months in the last two years. The focus of settlement programmes is on general support, such as the Grant-In-Aid scheme which is designed to help migrants settle in Australia and grants to non-prot organisations under the Immigration Advisory Services Scheme (IASS). Linguistic training is provided under the Adult Migrant English Program.
Australia without authority. In 1996/97, 1 715 people arrived without authority, 1 350 by air and 365 by boat. Unauthorised arrivals are generally held in detention until any claims to stay in Australia have resolved. Temporary migration Australias temporary entry residence programme (excluding student ows) has issued an increasing number of temporary visas since 1992/93 with 90 500 visas issued in 1996/97 (see Table II.1). The increase is largely accounted for by additional
76
entries under the Working Holiday Maker (WHM) Programme with the number of visas issued in other categories having fallen in recent years. Note that since 1994/95 a cap has been placed on the number of WHM visas granted. In 1996/97 the cap was set at 50 000 and is set at 55 000 for 1997/98. The reason for the cap is linked to concerns that the WHM programme may limit the job opportunities of the longterm unemployed. The number of student visas continue to grow rapidly with nearly 69 000 visas being granted in 1996/97 (see Table II.1). The largest groups come from Indonesia, Korea and Japan. As of Decem-
Table II.1.
Permanent and temporary migration programme outcomes, 1994-1997,1 and 1998 planning levels for permanent settlers, by category, Australia
Thousands
Actual 1994 1995 1996 1997 Planned 1998
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 Programme2 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.
62.8 43.2 33.8 9.4 18.3 4.0 1.9 0.2 11.8 0.4 1.3 12.8 6.8 5.8 0.1 78.8 14.2 0.1 3.3 9.1 1.1 0.6 25.4 38.4 29.6 0.8 41.5
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 0.9 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
68.0 40.0 32.0 8.0 27.3 5.8 6.0 0.3 14.7 0.5 0.7 12.0 6.8 3.2 2.0
ber 1995, students from some countries are able to apply for a visa that covers a series of educational courses rather than a single course. Net migration Net migration gain, a statistic based on the intended length of stay of arrivals permanent migration, as well as movements of more than one year (long-term) was about 30 000 persons in 1992/93, nearly 84 000 in 1994/95 and is estimated to be 115 000 in 1996/97. These recent rises in migration t into the general pattern of cyclical migration in Australia (see Chart II.1). Changes in permanent and long-term immigration account for most of the growth in net migration gain, with emigration
remaining relatively constant. One general feature of net migration gain in the 1990s is an increase in the importance of long-term migration compared to permanent migration. The foreign-born population and labour force Data on the characteristics of the population and labour force of overseas born are available from both labour force survey and census data. The 1991 census indicated the presence of about 3.75 million foreign-born residents in Australia, representing 22 per cent of the total population. According to survey data for August 1997, the overseas-born, a little under 60 per cent of whom were from a non-English-speaking background,
77
Chart II.1. Flows of permanent and long-term residents,1 Australia Fiscal years 1982/83-1996/97 Thousands
B. Inflows of permanent residents by entry class Family Humanitarian2 Skill2 Total3 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
A. Net migration gain Permanent and long-term flows Permanent flows 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1983 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 1997
Long-term flows
1983 84
86
88
90
92
94
96 1997
C. Inflows of permanent residents by main country or region of origin New Zealand Asia4 60 50 40 1. 30 20 10 0 1983 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 1997 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. 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
accounted for about a quarter of Australias labour force. The general pattern of overseas born employment across industry is similar to that of the Australian-born except that there is a relatively small proportion of immigrants in agriculture and a relatively large proportion in manufacturing. The overseas born have lower rates of labour force participation compared to those born in Australia and experience higher levels of unemployment. Hence, overall, the proportion of the overseas-born population in employment is lower com-
pared to those born in Australia. The reasons for this are complex but are generally linked to factors such as English language prociency, length of residence in Australia, age, skill levels and qualications as well as migration category. Evidence from the Longitudinal Survey of Immigrants to Australia, starting in March 1994, provides further insight on this issue. The data conrm that labour force participation tends to rise with migrants duration of residence, whilst rates of unemployment tend to fall. For example, the data
78
indicate a fall in unemployment rates for migrants from 38 per cent after six months residence in Australia to 21 per cent after 18 months residence. Correspondingly, participation rates rise from 57 per cent to 63 per cent. The data also conrm expectations that those who entered under the pointsbased categories of the Migrant Programme tend to perform better in these terms than other groups such as the Preferential Family category and those entering under the Humanitarian Program. One exception appears to be those entering through the Concessional Family category (now renamed Skilled-Australian Link), whose visas are based on a points system; they perform only marginally better (unemployment rates only) than those in the Preferential Family category whose visas are on the basis of family ties. Policy developments The government elected in March 1996 has, in broad terms, embarked on a tightening of immigration policy and is placing greater emphasis on skillsbased immigration. As well as the reductions in grants of permanent residence (especially in the Preferential Family category), a number of other initiatives have been taken, including: Legislative restrictions on access to benets by illegal immigrants and some non-citizens including a two year waiting period before newly arrived immigrants can access most social security benets and student study assistance. The Concessional Family category has been renamed the Skilled-Australian Linked (SAL) category and from 1997/98 will be included in the skilled stream. In its new form there is greater emphasis on skills compared to family links including additional points for English language skills. The List of Occupations Requiring English (ORE) has been expanded to cover around 80 per cent of occupations. In March 1998, the Immigration Minister conrmed that he was considering the use of a temporary residency system for parents. This measure would make sponsoring families responsible for the entire upkeep of migrating parents. In addition there may also be a bonus points test for skilled migrants possessing high demand skills and those who have studied in Australian universities. Another likely reform to the skills based category is the introduction of a requirement that skilled migrants bear
a higher burden of settlement costs, such as demonstrating that they have sufcient capital to cover the period of initial entry when they search for work.
AUSTRIA Introduction Net migration to Austria remains at a relatively low level, largely reecting the decline in humanitarian arrivals that occurred since the early 1990s. Although legislative provisions formally indicate that refugees and asylum seekers should only stay temporarily, there is little evidence to-date that earlier waves of such immigrants have returned to their native countries. Recent policy developments include allowing family members of foreign residents greater access to the labour market and a tightening of checks on the validity of marital status and income for foreign residents. Migration and settlement Data from population registers indicate a continuing fall in the net migration of foreigners from about 90 000 in 1991 to 10 000 in 1996. It has now reached levels similar to those in the mid-1980s, prior to the collapse of the former Soviet Union and the civil war in the former Yugoslavia. The net migration of Austrians in 1996 is estimated to be 5 000 (see Chart II.2.A and Table II.2). Inows of citizens from non-EU member states are regulated by a system of quotas which are decided jointly by the governors of the federal states and the Ministry of Domestic Affairs. The quotas apply to the issue of various categories of residence permit, including foreign workers, family reunion, foreign students and refugees. The administration of the residence permits is at the state level, rather than the federal level, leading to some differences in the treatment of applications. Comprehensive accounts on residence permits only became available in 1993 following the establishment of a centralised alien register. The data show that about half of the residence permits issued each year are related to employment. This proportion is declining, however. Family reunion is gaining in importance, accounting for 32 per cent of permits issued in 1993 and about 41 per cent in 1996 (see Table II.2).
79
Chart II.2. Components of population change,1 1983-1996, Austria Thousands

A. Net migration and total change in population Total change (foreigners) Total change (Austrians) Net migration (foreigners) Net migration (Austrians) 100 80 60 40 20 0 -20
Refugees and asylum seekers As a result of the crisis in the former Yugoslavia and political changes in Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, substantial numbers of persons have sought asylum in Austria. By the end of 1991, there were approximately 27 300 asylum seekers registered. The democratisation process in the Central and Eastern European countries led the government to reform asylum legislation in 1992. The legislative reform, undertaken with intergovernmental co-operation among EU countries, focused on harmonising admission policies for foreign migrants in general and for asylum seekers in particular. This resulted in a substantial reduction in the number of asylum seekers in 1992 and 1993 to about 5 000. Since then there has been a gradual increase with a total of 7 000 asylum seekers in 1996 (see Table II.2). In addition to those requesting asylum, it is estimated that since April 1992, 100 000 refugees from former Yugoslavia have ed to Austria. The formal position of these refugees is that they may reside and work in Austria on a temporary basis until circumstances permit the return to their native country. To-date, there is little evidence that many have returned to their native countries and a large proportion of them currently have the right to stay for at least another two years in Austria. In the past, asylum seekers and refugees (the majority from Central and Eastern Europe) used Austria as a stepping stone for emigration elsewhere. However, this role as diminished as the countries bordering Austria to the East have themselves become safe countries for asylum seekers. Labour migration Over the course of time, a highly differentiated system of work permits for foreigners has developed in Austria. The work permits fall into two groups, those which allow work only with a specic employer and more exible permits which allow for changes in employer. There are three types of employerspecic work permits; rst entry permits (Erstantrag), re-entry permits (Neuantrag) and extensions. In all cases the permit is granted to the employer for a particular job, initially allowing up to one year of employment. The rst entry permits are issued for those entering employment for the rst time. The re-entry permits are issued for those re-entering employment after a period of unemployment exceeding six months or those changing their place
100 80 60 40 20 0 -20 1983 84 86 88 90 92 94 1996
B. Natural increase and naturalisations Natural increase (Austrians) Natural increase (foreigners) Acquisition of Austrian nationality 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 1983 84 86 88 90 92 94 1996 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10
Components of national and foreign population change are: natural increase, net migration and naturalisations. Source: Austrian Central Statistical Office.
1.
80
At present, a foreigner may become naturalised after 10 years of stay in Austria, or, in some cases, after ve years of stay with a valid work permit (moves are being made, however, to shorten this period). As a result, the wave of immigration that occurred in the late 1980s and early 1990s (Chart II.2.A) is not yet seen in naturalisation data (Chart II.2.B).
Table II.2.
Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Austria
All gures in thousands unless otherwise indicated
1994 1995 1996 1994 1995 1996 1994 1995 1996
Components of population
change1 8 029.7 8 046.5 8 059.4 24.8 14.9 13.0 11.7 13.1 7.5 7.4 8.0 5.0
Residence permits issued, by
category2
276.9 308.6 224.2 Stocks of foreign workers, by 49.5 1.9 2.2 3.0 0.8 33.5 3.4 5.7 100.0 48.8 1.8 1.6 3.5 1.2 37.7 4.1 1.2 100.0
nationality3
291.0 300.3 300.4 48.9 18.6 6.3 26.2 9.5 49.2 18.2 7.0 25.6 9.8 49.3 17.8 7.8 25.0 9.9
Total population Population (annual average) Population increase from beginning to end of year of which: Natural increase Net migration Austrians Population (annual average) Population increase from beginning to end of year of which: Natural increase Net migration Naturalisations Foreigners Population (annual average) Population increase from beginning to end of year of which: Natural increase Net migration Naturalisations
1. 2.
7 316.2 7 323.1 7 331.2 10.3 9.5 8.4 1.0 6.0 15.3 2.8 2.0 14.4 2.2 5.0 15.6
Dependent employment (%) Self employment (%) Own account (%) Student (%) Retirement (%) Family reunication with foreigner (%) Family reunication with Austrian (%) Other (%) Total Asylum seekers and refugees Asylum seekers Outows of refugees
44.8 Former Yugoslavia (%) 2.0 Turkey (%) 1.8 EU (%) 3.9 Other (%) 1.4 Share of foreign employment in total employment (%) 40.1 0.4 Total of employed workers, by category of permit4 5.7 Short-term work permits 100.0 Work entitlements Permanent licences 7.0 Work permits issued to foreigners, by category 1.3 Initial permits issued Extensions issued Permanent licences issued 134.0 3.5 Unemployment rate, total5 12.9 Unemployment rate, foreigners 22.0 172.4 Employment of Austrians abroad6 Austrian employees in Germany Austrian employees in Switzerland
268.8 269.7 257.2 78.4 58.8 43.7 97.9 109.1 92.3 92.6 101.9 121.2 143.8 131.7 127.5 75.9 56.1 51.9 58.2 48.6 35.8 9.7 27.0 39.8 6.5 8.0 6.6 7.7 7.0 8.4
5.1 1.8
5.9 1.2
713.5 14.6 10.7 19.1 15.3
723.5 5.4 10.3 9.4 14.4
728.2 4.6
Legal measures taken against foreigners Total rejections at border Removals to home country Refusals of residence Expulsions from Austria 10.2 Total 10.0 15.6
142.4 4.1 11.2 15.5 173.2
134.7 3.9 12.7 17.9 169.2
88.7 14.9
83.6 14.4
79.4 13.7
Results are based on the 1991 census. The naturalisations refer to persons residing in Austria. Figures include all types of residence permits. A rst residence permit is usually granted for 6 months maximum (renewable once). Then a 2-year permit (renewable) can be granted. After ve years working in Austria, a permanent residence permit can be issued. Data refer to July of the given year through June of the next year. 3. Annual average. Employment of foreigners based on social security data records. 4. Data given as an annual average. The data exclude the unemployed and self-employed, and from 1994 on, citizens of the European Economic Area (EEA). Several types of permits are issued: Short-term permits: granted to an enterprise for a maximum duration of one year (renewable) and for a specic activity. Data include persons entering the labour market for the rst time, seasonal workers, those who are changing jobs or taking up activity after a period of unemployment of at least six months and holders of provisional permits (when the application process takes more than four weeks). Extensions of permits are also included. Work entitlements: granted for a maximum duration of two years (renewable). May be obtained after one year of work in Austria. Permanent licences: granted after ve years of work and valid for ve years (renewable). 5. Data are based on the unemployment register. 6. Data as of June for Germany, August for Switzerland. Sources: Central Alien Register; Central Statistical Ofce; Ministry of the Interior; Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs; Social Security database on labour force.
81
of work. The extensions enable continuation of employment beyond one year. After a period of one year of work, the employer-specic permit may be transformed into a work entitlement (Arbeitserlaubnis), issued to the person rather than the rm, which allows free movement of labour within regional state boundaries. After ve years of work a permanent permit may be issued which allows free movement in the labour market in Austria. The work entitlements were introduced in 1989. In the past, the stock of foreign workers correlated strongly with the issue of Initial and Re-entry permits. However, since the early 1990s there have been falls in the number of Initial and Re-entry work permits but continuing growth in the stock of foreign employees (see Chart II.3). This divergence between the series is thought to be driven by three factors: rst, the introduction of work entitlements enables foreign workers to remain longer in Austria under less stringent permit conditions; second, evidence suggests that many immigrants, notably those from Turkey and the former Yugoslavia, are remaining on a more permanent basis; third, the integration of Austria into the European Economic area (EEA) and subsequent European Union membership has meant that only non-EEA citizens need a work permit in Austria. The rising stock of foreign workers has resulted in the proportion of foreigners in the total employed reaching unprecedented levels: in 1996 the share was 9.9 per cent of total employment. This is placing
increased pressure for reductions in work permits in order to remain within the quota which sets a limit on the percentage of third-country foreigners in the labour force. Those from former Yugoslavia constitute roughly half of foreign workers, followed by Turks (18 per cent). Employment of foreigners remains relatively concentrated in agriculture, clothing, tourism and cleaning services. Between 1995 and 1996 the unemployment rate for foreigners fell, a consequence of decreased unemployment benet eligibility as well as changing registration practices of employment ofces in order to keep the labour supply of foreigners below quota limits. However, between 1996 and 1997 the unemployment rate among foreigners rose from 7.7 to 8.4 per cent. Foreign workers from the main source countries, Turkey and the former Yugoslavia, have unemployment rates of nearly 11 per cent and 8 per cent respectively. Illegal migration Austrias long land border with non-EU countries inevitably makes it susceptible to illegal immigration. A number of sources suggest an increase in organised trafcking of immigrants. However, it is extremely difcult to estimate the actual number of illegal entries being made in this way. Reports suggest that the objective of many illegal immigrants is to reach Germany. Whether Austria forms part of their route probably depends on the risks of apprehension. For example, some evidence points to a switch to using a route which involves entering
Chart II.3. Work permits1 and foreign employment, 1980-1996, Austria Thousands
300 250 200 150 100 50 0 1.
Initial permits issued Permanent licences Total foreign employment

2
Extensions issued Work entitlements
82
1980
82
84
86
88
90
92
94
1996
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.
Austria via Italy in response to tightened control of Austrias eastern border. Policy developments Last years SOPEMI report for Austria noted a number of policy developments including: implementation of the Schengen Agreement (December 1997), changes to the residence permit system and changes in policy with regard to the provision of social benets to foreigners. Other recent developments included: New legislation (August 1997) regarding foreigners access to the labour market. According to this new legislation the family members of persons who have been residing in Austria for four or more years have the right to access the labour market (i.e. a work permit cannot be denied). However, the effect on the supply of foreign workers is unlikely to be substantial due to application of the quota for the share of foreign workers in total labour supply. Increased control of existing residence permits. Measures have been taken to increase the checks on the income and marital status of foreigners which may lead to a removal of the right of residence for a substantial number of them. BELGIUM Introduction After having slowed in mid-1995, economic growth has begun to pick up. GDP should increase by around 2.5 per cent in 1998, but the labour market remains a source of concern. The standardised unemployment rate is still high (9.5 per cent in 1997), and Belgium has one of the lowest unemployment outow rates of the OECD countries. Migration ows and foreign population Inows of foreigners increased sharply in the late 1980s, but since 1991 they have become more stable. In 1996, there were close to 52 000 arrivals, compared to about 38 000 in 1988. As for the outow of foreigners through emigration, the gures have remained relatively stable since the end of the 1980s, and stood at some 32 000 in 1996. The net migration of foreigners is therefore positive. Since 1992, alongside an increase in the emigration ow of Belgian nationals, there has been a reduction in the number of returning Belgian emigrants, which has contributed to increasing the net migration level of
Belgian nationals. The overall net migration (of foreigners and nationals) was positive in 1996, at 12 700 (see Chart II.4). As of 1 January 1997, nearly 912 000 foreigners were on the national population register, accounting for 9 per cent of the total population (see Chart II.4). European Union nationals represented more than
Chart II.4. Population and net migration change, 1983-1996, Belgium

A. Change in total and foreign population1 Total population (left scale) Share of foreigners (right scale)
10.2
11
10.1
10
% of total population Thousands
Millions
10
9.9
9.8 1983 84 86 88 90 92 94 1996
B. Change in net migration2 by group of nationality Belgians 30 Foreigners Total population 30
20
Thousands
20
10
10
-10 1983 84 86 88 90 92 94 1996
-10
Note: Data are from population registers and refer to the population on the 31 December of the years indicated. 1. In 1985 and 1992, following changes in nationality laws, the stock of foreign population dropped sharply. The decrease in 1995 can be explain both by the continuation of the effects of the change in nationality laws and the removal from the register of almost 11 000 asylum seekers awaiting a decision on their application. 2. Figures include some asylum seekers up to 1995. Sources: Population Register, Institut national de la statistique.
83
60 per cent of the foreign population. Among other nationalities, Moroccans made up the largest group, followed by Turks (see Statistical Annex, Table B.1.6). The implementation of legislation allowing the second- and third-generation descendants of immigrants to acquire Belgian nationality brought about a signicant increase in the number of naturalisations in 1985. The following year, the average number of naturalisations returned to its usual level of around 8 500. However, beginning in 1992, a further liberalisation of Belgiums naturalisation procedures prompted an increase in the number of naturalisations granted each year. In 1996, just under 25 000 people were naturalised, of whom around a third were of Moroccan origin, and 27 per cent Turkish. After a period of steep decline, the number of mixed marriages has been stable since 1992. As the total number of marriages in Belgium is falling, the proportion of mixed marriages (about 12 per cent in 1996) has actually been increasing since 1989 (see Table II.3). There is still a fertility differential between foreign women and Belgian women. In 1992, foreign women had an average of 2.2 children, compared with 1.6 for Belgian women. The gap is narrowing each year, however. 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. Work permits, the labour force and unemployment With the exception of European Union nationals, all foreigners wishing to work in Belgium require a work permit. Two types of permit 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 rst time (permit without immigration). Since 1991, the annual number of permits issued to new immigrants has been steadily declining, from some 4 600 in 1991 to 2 200 in 1996. 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 of the main nationalities, 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 has fallen greatly since 1993, when there were around 9 000, to some 2 500 in 1996. In 1996, the main recipients of these permits were refugees and stateless persons, followed by Moroccans, Turks, and nationals of the 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 for inows (non-residents) and by country of employment for outows (residents), since not all crossborder workers are necessarily nationals of the country in which they live. Since 1970, the net ow of cross-border workers has always been negative, it was estimated at 28 600 for 1996. Cross-border workers come mainly from France. The main country of destination for workers living in Belgium and working in a neighbouring country is Luxembourg, whereas in the past it was France (until the mid-1980s), and the Netherlands (until 1990). The data available on the foreign labour force come 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. While the Labour Force Survey indicates a large rise in the number of economically active foreigners since the beginning of the 1990s, the rate of increase has slowed since 1993. The foreign labour force stood at 335 000 in 1994, including 232 000 European Union nationals. The very marked increase in unemployment since the beginning of the 1990s has affected all nationalities, but particularly foreign workers from non-European Union countries (see Table II.3). Although it has been rising since 1992, the activity rate of non-European Union nationals is lower than that of Belgian and European Union nationals. Asylum seekers and refugees The number of asylum seekers has declined sharply, from around 27 000 in 1993 to some 12 400 in 1996. The largest group of asylum seekers consisted of nationals of the former Yugoslavia, followed by citizens of the former Soviet Union and the former Zaire. The recognition rate (the ratio of successful applications for asylum to the total number of decisions taken each year) fell from nearly 40 per
84
Table II.3.
Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Belgium
1993 1994 1995 1996 1993 1994 1995 1996
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
10 100.6 32.3 13.2 18.9 0.1 9 180.1 21.0 7.8 2.9 16.4 0.2 920.6 11.3 5.4 21.8 16.4 0.4 53.0 26.4 4.8 9.3 7.6 4.4 0.2 0.3 26.7 6.4 11.8 3.7
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 8.4 4.8 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 6.6 4.9 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 6.7 4.9 0.2 0.3 12.4 6.2 12.3 3.3
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
Inows of foreigners by group of nationality EU Other European countries Africa Asia America Oceania Region not specied Asylum seekers Mixed marriages % of total marriages Marriages with a EU citizen
Initial work permits by kind of permits and by group of Permits with immigration Asia America Africa Europe Oceania Region not specied Permits without immigration Africa Asia Europe America Oceania Region not specied
nationality2
13.4 4.2 1.4 0.8 1.2 0.9 9.2 4.6 3.1 0.4 0.2 0.9 16.0 11.0 4.4 43.7 15.1 14.4 6.3 3 651.7 3 404.3 185.5 22.0 13.7 26.2 521.4 442.1 45.4 13.0 9.8 11.2 461.2 386.8 43.3 24.9 14.3 10.4 6.5
13.2 4.1 1.4 0.7 1.2 0.7 9.1 4.5 3.1 0.4 0.2 0.9 15.7 11.0 4.3 44.9 16.2 14.0 6.4
8.5 3.0 0.9 0.6 0.9 0.5 5.5 2.5 1.6 0.3 0.1 0.9 15.7 11.0 4.2 44.7 17.2 13.3 5.8
4.6 2.2 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.1 2.5 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.9 17.3 12.0 4.8 45.9 18.3 13.5 5.9
Migration ows of cross-border workers by country of origin/destination Inows by country of origin France Netherlands Outows by country of destination Luxembourg Netherlands France Labour force (March 1991 Census) by nationality3 Employed labour force Belgium Other EU countries Morocco Turkey Other Unemployed Belgium Other EU countries Morocco Turkey Other Recipients of unemployment benet by nationality4 Belgium Other EU countries of which: Italy Morocco Turkey Other
496.5 419.1 44.9 25.3 15.3 10.7 6.6
490.3 413.1 44.5 25.1 15.5 10.7 6.6
465.0 390.2 42.0 23.8 15.4 10.8 6.6
Note: Figures on European Union include the 15 members of the Union from 1994 on. 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. Note that on the March 1991 Census a total of about 250 000 persons did not state their employment status. 4. Data refer to the number of recipients of unemployment on the 30 June of the years indicated. Sources: Institut national de la statistique and Registre national de la population; ministere ` de lEmploi et du Travail; Ofce des etrangers; Census (March 1991).
85
cent in 1988 and 1989 to under 10 per cent from 1993 to 1995. This decline was largely due to 1993 legislative amendments that tightened the conditions for entry, residence and settlement in Belgium for foreigners, and particularly asylum seekers. Any candidate for refugee status who wishes to settle in Belgium must nd a place to live and apply to the Ofce for Foreign Nationals. If the Ofce declares the application inadmissible, the refugee can appeal to the General Commission for Refugees and Stateless Persons (CGRA), which also decides whether or not admissible applicants are granted refugee status. If the CGRA rejects the appeal, a further appeal may be made to the Standing Refu . Anygee Appeals Board, or even to the Conseil dEtat one 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. Policy developments The CGRA has sped up the asylum process, and the conditions for admissibility have been tightened. Under the July 1996 Act governing the entry, residence, settlement and deportation of foreigners (known as the Vande Lanotte Act), asylum seekers are assigned to specic 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 benets. Other sections of the 1996 Act focus on implementation of the Schengen Agreement, and particularly external border controls of the Schengen Area. This Act brings Belgian law into line with the commitments made under the Dublin Convention determining the State responsible for examining application for asylum lodged in one of the Member States of the European Union. The Act also gives the Ofce for Foreign Nationals broader discretionary powers on entry and deportation. It extends the maximum period of administrative detention for undocumented immigrants and unsuccessful asylum seekers to eight months, allowing for further extension if necessary. Lastly, in an effort to tackle illegal immigration more effectively, heavier penalties have been introduced for people who assist illegal immigrants, including carriers, and particularly airlines. Numerous steps were taken in 1996 and 1997 to improve the integration of immigrants into Belgian society and to increase their chances of nding employment. In the Brussels region, agreements
were reached with socio-professional training and placement organisations in order, inter alia, to help low-skilled job seekers nd employment. Action is being taken in close collaboration with local job centres, particularly in distressed neighbourhoods. Approved organisations receive subsidies for their work. The integration policy was recently amended to encourage partnerships between town ofcials and local associations for the setting up of programmes to combat exclusion and to develop harmonious links between the various communities. Since 1996, the Flemish region has been implementing a strategic plan for the integration of immigrants and refugees. This plan comprises three main features: making local facilities more accessible to immigrants; welcoming newly arrived foreigners; and encouraging immigrants to learn the language and providing them with training and information in order to make it easier for them to enter the labour market. The plan includes help for the long-term unemployed, a job seekers charter which protects workers against all forms of discrimination, repeal of the nationality requirement in the Flemish civil service and, lastly, special measures to help foreign workers and workers of foreign origin who are selfemployed. The Belgian Centre for Equal Opportunities and the Fight Against Racism co-ordinated in 1997 the Belgian activities devoted to the European Unionsponsored European Year Against Racism. In November of that year, it organised a general assembly on equal opportunities and the combating of racism. The Centre formulated a series of propositions which were presented to the inter-ministerial conference on immigrant policy. These propositions range from simple recommendations concerning modications to legislation relating to racism and xenophobia through to such domains as the ght against racial discrimination in employment, housing and continuing vocational training. BULGARIA Introduction In 1996, Bulgaria faced its most severe political and economic crisis since the beginning of the reform process. The economic crisis reached its apex in February 1997, by which time output was declining rapidly and monthly ination had exceeded 200 per cent. Following the implementation of an ambitious comprehensive programme of stabilisation and structural reform monthly ination
86
fell dramatically, averaging close to 3 per cent from April through to September 1997. Although preliminary data indicate that output and employment have continued to decline through to the end of 1997, the prerequisites have been created for at least a modest turnaround during the course of 1998. Emigration Prior to the political, economic and social upheavals of 1989, ofcial restrictions on movements abroad rendered the documented emigration ow negligible. The undocumented ow is likely to have been signicant however, in particular of ethnic Turks following the implementation of an assimilationist policy in the mid-1980s. Approximately 220 000 people left in 1989, the majority of whom were Bulgarians of Turkish origin who settled permanently in Turkey. According to the National Statistical Institute, which denes emigrants as all those who leave the country for more than one year (this group includes students, employees under xed term contracts abroad, Bulgarian diplomats, etc.), the ow then declined markedly, to 85 000 in 1990 and to 45 000 in 1991. Between 1992 and 1996 the outow uctuated at between 54 000 and 65 000. It is believed that a high proportion of these emigrants are highly skilled. Immigration In principle, immigrants require ofcial permission to stay in the country for more than six months. According to the records on those requesting such permission (the majority of whom are students, businessmen and accompanying family members), Greek nationals predominate followed by Russians, Syrians, Turks and Lebanese. The preliminary estimate from the Ministry of the Interior suggests that in 1997 the number of undocumented migrants in Bulgaria decreased by over 20 per cent on 1996 to just over 22 000. This would be due mainly to the deterioration in the economic situation. The strengthening of visa control is also believed to have made a contribution: following the imposition in 1993 of restrictions on the entry of citizens from 79 countries from Asia, Africa and the ex-Soviet Union (not the Baltic states, however), in October 1997 certain restrictions on the entry of citizens from CIS countries were implemented. Bulgarias central location and relatively porous borders render it an important staging post for
migrants heading towards the West. Two main ows can be identied: one from the Middle East towards Germany and Austria via Romania and Hungary; another from the CIS and Romania towards Greece.
Refugees and asylum seekers

The regulations require that those seeking asylum declare that intention 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 the asylum seekers approach the authorities after their entry visa has expired and the request for renewal has been rejected. The procedure generally takes from one to three months although provisions exist for the implementation of an accelerated procedure for manifestly unfounded applications. In the overwhelming majority of cases their ultimate objective is to obtain refugee status in Western Europe. The recent progress in establishing a system of procedures for the granting refugee status and the implementation of social integration programmes for recognised refugees (which include a programme for social aid; a programme for vocational training; an educational program for Bulgarian language; and a programme for psychological aid) have led to an increase, albeit from a very low base, in the number of applications. Since the establishment of the National Bureau for Territorial Asylum and Refugees (NBTAR) in October 1992, almost 350 foreigners have been granted refugee status of whom almost one third were minors. Approximately half of the refugees from the former Yugoslavia have left the country. In 1996, almost 300 persons sought asylum of whom just under half were granted refugee status. Approximately 40 per cent of the application procedures were suspended or abandoned (in all likelihood because the applicant had left the country). On receipt of refugee status the individual has, with the exceptions of the right to vote, the right to be appointed to certain civil service posts, the right to join the Bulgarian Army and the right to acquire ownership over land and forest, the same rights and obligations as a Bulgarian citizen. In particular, refugees are entitled to travel documents and may be joined in Bulgaria by their immediate families (in 1996, only ve such cases of family reunion took place). The family members are accorded the same rights and obligations as the refugee. Upon completion of three years of refugee status the individual may apply for Bulgarian citizenship.
87
Naturalisations
The number of successful applications for naturalisation registered a marked upwards shift in 1993, reecting the growth in number of the ethnic Bulgarians applying from Ukraine, Greece, Turkey, Moldova and Bessarabia. Over the period 1993-96, between 1 800 and 2 700 persons annually were granted citizenship. (The gure does not include those who reacquired Bulgarian citizenship.) This trend appears to have continued into 1997; as of the end of October over 2 100 citizenship applications had been granted. Employment of foreigners The majority of foreign workers in Bulgaria are either self-employed or work in small and medium sized enterprises. The self employed are primarily engaged in the service and trade sectors as they require a relatively small initial investment. Work permits were only introduced in 1994. The procedures for their obtention remain very restrictive. As of the end of October 1997 fewer than 1 000 had been issued. Of this total, teachers and trainers accounted for 20 per cent and managers, typically of foreign based multinationals, a further 15 per cent. Permit holders from the transition economies of central Europe are employed mainly as engineers and technicians. Policy developments An important aspect of migration policy is the attitude towards ethnic Turks who have emigrated from Bulgaria to Turkey. Liberalisation of the visa regime between the two countries as well as the opening of a free trade zone are expected shortly. The Turkish citizenship of approximately 150 000 Bulgarian Turks currently residing under temporary residence permits is still not settled, but is expected to be soon. It has been proposed that they should be given the right to choose between either acquiring Turkish citizenship or returning to Bulgaria. The draft of a Refugee Law has been prepared by an ofcial working party of Bulgarian experts. In December 1996, it was the subject of a round table discussion between experts from the UNHCR, the NBTAR and members of the 37th Bulgarian National Assembly dealing with human rights issues. Inter alia, it provides for improved efciency in the decisions procedure and the establishment of transit centres
for refugees at border checkpoints and at Soa International airport. An ofce of the International Organisation for Migration has been established. It will support the development of migration policy as well as the tightening-up of the legal and institutional framework as it relates to migration. A new visa centre has been established at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This centre is a stage of the Phare Programme for visa control. Steps in this direction are to be undertaken together with the measures to more efciently combat illegal forms of migration. In early 1997 the caretaker Government announced that citizens of the European Council and the European Free Trade Association may now stay in Bulgaria for up to 30 days without a visa.
Bilateral Labour Agreements

Despite Bulgarias continually expressed interest in labour agreements as an efcient instrument of migration policy and as a means of limiting illegal migration, at present the only active agreement is with Germany. The numbers sent there, already negligible in the mid-1990s, have recently declined. Pursuant to Art. 51 of the European Association Agreement, the exchange of specialists is considered an important prerequisite for European integration. Negotiations on bilateral governmental agreements with, among others, France, Greece and Italy for the granting of work permits to specialists who are in demand in the receiving country have been in progress for several years. They are still awaiting conclusion. It is expected that the ratication and implementation of the recently signed bilateral agreement with Greece which is designed to facilitate seasonal employment there will, in conjunction with Greeces regularisation process, lead to a normalisation of the migration ow to this country. Bulgaria and the Czech Republic are still considering the draft of a bilateral treaty for the exchange of workers, proposed in 1994. The draft treaty covers such issues as social benets, travel expenses and the legal and professional requirements which the applicants should full. The conclusion of such an agreement would have a positive impact on the regulation of migration ows and on the reduction of illegal migration.
88
CANADA Introduction Although data for immigrant landings in 1996 indicate an increase on the previous year, estimates for 1997 suggest a decrease to 216 000, indicating that the generally downward trend in permanent immigration to Canada is continuing. Recent policy developments include the tightening of family sponsorship regulations and the introduction of special provisions for undocumented refugees. In addition, a recently published independent report to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration recommends extensive revision of the immigration system. Permanent immigration Similar to other settlement countries, Canada has a comprehensive system of immigration which includes mechanisms for allowing independent entry to Canada on the basis of skills or investment as well as family and humanitarian reasons (see Box below). The total number granted permanent residence status in 1997 was 216 000 (see Chart II.5 and Table II.4), indicating a continuation of the broadly downward trend in immigration in recent years. There is a continuing shift in the composition of landed immigrants most notably a shift away from entries under family classes towards economic classes. In 1997, the composition was as follows: family class, 28 per cent; skilled worker class, 49 per cent; business class, 9 per cent; and refugees, 11 per cent. However, the family class does not cover all dependants, since, within the business and skilled worker classes, only about 40 per cent enter as the principle applicants, the rest being dependants of those applicants. Asia continues to be the dominant sending region with Hong Kong, China, India and Mainland China being the top three sources in 1996. Last years SOPEMI report indicated a rapid rise in the number of landed immigrants from BosniaHerzegovina. This trend appears to have been reversed in 1996 with a fall in the number of government sponsored refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina from about 5 200 in 1995 to 4 400 in 1996. This trend is more an indication of a fall in applications rather than a shift in policy.
Employment related migration Data on temporary employment authorisations is currently under review. The main trends identied in data up to 1995 indicated a decline in numbers, explained in part by the effects of the Backlog Clearance programme and also the relatively weak state of the Canadian economy. Since 1994, in addition to employment authorisations under the usual channels, about 10 000 to 12 000 authorisations have been given under the NAFTA. These gures imply that the provisions for labour movement under NAFTA have so far been of relatively little signicance compared to the overall volume of inows. Refugees and asylum seekers Following the fairly large rise in grants of refugee status between 1994 and 1995, the gures for 1996 and 1997 only show a slight decrease to 24 100. In 1996 the number of asylum applications received within Canada (including ports of entry) was 25 700, with signicant numbers originating from Sri Lanka and Chile. Net migration Ofcial statistical sources use the number of landed immigrants as the measure of total immigration to Canada. Emigration is based on a number of sources. Over the last decade the annual estimates have uctuated quite considerably but have tended to be in the range of 40 000 to 50 000 in recent years. Preliminary estimates put the 1996 immigration gure at 48 800, giving an estimated net migration of 175 300. Foreign-born population and labour force Detailed analysis of the foreign-born population and labour force in Canada can only be made periodically through census data. Comparing the 1991 and 1996 census data, the stock of immigrants in Canada grew from 16.1 per cent of the Canadian population to 17.4 per cent. However, the proportion of immigrants of European origin fell from 54 to 47 per cent while that of immigrants of Asian origin increased from 25 to 31 per cent over the same period, reecting the rapid rise in intakes from the Asia-Pacic region. Examination of the 1991 census data shows that the foreign-born represent roughly 18.5 per cent of the labour force in Canada. In aggregate terms, their
89
An overview of the structure and approach of Canadas immigration program 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 program and ii) on a temporary basis as students, refugee claimants or for temporary employment. It is possible to transfer from temporary to permanent residence status, therefore the total issues of permanent residence (often referred to as landed immigrants) include some who have been in the country for some length of time as temporary residents. About 15 per cent 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 of entry 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 for Citizenship and Immigration 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 de relation with the applicant. In addition, the sponsor must demonstrate an ability to provide nancial 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 specic selection criteria and their weighting pattern are designed to reect what is needed to succeed in Canadas labour market. Note that 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 to both Geneva Convention refugees and those who do not quite satisfy 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 ensure that there is no Canadian citizen or permanent resident available to ll 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 application for permanent residence from within Canada and asylum seekers seeking 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 specic professions. (continued on next page) 90
(continued) 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 those of 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 programme, (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 provide funds to community-based organisations to assist newcomers to integrate (e.g. interpretation, employment-related services and understanding cultural differences).
involvement and performance in the labour market as indicated by participation and unemployment rates is very similar to the Canadian born: the participation rates of the foreign born tend to be slightly lower but the unemployment rate is virtually the same. Illegal immigration Legislative changes, which became effective on 10 July 1995, deny access to the refugee determination system for multiple or fraudulent refugee claimants or criminals. To combat the growth in illegal immigrant smuggling rings, 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. Recent policy developments
Extension of the Interim Immigrant Investor Program

The Interim Immigrant Investor Programme which was scheduled to expire on 31 December 1997 was extended again, until 31 December 1998. The development of new regulations for this programme remains a high priority, along with new selection criteria for the skilled worker program.
Stricter eligibility requirement on family sponsorship

New regulations were introduced for family sponsorship on 1 April 1997: 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 conrming understanding of 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.
Report of the Legislative Advisory Group

In December 1996, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Canada appointed a three member Legislative Advisory Group which was tasked with reviewing existing immigration and refugee legislation to develop recommendations on how Canada can continue to meet its immigration objectives. The Group reported back to the Minister on 31 December 1997. The report covers all aspects of immigration to Canada, with major changes proposed for virtually all elements of the current programme. The recommendations are currently under review by the Minister who expects to announce new directions for the programme by late 1998 or early 1999.
Special provisions for undocumented refugees

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
91
Chart II.5. Inflows of permanent settlers by entry class and region of origin, 1980-1997, Canada Thousands
A. Main entry classes B. Main regions of origin Asia and the Pacific Africa and the Middle East Europe America 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
Family Economic 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1980 82 84 86 88 90
Humanitarian
92
94
96 1997
1980
82
84
86
88
90
92
94
1996
C. Economic permanent settlers Main economic classes Independents2 Business classes4 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1980 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 1997 1980 Assisted relatives3
D. Permanent settlers from Asia and the Pacific Main countries of origin Hong Kong (China) China India Others 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 1996
Note: Except for the family class, counts include both principal applicants and their accompanying dependants, 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.
92
become permanent residents ve 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 continuation of civil strife and lack of effective government.
Replacement of the Adjustment Assistance Program

The Adjustment Assistance Programme (see Box above) 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 deliv-
Table II.4.
Immigrant landings1 by type, 1993-1997, Canada

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Family Refugees Government assisted2 Privately sponsored2 Recognised refugees3 Skilled workers4 Principal applicants Accompanying dependents Business Principal applicants Accompanying dependents Live-in-Caregiver5 Principal applicants Accompanying dependents Retirees Other6 Backlog Clearance7 Total
1. 2.
110 581 24 6 4 13 787 924 775 088
93 693 19 7 2 9 724 629 828 267
77 101 27 8 3 16 707 113 213 381
68 330 28 7 3 17 351 872 067 412
59 956 24 7 2 13 101 663 593 845
62 901 29 819 33 082 32 626 8 298 24 328 3 001 2 959 42 7 733 14 183 255 819
69 141 28 619 40 522 27 365 7 024 20 341 4 951 4 743 208 7 426 1 560 223 875
81 430 34 537 46 893 19 428 5 294 14 134 5 446 4 654 792 304 423 652 212 491
97 829 42 095 55 734 22 462 6 209 16 253 4 756 3 829 927 147 3 949 247 226 071
105 569 44 913 60 656 19 924 5 582 14 342 2 723 2 253 470 46 3 402 318 216 039
A landing corresponds to a person obtaining the right of permanent residence, either within Canada or from abroad. Including persons in designated classes, who do not strictly satisfy the United Nations convention on refugees criteria but are resettled for humanitarian reasons. 3. Asylum seekers who have been granted the refugee status. 4. Figures include the Independent class and the Assisted Relatives class. Selection criteria are only applied to the principal applicants. 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.
ery will be outsourced rather than provided by Citizenship and Immigration Canada directly. CZECH REPUBLIC Introduction Despite a slowdown in economic growth, immigration ows rose signicantly in 1996. A number of factors underlay this trend: the persistence of a considerable disparity between the Czech Republics level of development and that of migrants main countries of origin, low unemployment, sustained wage growth and Czech laws relatively few restrictions on temporary work by foreigners. The predominant immigration ows involved persons of Czech origin and foreigners arriving from neighbouring countries (the former USSR, Poland and the Slovak Republic), but there was some diversication (see Table II.5). As in countries with a longer tradition of immigration, immigrant labour both documented and
undocumented has been playing an increasingly important role in the labour market. Lastly, emigration of Czech citizens has fallen off sharply and now seems to consist mainly of frontier-zone workers who commute to Germany or Austria.
Emigration Because the available sources lack reliability, it is impossible to gauge accurately the volume of emigration ows (see Table II.5 for greater detail concerning denitions). However, the observed tendency leaves no doubt that permanent emigration, including outows to the Slovak Republic, has tailed off since the early 1990s. In addition to the fact that the available gures greatly underestimate the ow of emigrants, it can be postulated that departing Czech workers anticipate only a temporary stay away from home one that does not require them to report a permanent change of residence.
93
Table II.5.
Current gures on ows and stocks of migrants, Czech Republic

Thousands
1993 1994 1995 1996
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 Net migration Inows of asylum seekers Stocks of foreign residents by type of permits and nationality Holders of a permanent residence permit Poland Slovak Republic5 Bulgaria Ukraine Other Total Holders of a long-term residence permit Ukraine Slovak Republic Vietnam Poland Other Total Registered foreign workers by nationality6 Ukraine Poland Bulgaria United States Other Total Slovak workers7 Holders of a business authorisation by nationality Vietnam Slovak Republic Ukraine Germany Other Total Czech workers employed in Germany Contract workers Seasonal workers Illegal migrants caught at the border
1. 2. 3.
population1
10 331 9 3 6 12.9 5.6 7.3 7.4 0.2 7.2 5.5 2.2
10 330 1 11 10 10.2 6.1 4.1 3.4 0.2 3.1 6.9 1.2
10 321 9 21 12 10.5 6.7 3.8 1.9 0.4 1.5 8.6 1.4
10 309 10 22 12 10.9 7.4 3.5 1.5 0.5 1.0 9.3 2.2
12.6 .. 2.9 .. 15.0 30.4 .. .. 6.8 8.7 30.6 46.1 7.7 10.6 0.7 1.2 8.0 28.2 23.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. 1.3 12.0 43.3
11.9 3.0 2.6 1.6 13.4 32.5 12.7 13.8 8.6 8.1 28.1 71.2 12.7 8.7 0.6 1.5 9.4 32.9 39.2 .. .. .. .. .. 18.6 2.6 3.5 20.5
12.1 6.5 2.7 2.1 15.1 38.6 26.0 33.2 12.7 11.0 37.1 120.1 26.7 12.1 0.8 1.7 11.1 52.5 59.3 7.7 2.9 0.8 0.6 24.9 37.0 2.5 3.7 19.2
12.1 9.9 .. 2.8 21.0 45.8 43.5 40.3 15.1 12.4 41.5 152.8 42.1 12.8 2.8 1.6 11.7 71.0 72.2 17.0 5.9 2.7 1.2 18.7 45.5 2.3 3.4 23.7
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. 4. From 1994 on, the data are issued by the Slovak Statistical Ofce and refer to the registrations of permanent residence in the Slovak Republic. 5. 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.
94
Today, most Czech citizens employed abroad are cross-border workers in mostly low-skilled jobs, concentrated in the construction and service industries, in Austria and in Germany. Flows of contractual and seasonal Czech workers to Germany have declined considerably since 1993. Rising unemployment in Western Europe and the adoption of more restrictive provisions for the employment of foreigners in those same countries have in all likelihood contributed to this switch in trend.
Asylum seekers Due to the fact that the former CSFR did not ratify the Geneva Convention until 1992 (the agreement being recognised the following year by the Czech Republic), the ow of asylum seekers is not at all on the scale recorded in some European Union countries. Some 2 000 applications have been led each year since 1992. In March 1997 a new law aiming to expedite the processing of applications for asylum was adopted. In addition, there are special provisions to give temporary shelter to war refugees from the former Yugoslavia. Between January 1992 and May 1996, over 5 000 former Yugoslavs (the large majority Bosnian) obtained temporary refugee status. Following the Dayton Agreement in 1995, and because the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina has improved, a voluntary repatriation programme for temporary refugees was drawn up; it took effect on 30 September 1997. Labour migration After having declined appreciably in 1990-92, due in particular to the departure of workers whose contracts had been obtained under agreements between the CSFR and other former communist countries (especially Poland), temporary immigration of foreign workers has risen substantially in recent years (see Table II.5). The breakdown by nationality of persons holding work permits shows the high volume of Slovak workers (who account for nearly half the total and are present in all sectors) as well as Ukrainians and Poles. A majority of Ukrainian workers hold low-skilled jobs in construction or industry and as a rule are less well paid than Czech citizens doing equivalent work. The attraction these workers hold for local employers undoubtedly explains the unprecedented growth in the number of permits issued to them over the past four years. A community of South Asians primarily Vietnamese and Chinese has also taken root in the Czech Republic. They tend to occupy unskilled positions, concentrated in the small business and restaurant sectors. Another group of foreign workers is constituted by holders of business authorisations, on which Czech law imposes relatively few restrictions. Such permits are valid for as long as a business is conducted in the Czech Republic, and they confer entitlement to (renewable) long-term residence permits. Some 45 000 foreigners hold this type of authorisation; Vietnamese, Slovaks and Ukrainians comprise the majority.
Permanent immigration and temporary immigration The fall-off in emigration and rise in immigration (due largely to the break-up of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic (CSFR), which was anticipated and took effect on 1 January 1993) explain why the Czech Republics net migration has been positive since 1990. In addition, the growing foreign presence is revealed by the trend in the number of people with long-term residence permits, which are generally granted for work-related purposes for a maximum of one year (renewable): since 1994 the number of such permits has more than doubled, rising to over 150 000 in 1996. The number of permanent residents rose as well (to about 45 000 in 1996). The breakdown by nationality is highly diversied and differs signicantly from one type of permit to another. Ukrainian, Polish and Slovak citizens are involved in both permanent and long-term migration, whereas the Vietnamese and, to a lesser extent, the Chinese usually have long-term migrant status (see the chapter on the temporary employment of foreigners). The many bilateral agreements which were signed with South Asian and Central and Eastern European countries before the break-up of the Soviet bloc provide a partial explanation for the current diversity of migrants countries of origin. Return migration In 1995, for the rst time, the National Statistics Institute distinguished entries of Czech citizens among permanent inows. Czech citizens accounted for nearly half of total permanent entries (10 500), coming from the Slovak Republic, Germany, North America and, to a lesser extent, other European countries (including Switzerland, Austria and Bulgaria).
95
Illegal migration The employment situation, which is relatively favourable in the Czech Republic, prompts a great many migrants in particular from Russia, Ukraine and the former Yugoslavia to work illegally. The only available data suggesting the magnitude of illegal immigration relate to the number of persons apprehended at the border. This gure was down sharply from the level reached in 1992. Many of the illegal foreign workers who enter the country legally as tourists come from the Ukraine or Russia. This pattern is facilitated by the fact that citizens of many countries may enter the Czech Republic without a visa. Inter alia, this holds true for Russia and the Baltic States. Most illegal migrants exit via the German border, opting to continue their way westward once they have accumulated enough money. Policy trends In October 1997 a report outlining the difculties besetting Gypsies and proposing special solutions was submitted to the government. The report highlighted the need for emergency policy measures to educate and bring gypsy minorities into the labour market. Classes will be set up and additional resources earmarked for gypsy children who have failed at school. Steps are to be taken to combat employment practices which discrimination against Gypsies. In order to align migration policy with that of the European Union countries, a new law on the entry and residence of foreigners is under preparation: inter alia, it will limit opportunities for tourists wishing to enter the labour market to alter their status, by requiring that prior application be made at Czech embassies in their home countries. In addition, a minimum stay of eight to ten years is to be required of persons wishing to obtain permanent resident status. The law on refugees has been amended in order to accelerate the processing of applications for asylum and to strengthen the protection of refugees. Finally, ways to counter the presence of foreigners who are in the country illegally are gradually being put in place. Readmission agreements have already been signed with Austria, Poland, the Slovak Republic, Germany, Hungary and Romania. Other accords will soon be signed with France and Slovenia, and negotiations have begun with the Ukraine and Belarus. Introduction
DENMARK
The Danish economy has continued to expand since the recovery of 1993. In 1996 GDP grew by more than 3 per cent, while employment rose by approximately 1 per cent and unemployment fell, standing at roughly 8 per cent in January 1997 (four points lower than in January 1994). Migration movements Those who enter Denmark as long-term immigrants are only recorded in immigration statistics after they have lived in the country for a full year. As a result, information concerning long-term entries for 1995 did not become available until 1997. 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 1995, inows were still greater than outows. The substantial increase in inows led to a particularly large net migration gain (nearly 28 000), which was more than twice the annual average of recent years. The number of long-term immigrants remained stable between 1990 and 1994 at approximately 29 000 entries per year (see Table II.6), but rose sharply to roughly 46 000 in 1995. One-quarter of these immigrants had Danish nationality, while a further 15 per cent were nationals of Nordic or other EU countries. Among European nationals, immigrants from former Yugoslavia were the largest group (36 per cent of the total), and Somalians accounted for two-thirds of the ow from Africa. The sudden jump in long-term immigration was mainly due to the fact that a large number of asylum seekers and refugees temporarily admitted to Denmark in previous years were granted refugee status in 1995 and thereby obtained a long-term residence permit. Outows remained stable over the 1990-95 period, with departures ranging between 17 000 and 18 000. In 1995, almost 90 per cent of emigrants were either Danes or nationals of EU or Nordic countries. Residence permit trends Some 32 000 residence permits were issued in 1996 (Nordic country nationals are exempted from this requirement). Approximately 30 per cent were granted for the purpose of family reunion and slightly over one-quarter were issued to refugees.
96
Table II.6.
Current gures on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Denmark
Figures in thousands unless otherwise indicated
1993 1994 1995 1996 1993 1994 1995 1996
Long-term immigration by group of Denmark Other Nordic countries Other EU countries Other European countries Africa Asia Other regions
nationality1
28.2 12.8 1.9 3.0 2.3 2.2 4.3 1.8 17.1 12.1 1.3 1.4 0.6 0.2 0.8 0.6 17.6 3.4 2.8 5.6 2.1 3.7 14.3 9.9 8.7 2.0 1.0 1.6 0.7 0.8 189.0 61.3 50.3 77.5 .. .. .. .. .. ..
28.9 13.4 2.5 3.7 2.2 2.2 3.5 1.5 17.7 12.7 1.3 1.6 0.5 0.2 0.7 0.7 20.3 2.8 4.3 6.7 2.1 4.3 6.7 2.1 0.7 2.4 1.6 1.6 0.5 0.6 196.7 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 6.8 2.2 4.7 5.1 1.2 0.8 1.7 1.2 1.6 0.5 0.6 222.7 72.6 68.6 81.6 314.6 38.3 53.4 93.9 89.6 39.3
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 31.9 8.3 6.0 9.3 2.7 5.6 5.9 1.2 0.7 1.2 0.9 2.0 0.7 1.5 237.7 79.9 72.3 85.5 336.7 38.8 53.8 103.8 95.4 44.8
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 (%)
5.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 5 196.6 56.0 5.0 39.0 6.2 5.7 44.0 5 007.6 56.5 5.1 39.8 6.0 5.7 43.5 189.0 41.1 3.5 19.1 12.6 5.9 58.9
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 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
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 category3 Refugee EU provisions Family reunication Employment Others Asylum seekers by region of origin Europe of which: Former Yugoslavia Africa of which: Somalia Asia of which: Iraq 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.
97
The introduction of stricter family reunion rules in 1992 led to a levelling off in the number of permits granted in this category (an average of 7 000 per year). However, in 1996 the family reunion ow rose again to over 9 000. Asylum seekers and refugees Whereas in 1992 and 1993 Denmark experienced close to triple the number of asylum seekers of previous years, with 14 000 in each year, the number fell dramatically in 1994 and levelled off at slightly under 6 000 in 1996. The largest groups are from Somalia, Iraq and the former Yugoslavia. In 1994, Denmark introduced visas for nationals of Bosnia-Herzegovina and a number of African countries and created a new channel for asylum seekers to apply directly as refugees to a Danish government ofce in Zagreb (3 300 applied in 1994). The number of individuals granted refugee status has varied considerably since the beginning of the 1990s. It fell gradually from 4 000 in 1991 to 2 800 in 1994. There was a sudden jump in 1995 (to over 20 000), followed by a sharp decline in 1996. Nationals of the former Yugoslavia were still the largest group in 1996, and accounted for over half of those who obtained refugee status. Foreign population Statistics on resident foreigners are based on population registers and cover 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 per cent of the total population: their numbers have grown steadily since 1984, rising from 108 000 to slightly under 238 000 at 1 January 1997. An unusual feature of Denmarks foreign resident population is the fact that one-third are refugees, mostly nationals of the former Yugoslavia, Iraq, Iran and Sri Lanka. Other foreign residents are from Nordic countries, the European Union or North America (30 per cent of the total), while the remainder come mainly from Turkey, the former Yugoslavia (not including refugees) and Pakistan. The number of naturalisations (7 300 in 1996) has risen considerably compared to the annual average at the beginning of the 1990s (slightly more than 5 000). Over 40 per cent of those granted Danish nationality in 1996 were of Asian origin, and 13 per cent of Turkish origin.
Foreigners and the labour market The share of foreigners in the labour force (2.9 per cent) was lower than their share of the total population (4.7 per cent). At 1 January 1996, the number of foreign workers was slightly under 84 000 (see Table II.6). The participation rate of foreigners was 38 per cent, compared with 55 per cent for Danes. The low participation rate of refugees was partly due to the fact that they have to follow an integration programme lasting 18 months or longer before they may enter the labour market. Thus, the low participation rate of certain nationalities is explained by the large number of refugees in those groups. For example, nationals of the former Yugoslavia have a 23 per cent participation rate and Asian nationals 29 per cent, while the participation rates of Nordic country or EU nationals are comparable to that of Danish nationals. On the whole, while immigrants from Nordic countries, EU member countries or North America have an employment status comparable to that of Danish workers, foreigners from Turkey, Pakistan and other Asian countries are more frequently selfemployed. Recent research on integration and mobility of ethnic minorities has pointed to the duration of residence in Denmark as a key factor for labour market integration. The unemployment rate has been increasing in Denmark for the last decade, and even faster for recently arrived immigrants and refugees. However, since 1994, the total number of unemployed has fallen continuously. In 1996, it was 20 per cent lower than in 1995, for both Danes and foreigners. Nevertheless, unemployment remains very high for foreigners at 24 per cent, as compared with 7 per cent for Danes. Foreigners greater vulnerability to unemployment is partly due to the fact that they more often hold unskilled jobs, which are diminishing in number. Policy development The issue of the integration of foreigners is receiving growing attention in Denmark. In June 1994, measures were taken to improve the situation of refugees from the former Yugoslavia. These included more linguistic and other training, better housing, increased employment opportunities and more leisure activities. Under an Act of January 1995, most of the Bosnian war refugees will be granted residence and entitled to the same integration programmes as recognised refugees. Also, a strategy to
98
dismantle labour market barriers to immigrants and refugees was introduced in autumn 1994. At the same time, some municipalities have limited the number of refugees and immigrants allowed to stay in certain urban districts in order to avoid high concentrations of immigrant groups. In 1995, several changes were made to the Aliens Act concerning asylum seekers. A procedure was introduced to enable applications to be speedily refused if unfounded or based on insufcient information. Administrative procedures for processing applications were streamlined, and the number of applications from safe countries diminished. Also, the terms of admission were tightened by requiring further information from applicants and policies were developed to allow for the detention of asylum seekers and for a new procedure to register asylum seekers through a computerised ngerprinting system. In addition, the Danish government has decided to x an annual quota for residence permits given to persons from the former Yugoslavia. In December 1996 an amendment to the Aliens Act reinforced provisions for the expulsion of foreigners charged with drug trafcking. As from June 1997, foreigners who are unco-operative during the expulsion procedure will be placed on le, which will enable the police to investigate the background of asylum seekers more thoroughly and enforce the law more effectively. The Danish services in charge of immigrants are also authorised to carry out DNA tests on family reunion applicants and on unsuccessful asylum seekers who are uncooperative at the time of their expulsion, in order to prevent them from reapplying. In June 1997, the Danish Parliament ratied a co-operation agreement signed in 1996 with the countries enforcing the Schengen Agreements. FINLAND Introduction The recession in the early 1990s, fuelled by the disruption in the trade relationship between Finland and the Soviet Union, adversely affected the Finnish economy. Since 1994, annual GDP growth has been averaging around 4 per cent and the Finnish economy has been making up for the earlier loss of output. Although unemployment is on the decline, it still exceeded 14 per cent in 1997.
Emigration and immigration 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. Total emigration has risen sharply since 1993, when it stood at 6 400, to 10 600 in 1996. In 1994 and 1995, the number of Finnish emigrants increased, whereas in 1996 the increase was in foreign emigrants. But the number of Finns emigrating is still more than double that of foreigners. Between 1989 and 1991, Finland saw a rapid rise in immigration, largely due to the inows of refugees and of ethnic Finns (Ingrians) returning from Russia and Estonia. Since 1991, however, there has been a general downward trend in the inow of foreigners, while the inow of Finns has begun to rise since 1993. Between 1995 and 1996, total immigration rose from 12 200 to 13 300, with an 18 per cent increase in Finnish nationals and 3 per cent in foreigners. By nationality, the largest immigration ows in 1996 were from Russia, followed by Estonia and Sweden (see Table II.7). Among non-European immigrants, Iraqis predominated. Since 1994, net migration has fallen to 3 000, from around 9 000 in the early 1990s. Recent trends indicate that Finnish emigrant ows exceed immigration ows, although this is offset by the fact there are more foreigners entering than leaving the country. Estimates of illegal immigration are based on statistics relating to illegal immigrants apprehended at the border. Most of them attempt to enter via the border with Sweden (fewer controls owing to free circulation between the Nordic countries) rather than Russia (stricter controls). 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. Foreign population The foreign population is relatively low compared to that of other OECD countries in Europe, but continues to grow. As a share of the total population it stood at 1.4 per cent at the end of 1996. Foreigners number 74 000, almost half of them women. The single largest group of immigrants residing in Finland is from the former Soviet Union (17 000), followed by Estonians and Swedes. EU nationals number 14 000 (including 7 300 Swedes). On average foreigners are younger than Finns, with
99
Table II.7.
Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force, Finland
1993 1994 1995 1996
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 region of former nationality Europe Asia Africa Other countries Foreign workers by main nationality Former USSR Estonia Sweden United Kingdom Germany Other countries Mixed marriages % of total marriages
14.8 3.9 10.9 2.2 2.0 0.4 8.4 1.0 9.4 2.0 1.9 0.1 55.6 13.3 5.9 6.5 2.9 2.4 24.6 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.3 9.3
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 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 24.4 6.0 3.0 2.5 0.9 0.8 11.1 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 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 26.9 6.6 3.3 2.7 1.0 0.9 12.5 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 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
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 per cent of the foreign population under 45 years of age, compared with 60 per cent of Finns. Around 1 000 people acquired Finnish citizenship in 1996, 300 more than the previous year. The increase is due to the high proportion of naturalisations among Asians, up from 22 per cent in 1995 to 33 per cent in 1996. Nationals of the former Soviet Union still account for the largest share of naturalisations, followed by Vietnam and Sweden. Asylum seekers and refugees
100
were the most numerous applicants for asylum in 1996. 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 nal gure reached 1 200) because of exceptional cases from the former Yugoslavia and Iraq. Nationals from these two countries accounted for 70 per cent of all refugees. Migration and the labour market At the end of 1996, the labour force participation rate was 54 per cent for foreigners, compared
The number of asylum seekers has been falling steadily, from 2 000 in 1993 to 700 in 1996. Somalis
with 71 per cent for Finnish nationals. Unemployment was much higher for foreigners than for nationals, 47 and 17 per cent respectively. The very high rate of unemployment among foreigners is to some extent attributable to the requirement that refugees register as jobseekers, although they do not necessarily speak Finnish. By nationality, unemployment rates of over 70 per cent are found among those who typically enter Finland as refugees, i.e. Iraqis, Iranians, Vietnamese, Somalis and nationals of the former Yugoslavia. Of the 13 600 foreign unemployed, 32 per cent are from the former USSR and 14 per cent from Estonia. Since March 1994, an amendment to the Aliens Act has involved employers in the procedure for issuing work permits. The local labour market situation must now be taken into account when issuing work permits. Employers must consult with the local employment ofce before either employing foreign workers or applying for their work permits to be extended. Policy developments In order to improve the integration of foreigners already in Finland, the Government has started a four-year (1995-99) project nanced by the European Social Fund. The project, which promotes access to employment for the socially excluded, focuses on specic 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 March 1995, a new Directorate of Immigration was established within the Ministry of the Interior. The Ministry has overall responsibility for dening the conditions of immigration and residence, asylum and Finnish citizenship. The Directorate is responsible for issuing individual permits and processing applications for asylum and citizenship. The Ministry of Labour has taken action against discrimination in recruitment and at the workplace. The Criminal Code, amended in 1995, states that it is against the law to practise discrimination on the
basis of race, nationality, ethnic origin, language, sex, age, family ties, religion or political opinion. In addition, the Advisory Board for Refugees and Immigration Affairs has developed measures to promote co-operation between government bodies, the media and non-governmental organisations as well as political parties and decision-makers in order to prevent discrimination. In 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 delivery of residence permits for ethnic Finns returning from the former Soviet Union. These persons are recognised as being of Finnish origin if they themselves, a parent or at least two of their grandparents hold ofcial documents indicating that they are Finnish citizens. Proof of other links with Finland or Finnish citizens, even if unsupported by ofcial documents, may be sufcient. Thus residence permits are granted to the spouses/cohabitees and children of those meeting the above requirements. On 16 October 1997 the Council of State approved the Committees policy proposals on immigrants and refugees. The following decisions were taken: the refugee quota would be raised year by year (up to an annual gure of 1 000); decisions relating to quotas for each nationality would be transferred to the Directorate of Immigration in order to simplify decision-making procedures; steps would be taken to improve the integration of immigrants into Finnish society over the long term. FRANCE Introduction In 1996, there was another drop in permanent inows, conrming the trend which began in the early 1990s, albeit at a slower rate. The main reason for entry was family reunion in the broad sense, whereas inows of workers and persons with refugee status (see below) were signicantly smaller. Migration policy remained focused on two major objectives: to limit inows and integrate segments of the population already living in France. In 1997, there were major amendments to the Nationality Act, and it was decided to implement an exceptional regularisation procedure. In addition, a number of
101
amendments were proposed with regard to the entry and residence of foreigners; these are expected to be adopted in 1998. Permanent immigration Permanent immigration encompasses inows of foreigners who have obtained residence permits valid for a minimum of one year; this includes certied refugees but excludes asylum seekers and students. The reduction in migratory ows, which began in the early 1990s, was conrmed. Permanent immigration by nationals of the European Economic Area (EEA), who enjoy freedom of movement within the area formed by the 17 States that adopted the EEA Agreement in Oporto, is underestimated; it is possible to estimate actual ows from the data provided by OMI (Ofce des migrations internationales) on the basis of a statistical treatment of the residence permits issued by the Ministry of the Interior. According to that estimate, there were around 74 000 permanent immigrants (from EEA countries and elsewhere) in 1996 (see Table II.8) down from the estimated volumes of the two previous years (respectively 77 000 and 91 500).
that Italians account for a quarter of the foreign labour employed in the hotel and restaurant trades.
Inows by category
Permanent immigration can be divided into four main categories: people entering for the purpose of family reunion, permanent workers, people granted refugee status and visitors which need to be distinguished from tourists inasmuch as foreigners belonging to the visitors category hold resident permits, which are renewable and, from a regulatory standpoint, similar to the authorisation issued to (for example) permanent wage earners. The gures cited below apply exclusively to nonEEA nationals. Family reunion encompasses three types of entries: family members of foreigners (i.e. family reunion in the strict sense), family members of French nationals and family members of refugees and stateless persons. Except for this last sub-category, immigration ows declined in 1996, feeding through to a drop in the aggregate number of entries for family reunion (down 3.7 per cent compared to 1995). At around 30 400 entries, aggregate family reunion accounted for two-thirds of total permanent inows. With regard to family reunion in the strict sense, and in the case of refugees and stateless persons, a large majority of entering spouses (about 80 per cent) were women, whereas over 40 per cent of entering spouses of French citizens were men. A majority of family members were of African origin (about 60 per cent), except in the case of family members of refugees and stateless persons, where Asians predominated (60 per cent), although the numbers involved were very small. Since family reunion increasingly involves spouses without children, it can be assumed that there is a growing trend towards the constitution of new families. The second category is that of workers, which combines wage earners and the self-employed. This particular inow, like the overall total, declined: 4 500 permanent wage-earners were recorded in 1996. These workers were either regularised (in about two-thirds of the cases) or brought in under recruiting procedures. By broad region of origin, the discrepancies are sharper: 90 per cent of immigrants from the African continent counted under permanent immigration were regularised, versus 50 per cent of those from Asia but only 15 per cent of those from the Americas. Socio-demographic proles also differ by nationality. In all, just under a third of the workers admitted were women; the proportion rises
Permanent immigration by region of origin

The reasons for entry vary by geographical origin (EEA and elsewhere). EEA nationals break down fairly equally into three categories: workers, family members and visitors (see below). In contrast, non-EEA nationals enter primarily as family members (60 per cent) or visitors (17 per cent), with other categories accounting for less than 10 per cent of the total. Of immigrants from non-EEA countries, over half come from Africa, roughly a quarter from Asia and the balance from the Americas (14 per cent) and non-EEA Europe (11 per cent). Within the category of workers, the prole of EEA citizens varies by nationality. A substantial proportion of immigrants admitted for the purpose of work are low-skilled (40 per cent, versus only 18 per cent for foreigners from non-EEA countries). This stems from the predominance of Portuguese workers in agricultural jobs, in the construction industry and in domestic service. No such concentration is evident for other nationalities, in terms of level of skills or type of employment. It can be seen, however, that nearly half of the German workers admitted as permanent immigrants are managers (cadres) or engineers, that 43 per cent of the permanent immigrants working in education are British, and
102
Table II.8.
Current gures on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, France
1994 1995 1996
Permanent immigration 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 Total of which: EEA Estimated ows by 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 Registered outows of foreigners3 Expulsions Actual removals to the borders Assisted departures Foreigners involved in an assisted departure procedure by main status or nationalities (cumulated gures since 1984) of which: Family members Maghrebians Portuguese Acquisition of French nationality Legal procedures of which: Naturalisation Declarations of which: Decision following a wedding Declaration of becoming French4 Total Stocks of foreigners aged 15 and over according to work status Total foreign population Labour force of which: Employment Participation rate (%) Unemployment rate (%)
1. 2. 3.
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 1.2 11.3 1.3 .. .. .. .. 49.4 29.1 43.6 19.5 33.3 126.3 2 805.7 1 593.9 1 202.8 56.8 24.5
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 1.0 10.1 1.6 .. .. .. .. 40.9 24.7 21.0 16.7 30.5 92.4 2 803.0 1 573.3 1 232.2 56.1 21.7
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 1.2 11.6 1.6 73.1 40.6 37.8 16.2 58.1 34.7 21.9 19.1 29.8 109.8 2 836.1 1 604.7 1 217.0 56.6 24.2
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. People born in France to foreign parents who declared their intention to become French in accordance with the legislation of 22 July 1993. Sources: Ofce des migrations internationales (OMI); Ofce fran cais de protection des refugi es et apatrides (OFPRA); Ministry of the Interior; Labour Force Survey.
103
to 46 per cent for Algerians, and is less than 10 per cent for Japanese. The service sector is becoming increasingly predominant, accounting for over threequarters of all work-related entries, for wage earners and the self-employed (85 per cent in the case of Africans). Lastly, the breakdown by qualications shows an overall rise in skills levels, but also sharp disparities between nationalities. The proportion of technicians, engineers and managers has grown steadily: in 1996 it exceeded 46 per cent. This average rate covers gures of over 90 per cent for Japanese and citizens of the United States, and of less than 5 per cent for citizens of the former Zaire and of Haiti. Flows of self-employed workers were still declining, to fewer than 500 persons in 1996. Roughly half were tradespeople, and for the other half no occupation was specied. The third category is that of certied refugees, i.e. foreigners who have obtained refugee status and been granted residence permits for longer than one year. The numbers have been trending downward since the early 1990s. These ows could be estimated more precisely by adding the number of people (spouses and children) who accompany refugees, which averages 0.6 people per refugee. In contrast, the stock of refugees was up from earlier years, due to the growing proportion of adolescents reaching adulthood, and of spouses already in France, who obtain refugee status themselves. The decrease in 1996 was divided unequally between the continents. Europe showed the sharpest decline, due in particular to a fall-off in applications from nationals of the former Yugoslavia (and especially Bosnia and Herzegovina), as well as from Asians, whereas inows from the African continent were up very slightly. In all, 59 per cent of the inows were from Asia (primarily Sri Lanka and Turkey), 20 per cent from Africa, 18 per cent from Europe and 2.5 per cent from the Americas. Lastly, the fourth category that of visitors comprises a variety of ows. Since 1994, it has included ascendants and collaterals, who are no longer eligible for family reunion (which is limited to spouses and children), along with spouses of French citizens who have been married for less than a year, and parents of French children who were regularised at the end of 1996. These ows were the only ones to increase in 1996, in contrast to other permanent inows. This increase, which had already been noted in 1995, was even sharper in 1996, with entries rising from just under 6 400 to more than 8 900 for citizens of non-EEA countries.
Temporary immigration and seasonal immigration
Temporary immigration
This category combines foreigners who have entered France for widely differing reasons (e.g. to seek asylum, temporarily exercise an activity, study, etc.) but who all hold permits that are limited to less than one year, barring extension or a change in status. The number of temporary workers (around 4 900 in 1996), who were predominantly male and fairly skilled, increased in 1996, to a point where it exceeded the ow of permanent workers from nonEEA countries. The number of entering students (around 16 000) also rose slightly in 1996 (by more than 6 per cent). Africa was the leading continent of origin (36 per cent), even if the number of African students was down from the previous year. Next came Asia, the Americas, non-EEA Europe and the former USSR, all of which showed an increase over 1995. The students entering France in 1996 were predominantly female, with women accounting for 56 per cent of the total. In contrast to the two previous categories, ows of asylum seekers declined for the seventh consecutive year. In 1996, the French Ofce for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (OFPRA) recorded 17 400 applications for asylum, or 3 000 fewer than in 1995. Because registration gures include adults only, the actual ow was probably slightly greater. The geographic origin of would-be refugees has changed in recent years: the proportion of Africans (and especially Algerians) has declined, as has that of Turks and Chinese, among Asians, and citizens of the former Yugoslavia, among Europeans. In all, 40 per cent of asylum seekers came from Asia, 34 per cent from Europe (including the former USSR) and fewer than 25 per cent from Africa. The refusal rate decreased slightly in 1996, to 80 per cent. This rate was higher for applicants from Africa (87.9 per cent) than for those from other continents and was particularly low (10 per cent) for South-East Asian countries (Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam). These rates must be reduced slightly on account of appeals and regularisations that could ultimately allow some of these people to become permanent workers, but in this case there would be no recognition of refugee status.
104
Seasonal immigration
This ow counts workers from non-EEA countries only, and it has declined continuously, to fewer than 9 000 persons in 1996. These entries are concentrated on a small number of nationalities: the majority of seasonal workers come from Morocco and a third of them from Poland; far behind, Tunisians make up the third-largest group (7 per cent). Ninety-ve per cent of seasonal work is in agriculture, with clear specialisation by nationality: multitask farm work for the Moroccans, grape picking for the Poles and market gardening and glasshouse cultivation for the Tunisians. In contrast, recruitment for fruit and vegetable harvesting is split more evenly among the three nationalities. Departures from France Because France does not keep population registers, in contrast to most other countries of the European Economic Area, the only departures to be recorded are those that are prompted by administrative action, i.e. expulsions and being physically escorted to the border, along with government assisted departures. In 1996, expulsions and escorts to the border increased slightly (to 12 800, versus 11 100 in 1995). Since 1994, there have been more than a thousand expulsions per year. While the number of administrative and judicial orders to escort people to the border diminished, the proportion of such decisions actually carried out rose by 5 percentage points as compared with 1995. For this reason, the number of actual departures rose in 1996 (to 11 600, from 10 100 in 1995, see Table II.8). The number of assisted departures has always been very small. The two main schemes are government aid for the placement of certain wage earners and job seekers, and aid for the placement of foreigners who are invited to leave France. The rst type of aid was supplied in 1996 to 311 persons (fewer than in 1995), including 205 workers, most of whom were job seekers or wage earners under threat of redundancy. Such aid is conditional upon preparation of a plan for economic placement in the home country. The second measure applies to foreigners invited to leave France, a majority of whom are asylum seekers whose applications have been denied. In 1996, only 1 600 persons received this aid, whereas 5 700 invitations to leave France were conveyed to OMI. Assisted departures therefore involve only a very small, and diminishing, number
of foreigners representing a very modest percentage of Frances total foreign population. The foreign population Foreigners make up 6.3 per cent of the total population of France. The foreign population makes a double contribution to French demographic growth through births and the migration balance. In 1994, 711 000 births were recorded; of these children, 7.8 per cent were born to two foreign parents and 5.7 per cent to one foreign parent. The migration balance for 1996 has been estimated at 40 000 entries, accounting for 17 per cent of total population growth in France. The foreign labour force The foreign labour force numbered 1.6 million as of March 1997 (according to the Employment Survey, see Table II.8), down 2 per cent on the previous year. The proportion of foreigners had been declining for twenty years, but in 1997 it levelled off at 6.2 per cent. At the same time, the number of working foreigners has continued to drop, even though the number of self-employed persons has stabilised at around 127 500. Over a third of the workforce are women substantially unchanged from 1996. The number of Algerian women and women from subSaharan Africa, as well as of those from Poland, is on the rise as a percentage of the total labour force. By nationality, the largest group of foreign workers is made up by the Portuguese, followed by Algerians and Moroccans and then by nationals of subSaharan African countries. While the service sector is the main employer of foreign wage earners, large numbers of foreigners 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 automobile industry (see Chart II.6). In 1997, foreigners were still affected more by unemployment than the French: 364 600 foreign workers, or nearly a quarter of the foreign labour force, were unemployed. Foreigners accounted for 11.5 per cent of the unemployed double their proportion of the working population. However, the proportion of foreign jobless is declining slightly, helping to narrow the unemployment gap with the French labour force. The aggregate foreign unemployment rate masks substantial differences
105
Chart II.6. Share and concentration of foreign employees by economic activity, 1997, France Percentages
5 10 15 20 Share of foreign employees by economic activity Share of foreign employees in each economic activity
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 0
Share of foreign employees in total employment (all activities)
10
15
20
1. Construction 2. Domestic services 3. Industrial services 4. Trade 5. Education, health and social work 6. Manufacture of intermediate goods 7. Administration 8. Manufacture of consumption goods 9. Real estate services 10. Transport 11. Agriculture, hunting and forestry 12. Manufacture of equipment goods 13. Manufacture of motor vehicles 14. Others Note: Economic activities are ranked by decreasing stock of foreign employees. Source: Labour Force Survey, March 1997.
depending on nationality, gender and age. While the unemployment rate for foreigners from European Union countries is slightly lower than for French citizens, the rate is much higher for non-EU nationals (at over 30 per cent, versus 11.6 per cent for the French). On the whole, women are hit harder by unemployment, especially among non-EU nationals (36.8 per cent in March 1997). Lastly, young people aged 15 to 24 from non-European Union countries are the primary victims of joblessness, with an average unemployment rate of 50 per cent, and even higher for Algerians and other Africans. Acquisition of French nationality In 1996, a total of 109 800 foreigners (see Table II.8) acquired French nationality through all procedures combined, either by decree (50 700 naturalisations and 7 400 restorations of French nationality), by declaration (21 900, mostly upon marriage to a French citizen) or by formal statement (29 800) on the part of young people born in France between 1976 and 1980 of two foreign parents. Adding to these naturalisations were approximately 7 500 attributions (at birth) of French nationality, which since 1994 have been reserved to children born in France of at least one parent born
in Algeria prior to 1962 (when Algeria became independent) on grounds of dual jus soli. In all, nearly 117 600 persons acquired or were granted French nationality in 1996. In 1996, by nationality, the largest groups to acquire French nationality through all procedures combined were Moroccans (who accounted for onequarter of the total), Algerians, Portuguese, Tunisians, Turks and nationals of countries in South-East Asia (particularly Cambodia and Viet Nam) and French-speaking Africa. In all, over half of the acquisitions involved African nationals and around a quarter Europeans. Policy developments
The international dimension of immigration policy

Since late 1995 and through mid-1997, the primary framework for international activities involving immigration and the presence of foreigners in France was the European Union. On 28 June 1996, France ratied an agreement (in connection with ongoing negotiations with the World Trade Organization) whereby employees of a foreign company wishing to establish a subsidiary in France are exempted from restrictions imposed because of the
106
employment situation. Work permits are issued to such employees, provided that they have been working for the parent company for at least a year and belong to one of the occupational categories stipulated in the agreement: senior executives, highly qualied technicians and transferred employees. In addition, France made a number of other commitments, extending these special arrangements to four other categories of workers: researchers, teachers in higher education, assemblers and technicians, and performing artists. Two Euro-Mediterranean agreements were ratied, creating an association between the European Union and its Member States and, respectively, Tunisia (in July 1996) and Morocco (in July 1997). France, which is part of the Schengen Area, had invoked the safeguard clause to restore internal border controls with the six other signatory States (Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain) but decided, on 18 April 1996, to remove internal controls from its borders with Germany and Spain. At the end of 1997, the Schengen Area was extended to include three new partners: Italy, Austria and Greece.
marrying a French citizen to obtain French nationality from two years to one. Lastly, the law restores the right to automatic acquisition of French nationality at birth to children born in France of a parent born in Algeria prior to 1962 (when Algeria became independent). In June 1997, it was decided to carry out an exceptional regularisation campaign which was to terminate on 20 April 1998. The campaign was aimed primarily at regularising the unlawful status, with regard to entry or residence, of people married to French citizens or to foreigners having entered France legally outside of the family reunion procedure, spouses of people with refugee status and long-established foreign families. It also applied to certain categories of children who had entered France outside of the family reunion procedure and other clearly specied categories of foreigners under certain conditions (foreigners with no family responsibilities, foreigners who were ill, students pursuing higher-level studies and people denied asylum). According to the earliest available information, around 150 000 regularisation applications had been examined and 23 450 residence permits granted as of 31 January 1998. Approximately 16 500 people had received acknowledgements of their applications pending receipt of their residence permits and 22 500 denials had been issued. To date, nearly 85 per cent of the regularisations have been granted on family-related grounds, whereas nearly half of the applications were from people who are single. Of all the permits issued (23 450), 15 per cent have been granted to Algerians, 11 per cent to Moroccans, 10 per cent to Chinese and 9 per cent to nationals of the former Zaire. GERMANY Introduction In 1997, unemployment hit record levels and employment declined. At the same time, the skill levels required by employers tended to rise. Foreigners, usually less skilled than the rest of the population and hence more vulnerable to unemployment, were severely affected; their unemployment rate rose to 18.9 per cent (annual average) in 1997, compared to 10.1 per cent for the population as a whole. This led to a decrease in entries of foreign nationals and in the number of new work permits issued. Despite faster growth during the third quarter of 1997, the unemployment rate is not expected to stabilise until 1998.
The domestic dimension of immigration policy

Two bills one on the acquisition of French nationality and the other on the entry and residence of foreigners were introduced and examined in 1997. To date, only the rst bill has been adopted. It was decided that same year to conduct an exceptional regularisation campaign. The Nationality Act was nally adopted in March 1998. It reafrms the right to French nationality by virtue of birth in France, providing for acquisition of French nationality at three age levels by children born in France of foreign parents. At age 13, such children may become French with their parents consent, provided they have lived in France for at least ve years. At age 16, they may ask to become French without their parents consent, but subject to the same residence requirement. At age 18, they will be automatically entitled to French nationality if they have lived in France for at least ve years since the age of 11; they may, however, decline French nationality at any time between the age of 171/2 and 19. The new law also changes other rules concerning the attribution of nationality. It requires the government to respond to applications for naturalisation within 18 months. In addition, it reduces the amount of time required for a foreigner
107
The total population of Germany continued to increase despite a marked decrease in entries of ethnic Germans (Aussiedler) and foreigners. With regard to migration policy, the government is maintaining its efforts to introduce effective schemes to promote the cultural and economic integration of rst, and more especially, second-generation immigrants. Migration and settlement All persons (including asylum seekers) occupying a private residence for a period exceeding three months are required to register their entry and departure. Because of this broad denition of immigration ows, net ows need to be considered rather than just inows, so that the extent of migration is not inated compared to ows recorded in other countries. Over the last 25 years, foreign immigration has moved cyclically, following the pattern of economic and political events (see Chart II.7). High net ows up until the early 1970s were attributable to recruitment agreements signed with a number of countries, mostly in Europe (Yugoslavia, Italy, Greece, Spain, Turkey, Portugal, Morocco and Tunisia). The volume of ows fell considerably after the rst oil crisis, with family migration becoming the main form of migration. Finally, since 1989, upheavals in the Central and Eastern European countries have generated exceptionally high inows, especially of asylum seekers and ethnic Germans (Aussiedler). Since 1993, net migration gures have steadily diminished,
falling to 148 900 in 1996. There has even been a net outow of migrants from Croatia, BosniaHerzegovina, Romania and Bulgaria. Foreign births (on the rise again after a two-year decline) and entries of foreign residents and ethnic Germans account for a large part of the increase in the total population (see Chart II.8). The proportion of foreigners in the total population, rising steadily, stood at 8.9 per cent in late 1996. The proportion of nationals from Central European countries is falling all the time, whereas that of nationals from European Union countries and Turkey is increasing. Naturalisations The Aliens Act, amended in July 1993, facilitates the naturalisation procedure for long-standing foreign residents or those with proof of German origin. Since 1989, most naturalisations have in fact concerned ethnic Germans (see Statistical Annex, Table B.1.7). The requirements for a discretionary decision are more restrictive, particularly when it comes to knowledge of the German language. Turks were the main group naturalised by discretionary decision in 1996. Asylum seekers Following an amendment to the Basic Law, tougher legislation was introduced on 1 July 1993 to clarify who is entitled to apply for asylum. This has drastically reduced the number of valid applications. Nonetheless, over 116 000 applications were
Chart II.7. Migration flows of foreigners,1 1960-1996, Germany Thousands
1 200 1 000 800 600 400 200 0 -200
Net migration of foreigners Inflows of foreigners
108
1960
65
70
75
80
85
90
1995
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: Federal Statistical Office.
1.
Chart II.8. Components of German population change,1970-1996 National and foreigners Thousands
B. Foreigners Total change3 Net migration Natural increase Acquisition of German nationality2 Total change3
A. Nationals1 Net migration Natural increase Acquisition of German nationality2 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 1996 1970 72 74 76 78
700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 -100 -200 -300 -400 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 1996
Note: The data cover western Germany up to 1990 and Germany as a whole from 1991 on. 1. Aussiedler are considered as nationals in statistics on migration. They can reside in Germany and acquire German nationality as soon as their German origins are recognised. 2. Including naturalisations on the basis of a claim. 3. Net migration, natural increase and acquisition of nationality. Source: Federal Statistical Office.
made in 1996. The biggest ows in 1996 were still from Turkey and the former Yugoslavia but also from Iraq, Afghanistan and Sri Lanka. Flows from Iraq were up sharply on 1995. Migration and the labour market Any foreigner from a country outside the European Economic Area requires a work permit in order to take up paid employment in Germany. In 1996, nearly 440 000 new permits were issued, over half to new arrivals to Germany (see Chart II.9). The decline in the number of work permits delivered can be attributed to slower economic growth and high unemployment. The majority of new permits, known as ordinary permits, are subject to the rule of prior entitlement for German workers and foreigners with comparable status. In addition they are only valid for a specic activity. The remaining permits are special permits which grant unrestricted access to the labour market, for a limited or unlimited period, with no geographical or occupational restrictions.
The recruitment of temporary foreign workers is highly contingent on the economic climate inasmuch as the employment situation is generally taken into consideration. The employment of contract labour, and that of guest workers, perceived as a form of cooperation with the Central and Eastern European countries, is an exception to the rule of prior entitlement, but here too quotas are set for each nationality and each sector of economic activity, depending on the situation on the labour market. In 1996, the quotas were lowered. The number of cross-border workers, who are subject to the rule of prior entitlement, fell by nearly 60 per cent between 1995 and 1996. Conversely, the employment of seasonal workers rose once again in 1996 (see Table II.9). The total workforce has been on the decline since 1992. Since employment has mirrored this trend, even more sharply (see Chart II.9), unemployment has substantially increased in Germany. Furthermore, viewed over a long period, uctuations in the employment of foreign workers have been greater than for the population as a whole. The gap
109
Chart II.9. Change in employment and unemployment in Germany, 1981-1997 Total population and foreigners Percentages
A. Employment and labour force Labour force (nationals and foreigners) Employment (nationals and foreigners) 7.5 7.5 5.0 5.0 2.5 Employment (foreigners1)
10.1 per cent for the population as a whole, but from 16.6 to 18.9 per cent for foreigners. However, the rate conceals wide disparities depending on nationality and the sector of economic activity. Turks are the hardest hit (24.4 per cent at the end of the year), followed by Italians (20.6 per cent) and Greeks (19 per cent). Illegal migration The illegal employment of foreign labour persists, despite numerous efforts to combat the entry of illegal foreign immigrants. Criminal trafcking organisations are developing, especially those smuggling workers in from the Central and Eastern European countries. Since 1994, some 30 000 foreign nationals have been apprehended each year after entering the country illegally, most frequently via the borders with Poland and the Czech Republic. Breaches of labour legislation on the illegal employment of foreign workers have risen sharply (86 800 in 1996 compared with 79 500 the previous year). In order to improve the effectiveness of measures to restrict the ow of non-EU foreign nationals, particularly through the asylum seeker channel, Germany is endeavouring to sign readmission agreements with the main countries from which the illegal migrants come. Policy developments
Annual change
2.5 0 0 -2.5 -2.5 -5.0 -5.0 -7.5 1981 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 1997 -7.5
B. Unemployment rates2 Total population 20.0 17.5 15.0 12.5 10.0 7.5 5.0 1981 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 1997 Foreigners 20.0 17.5 15.0 12.5 10.0 7.5 5.0
% of labour force
1.
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: Federal Statistical Office and OECD Economic Outlook, No. 62, December 1997.
110
between unemployment rates in the national and foreign populations has continued to widen since the early 1980s, indicating that the foreign population are more vulnerable in this respect. Between 1995 and 1996, unemployment rose from 9.3 to
While new policies are being developed to tighten entry for new immigration from outside the European Union, the Federal Government, in cooperation with the Lander and the municipalities, is actively facilitating the integration of long-time resident foreign workers and their families. In particular, the Federal Ministry of Labour is nancing language courses for immigrants and their families, and schemes to help second-generation immigrants nd employment by enhancing their technical and linguistic skills. Some 1 800 young foreigners have already beneted from vocational training schemes, co-nanced by their countries of origin and the Federal Ministry of Labour. These initiatives are aimed at using the linguistic and cultural skills acquired by young people from immigrant families and at developing their specic skills. Those completing the course are awarded a diploma from the Chamber of Commerce and Industry and are eligible for a training course in the country of origin. Nineteen new projects involving Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal and Turkey are under consideration.
Table II.9.
Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Germany
1993 1994 1995 1996
Components of population changes Total population (Total change) Natural increase Net migration 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 Net migration by nationality of which: Turkey Portugal Russian federation Italy Former Yugoslavia Poland 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 10 years (less than 11 from 1994 on) (%) 10 years or more (11 years or more from 1994 on) (%) Total (%) Acquisition of German nationality3
372.3 98.8 471.1 204.1 189.8 194.5 199.4 168.2 91.0 276.6 199.4 986.9 75.2 67.8 31.7 141.6 12.9 29.4 276.6 22.3 10.0 21.7 0.7 68.1 26.6 218.9 207.3 5.8 5.4 322.6 19.1 74.1 .. 5.5 6 878.1 9.0 23.8 17.8 49.5 100.0 199.4
205.8 115.1 320.8 224.0 203.4 168.3 259.2 18.3 88.3 152.6 259.2 774.0 78.6 63.9 38.7 63.2 26.5 33.4 152.5 17.6 23.6 21.1 6.6 1.0 12.9 222.6 213.2 6.6 2.4 127.2 19.1 30.4 2.1 5.6 6 990.5 6.3 23.9 22.3 47.4 100.0 259.2
288.6 119.4 408.0 288.1 206.3 180.7 313.6 0.6 86.9 227.2 313.6 788.3 87.2 73.6 48.0 54.1 30.5 33.0 227.2 30.4 27.6 19.5 14.5 13.8 16.5 217.9 109.4 6.5 1.7 127.9 25.5 26.2 6.9 7.5 7 173.9 7.9 23.1 24.5 44.5 100.0 313.6
195.4 86.8 282.2 256.5 179.7 133.3 302.8 61.1 92.8 148.9 302.8 708.0 77.4 73.2 45.8 42.9 32.0 31.9 148.9 29.7 29.1 19.3 9.0 8.6 5.7 177.8 172.2 4.3 1.2 116.4 23.8 18.1 10.8 5.7 7 314.0 5.6 18.2 27.7 48.5 100.0 302.8
111
Table II.9.
Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Germany (cont.)
1993 1994 1995 1996
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)
555.8 64.5 70.0 325.6 .. 230.2 388.8 167.0 2 131.6 24.0 28.6 953.0 188.9 211.4 99.1 21.0 29.7 54.8 521.1 0.1 63.3 11.5 15.2 8.3 1.3 .. 179.9 143.9 7.8 7.0 3.9 5.3 12.0 3 419.1 2 270.3 8.2 344.8 15.1
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
Note: The data cover Germany as a whole, unless otherwise indicated. Data for Former Yugoslavia cover Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia in 1993 and exclude Republic of Macedonia from 1994 on. 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.
112
Foreigners hold a greater proportion of unskilled or low-skilled jobs and are therefore more concerned by job losses. The Ministry of Labour and the federal labour services are accordingly encouraging the development of a programme of life-long vocational training (and where appropriate, retraining), both within and outside company structures. The Federal Government is also supporting initiatives by some foreigners (particularly Turks) who wish to return to their country of origin. It provides information about the conditions of their return and the opportunities for salaried work or selfemployment. In addition, technical training courses recognised by the country of origin are offered in Germany. The Federal Government and industry have together funded measures to promote return migration and the development of self-employment in the home country. A centre was opened in Turkey in June 1995. In co-operation with Hungary, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic, Germany has created upskilling programmes for guest workers (Gastarbeiter) who, upon completion of their chosen programme, will return to their country of origin. As well as facilitating the integration of immigrants and young people from immigrant families, the Ministry of Labour also attempts to combat racism by promoting better intercultural understanding. GREECE Introduction The Greek economy continues to strengthen. Robust output growth has not, however, been accompanied by a decrease in registered unemployment. This is in all likelihood a reection of continued company restructuring and of enhanced incentives to register. The unemployment rate is expected to increase in the medium term from its present level of just over 10 per cent as rms strive to attain productivity gains in order to offset the impact of the recent sustained increase in real wages. Estimates of the magnitude of recent emigration movements indicate that the ow to nonEuropean countries is diminishing; ows to European countries, by contrast, appear to be increasing. The inow of ethnic Greeks is diminishing. This would appear to reect both a fall in the potential pool of ethnic migrants and an increased desire on their part to remain in their countries of settlement.
This latter development may to some extent be due to the Greek governments support for its overseas communities. Conrming recent trends, asylum seekers remain few in number. Greece continues, however, to constitute for many asylum seekers and refugees a stopover point on the way to other countries. At present the stock of documented immigrants, 305 000, is believed to be more than matched by those who are undocumented. It is hoped that this situation will be remedied by the regularisation programme which is in the course of implementation. Emigration Greeces National Statistical Service ceased collecting data on emigration in 1977. Any estimate of the magnitude of recent emigration ows has therefore to be obtained through the records of receiving countries. After considerable emigration in the 1950s and 1960s, ows to the United States, Canada and Australia are now almost negligible and are primarily linked to family reunion. The outow to the United States, for example, amounted to only 1 450 people in the 1996 scal year, an over 40 per cent reduction on the corresponding gure for 1986. In contrast, the emigration ow to Germany, historically also an important receiving country for Greeks, remains signicant averaging approximately 19 000 annually between 1993 and 1996. Between 25 000 and 35 000 Greek students are currently studying in overseas universities. A decline is believed to have taken place in recent years due, inter alia, to the expansion of Greek universities, a reduction in the number of scholarships and difculties in gaining recognition upon return for diplomas from certain countries. Greek emigrant remittances transmitted through ofcial sources amounted to slightly less than US$3 billion in 1996, a 2.4 per cent fall on the 1995 gure. This is attributable largely to slow growth in Germany (whence approximately one quarter of the remittances are transmitted), the reevaluation of the US dollar against the drachma and to the increased assimilation of overseas Greeks. Migration and settlement The Ministry of Public Orders estimate of the total foreign population in Greece, 305 000, indicates no substantial change in 1996. This estimate only includes, however, those in possession of a valid or expired permit and those who are on the
113
waiting list. To the above gure should be added a further 250 000 to 500 000 undocumented immigrants.
Table II.10. Residence permits issued to foreigners,1 by country of origin, 1993-1996, Greece
Thousands
of which: Women
1995 1996
Residence permits issued

Residence permits are valid for one year but may be renewed annually for a period of up to ve years. After ve years of legal residence and employment, a foreigner can request authorisation for family members to enter Greece. During 1996 just over 70 000 new residence permits were issued (ethnic and non-ethnic migrants combined), an almost 8 000 decrease on the 1995 gure (see Table II.10). With the notable exceptions of the Arabic countries, females predominate; overall they outnumbered males by a ratio of four to three. Signicant reductions were observed in the entries of citizens from Russia, Turkey, Cyprus and Albania, countries with large numbers of ethnic Greeks. On the other hand those from Georgia and the Ukraine marked substantial increases (the latter albeit from a very low base).
Russian Federation Georgia Bulgaria Albania Egypt Former Yugoslavia Romania United Kingdom United States Turkey Cyprus Philippines Poland Germany Ukraine Lebanon Syria Italy Other Total
1.
1993
1994
1995
1996
14.3 .. 2.6 2.4 3.0 1.5 2.5 3.6 2.3 5.1 5.6 3.1 1.4 1.8 .. 1.3 0.9 0.4 18.4
17.0 .. 3.5 3.7 3.6 2.9 3.5 3.2 2.8 6.2 5.5 2.7 1.9 1.5 .. 1.3 1.1 1.0 15.6
17.3 2.9 3.7 4.2 3.6 2.9 2.6 3.1 2.8 5.1 4.7 2.3 1.7 1.5 0.5 1.2 1.3 0.9 15.9
13.9 5.3 4.3 3.4 3.1 2.9 2.7 2.7 2.4 2.3 2.1 1.9 1.8 1.5 1.4 1.1 1.1 0.8 15.7
9.7 1.4 2.4 2.2 0.5 1.7 1.9 1.8 1.5 2.6 2.1 2.0 1.2 0.9 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 8.7
8.2 2.8 2.8 2.4 0.4 1.8 2.0 1.5 1.3 1.1 1.0 1.6 1.4 0.9 0.9 0.4 0.3 0.3 8.9
70.1 77.2 78.2 70.4 42.2 39.9
Settlement of ethnic Greeks

Continuing the declining trend which started in 1993, fewer than 6 000 ethnic Greeks from the former Soviet Union (Pontians) entered under a returnee visa in 1996. Factors which could account for this include: relative political stabilisation in the Commonwealth of Independent States; integration difculties encountered by Pontians in Greece, government assistance notwithstanding; high unemployment; approaching exhaustion of the potential pool of returnees; and possibly the policies of the Greek government in support of Greek communities abroad which may have inadvertently had the effect of encouraging Pontian Greeks to remain in their host countries. Ethnic Greeks from Albania have not been encouraged to settle in Greece and the Greek government provides nancial assistance and other incentives to encourage them to return to Albania. Recently, the Greek Government has undertaken initiatives aimed at assisting the economic development of Albania, the most important of which is to include Southern Albania in the category of preferential treatment usually reserved for Greeces less developed regions. Unlike Pontians, neither Albanians nor ethnic Greeks from Turkey are encouraged to change their nationality.
Data refer to total number of permits issued. One person can be granted several work permits per year. However a large majority of the permits are delivered for one year and only a small number of persons receive more than one permit. Data include ethnic Greeks. Source: Greek Ministry of Public Order.
Naturalisations
The 1991 law on aliens is very restrictive with respect to the naturalisation of foreigners not related to Greeks. Even for the foreign spouse of a Greek national, the acquisition of Greek nationality is far from being a formality: after applying, the spouse must wait ve years before the application is examined by the relevant authorities. Other foreigners who apply for Greek nationality must have been resident in the country for ten years. No statistics are available for those who demonstrate Greek descent as these fall under the jurisdiction of the Prefects. During the period 1986 to 1994, between 200 and 500 foreigners (of non-Greek descent) were naturalised each year. That gure jumped to close to one thousand in 1995 to fall back in 1996. An increase is again expected in 1997 as the number of naturalisations had by the end of September already surpassed that for 1996.
114
Refugees and asylum seekers For most refugees, Greece has traditionally been a country of transit. At the end of 1996, Greece had a stock of almost 5 000 refugees for resettlement to other countries. The majority are selfsupporting. Data show that between 1986 and 1996, almost 22 000 asylum seekers in Greece were resettled in other countries, over 90 per cent in the United States and Canada. In 1996 this outow fell sharply due to a steep decline in the number accepted by the United States; it accounted for just over one quarter, a gure matched by Australia. However, the possibility of settlement in Greece is not excluded and new legislation was passed in 1991 and in 1996 (see below) which has allowed for the development of procedures for the recognition of political refugees, the treatment of asylum seekers and refugees and the procedures for granting a work permit. After reaching a high of 2 700 in 1991, fewer than 1 600 asylum seekers entered Greece in 1996. Iraq, Iran and Turkey are the principal countries of origin accounting in 1996 for respectively 56, 24 and 10 per cent of the applications. Although rm statistical evidence is not available, it is assumed that the largest proportion of these asylum seekers are Kurds. However, as in previous years, only a small percentage (7 per cent) of the applications were accepted. Just over one hundred people were granted regular refugee status and a further 53 were granted humanitarian status. 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 Union and Employer 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. The former estimates the number of foreign workers (non-ethnics) in 1996 to be just under 29 000. If we add to these the number of ethnic workers with a work permit, 6 000, then the total number of foreign workers is almost 35 000, virtually no change on
1995. The Ministry of Labour estimates the total number of foreign workers (foreign and ethnic) for 1996 at 25 000, a fall of almost 10 per cent. There exists then an absolute difference of about 10 000 migrant workers and a marked difference in the registered trend. In 1996, the ve most important countries of origin for permit holders were the United Kingdom, Egypt, Russia, Germany and the Philippines, in that order. Citizens of these countries together account for almost half of all permits. Since 1990, the number of permits going to workers from the Philippines has dropped sharply. The inux of Eastern Europeans and Albanians may have contributed to a displacement of Asian workers, especially Filipino women in domestic services. Sixty per cent of registered foreign workers are employed in trade, restaurants, hotels and other services. Illegal migration Illegal migration ows to Greece in many cases involves organised trafcking in migrants. Every few months the Greek authorities intercept and uncover organised illegal entry of groups of migrants from the northern and eastern borders of the country, from Turkey or from the Aegean islands. At over 19 000, the number of deportations increased substantially (over 40 per cent) between 1995 and 1996. Over half of this increase was due to an almost 120 per cent increase in the number of Romanians deported. A decrease is expected for 1997, however, as fewer than 11 500 people had been deported by mid-November.
Illegal foreign workers

Various estimates put the number of undocumented foreign workers in Greece at between 250 000 and 500 000, that is to say at between 6 to 12 per cent of the Greek labour force. Half are thought to be Albanian. The strong seasonal character of the Greek economy (especially in construction, tourism and agriculture), acts as an important pull factor. It is expected that the ratication and implementation of recently signed bilateral agreements with Albania and Bulgaria which are designed to facilitate seasonal employment will, in conjunction with the regularisation process which is currently under way, lead to a normalisation of the migration ows. Immigrants without work permits can nd jobs despite high unemployment; their wages, perhaps
115
three to six times more than they can earn at home, are about half the market rate in Greece and they do not have, of course, any social security coverage. It is expected that many small entrepreneurs who are currently dependent on this cheap labour will go out of business as a result of the forthcoming regularisation process. It is likely, moreover, that following the regularisation programme skilled foreigners currently in an irregular situation will attempt to takeup posts more in keeping with their qualications and experience. Policy developments
Regularisation of undocumented foreign workers

Following a long period of consultation, the regularisation process was implemented on 1 January 1998. The process will be completed in two steps: a registration phase followed by the issuance of a green card. During the initial registration phase, the nondocumented workers must submit an application to their local Employment and Manpower Organisation (OAED). This involves supplying information regarding their occupation, level of education, skills, employment experience, age, family status, nationality and country of origin. Upon completion of these formalities the applicant will receive a Temporary Residence Permit Card (white card) which will give him/her the right to work on the same basis as native workers. The applicant must have supplied by the end of May 1998 a number of other documents. These include a passport or other kind of travel document, a certicate testifying to the nonpossession of a criminal record and documents detailing the previous duration of stay in Greece. It is not unlikely that the May deadline will be extended by two months. Applications on the part of non-documented workers do not exempt employers from their obligations to report the employment of non-documented workers within the ve month period. Neither does the reporting of undocumented workers by their employers exempt the undocumented workers from their own responsibility for registration. The provisions of pre-existing legislation allow for penalties to be imposed on undocumented workers (e.g. expulsion, payment of travel costs) and on their employers (e.g. prison, nes, etc.). During the second phase which will last until the end of July 1998, the applicants must demonstrate that they have earned an income equivalent
to 40 working days of non-specialised labour. An OAED Committee, after a consideration of the applicants record, the needs of the labour market and the needs of the Greek economy, may then grant the Residence Card of Limited Duration (green card). The card will be valid initially for between one to three years. Subsequent renewals for two year periods will be possible. Special provisions exist for the granting of ve year permits. A Special Committee (composed of representatives of relevant Ministries, trade unions, employers, the UNHCR and the Athens Bar Association) will meet to consider appeals against rejection and to oversee the granting of green cards under exceptional circumstances, for example, for humanitarian reasons. The regularisation process does not apply to foreign seamen working on Greek agged ships most of whom come from the Philippines, Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka, Honduras and Indonesia. As of the beginning of March 1998, just over 150 000 undocumented foreign workers had registered, roughly one third of the estimated total. Fifty-ve per cent of those registered were based in the Attica region (which includes most of the Aegean islands) as well as two provinces in central Greece (Biotia, Evia).
Ratication of the Schengen Agreement

The Greek Parliament ratied the Schengen Agreement in 1997. The fact that the Government had passed legislation that same year protecting the citizen from electronic abuses of personal information contributed to the ratication process. However, concern has been expressed regarding Greeces infrastructure and its readiness to implement the Agreement, especially by older Schengen Agreement members ( e.g. Germany and the Netherlands). That as of 1998 a special border control service will be in operation to prevent illegal entry into EU territory should help to assuage these concerns.
New policies for asylum seekers

A new law was passed in 1996 to extend health care and temporary employment rights to asylum seekers and to foreigners granted refugee status. The new law also contains 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
116
reasons beyond their control (e.g. civil wars, natural disasters etc.). HUNGARY Introduction During the rst half of the 1990s, Hungary went through a serious economic and social crisis which resulted in a sharp drop in GDP (down 20 per cent between 1989 and 1993), a widening trade decit, an increased budget decit and an acceleration in the rate of ination (to 35 per cent in 1991). This poor economic performance led the government to take stabilisation measures in March 1995, the effects of which began to be felt in 1996 and were conrmed in 1997. Unemployment fell, from 10.2 per cent in 1995 to 8.7 per cent in 1997. Also contributing to economic recovery were the continuing inows of foreign direct investment: many investors look upon Hungary as a base from which to expand their market share in other Central and Eastern European countries. At present, nearly 40 per cent of the foreign capital owing into the ex-COMECON region is being invested in Hungary, and most large rms are nanced with foreign capital. However, this investment mainly benets the Budapest region. This merely serves to accentuate the already considerable regional disparities that emerged in the wake of the large-scale job losses of the 1989-93 period. Emigration Hungary has not experienced major waves of emigration during the period of transition to a market economy. Today, whereas immigration is frequently attributable to immigrants ethnic or family ties, those who decide to emigrate are most often individuals leaving alone to work on a temporary basis. The Hungarian government is continuing to promote the temporary emigration of Hungarian workers to Western European countries in order that they might gain employment experience and enhance their skills. Germany is the preferred destination of Hungarian temporary workers with over 9 000 Hungarians having worked in Germany in 1996 under the programme for the recruitment of sub-contract workers, together with some 3 500 seasonal workers. Nevertheless, the number of Hungarian nationals resident in Germany is diminishing, this being explained more by the temporary nature of this migration than by the number of naturalisations. Other bilateral agreements have been signed with
Luxembourg, Switzerland, Ireland and, more recently, the Netherlands, the latter specically for young skilled workers. The number of Hungarian entrepreneurs emigrating to other countries of Central and Eastern Europe, the former USSR (mainly Russia) and Central Asia is also beginning to increase. Lastly, migration for the purpose of education and studying a foreign language is becoming signicant. Permanent and temporary immigration The data available on temporary immigration concern the issuing and renewal of short-term residence permits (for one, three or six months). The sharp drop since 1992 does not mean that labour immigration has declined, but is mainly the result of the dwindling numbers of temporary war refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina. Long-term immigration (i.e. foreigners entering Hungary with a residence permit valid for at least one year) has continued to decline since 1991. The legislation passed in May 1994 tightening the requirements for the entry, stay and settlement of foreigners has reinforced this trend. The breakdown of immigrants by age and ethnic origin has gradually changed since the early 1990s. The average age of new immigrants has risen due to the fact that, while at the beginning of the decade inows consisted almost entirely of ethnic Hungarian families from Romania, former Yugoslavia or the former USSR, today it is more common for workers to immigrate without their families. At the same time, the pattern of countries of origin of new migrants has changed somewhat. In 1989 and 1990, some 80 per cent of immigrants were ethnic Hungarians from Romania (see Table II.11). In 1996, however, although they were still the largest group of immigrants to Hungary, Romanians accounted for less than onethird of new arrivals. Because of the war in former Yugoslavia, there was large-scale immigration from this country in 1992 and 1993. Lastly, with the collapse of the Soviet bloc, nationals of the states of the former USSR (notably in Ukraine and Russia) began to emigrate to Hungary. Permanent immigration has also fallen sharply in recent years, even though the data available for 1996 on the number of applications led and immigration permits granted showed a slight increase. The new law on foreigners set an annual quota for permanent immigrants at approximately 2 000, although ethnic Hungarian immigrants, who account
117
Table II.11.
Current migration gures, Hungary

1993 1994 1995 1996
Long-term immigration by country of 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 permits 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 China Poland Slovak Republic Other Total of which: Women Acquisition of the Hungarian nationality of which: Romania (% of total acquisitions) Former Yugoslavia (% of total acquisitions) Former USSR (% of total acquisitions) 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 origin Romania Former USSR Poland Other Total Number of deportations and expulsions of which: Romanians Former Yugoslavs
1.
origin1
6.1 1.7 1.0 5.2 2.4 16.4 7.8
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
3.8 1.9 1.4 1.0 4.4 12.5 5.4
94.9 56.2 7.9 92.1 72.1 65.7 11.5 7.7 5.4 .. ..
92.3 53.4 5.8 82.8 59.3 51.4 17.7 3.4 3.4 81.9 44.1
91.0 48.3 7.3 78.0 56.6 30.3 22.4 2.2 5.9 81.4 43.8
93.9 58.6 11.5 67.7 68.6 25.0 15.1 2.8 1.3 77.4 41.8
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 11.8 89.7 2.3 4.8 13.3 8.0 2.7 2.0 6.8 19.5 7.6 2.0 1.1 6.9 17.6 2.7 1.7 0.1
68.3 15.6 15.6 7.4 3.5 4.6 3.4 19.5 137.9 65.0 9.9 70.1 8.6 16.0 3.8 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
65.7 16.1 16.8 7.8 4.3 4.5 3.5 21.1 139.9 65.6 10.0 70.4 11.3 11.8 3.4 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
61.6 17.0 16.4 8.3 6.7 4.3 3.7 24.2 142.2 66.1 12.3 69.7 16.3 10.0 2.9 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
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 shortterm permit which cannot be extended more than one year. Therefore data on long-term immigrants cannot be fully considered as ow data. 1996 gures are provisional. Sources: Registers of foreigners, Ministry of the Interior; Ofce for Migration and Refugees, Ministry of the Interior.
118
for most of the applications for permanent permits, are not subject to this restriction. Moreover, despite the quota the authorities have thus far never refused eligible applicants. The legislation will probably be repealed in 1998.
Table II.12. Demographic characteritics of permanent foreign residents and naturalised persons, 30 June 1997, Hungary
Permanent foreign residents Naturalised since 1993 Other naturalised people Total

In 1995 and 1996, Hungary admitted 5 900 asylum seekers and 1 300 refugees (including individuals eeing the war in former Yugoslavia). The ethnic make-up of these migrants has changed markedly. From 1988 to 1990, they were mainly ethnic Hungarians from Romania. As of 1991, the growing number of migrants arriving from former Yugoslavia made it necessary to pass special legislation providing for temporary asylum in Hungary. Since 1993, this ow has declined substantially. Nevertheless, the return of nationals of former Yugoslavia to their country of origin is a problem that has yet to be solved. The number of individuals living under temporary protection in Hungary was estimated at 5 700 in mid-1996. The presence of foreigners and persons of foreign origin In 1997, according to estimates based on the 1990 census, over 3 per cent of people resident in Hungary were foreign born, 20 per cent of whom were foreign nationals while a further 10 per cent had obtained Hungarian nationality during the previous ve years (see Table II.12). There is a much higher proportion of women in this foreign-born population than in the population as a whole, although taking an identical age structure, the ratio of men to women among individuals born abroad is the same as in the population as a whole. This ratio does vary quite considerably depending on the country of origin, immigration from Romania, and especially from the republics of the former USSR, being of a distinctly family nature. In June 1997, there were some 143 000 foreigners (holding a residence permit valid for at least one year) resident in Hungary, or 1.4 per cent of the total population. Almost two-thirds of them had arrived after 1989. Their socio-demographic characteristics have not changed greatly in recent years, foreigners being on average younger than the population as a whole, and the bulk of them male. Most are from neighbouring countries, mainly Romania, the former USSR and former Yugoslavia (see Table II.11); over half are ethnic Hungarians.
Thousands
Total By place of birth Natives Foreign-born
71.4 5.8 65.5
37.3 3.0 34.2
220.5 220.5
329.1 8.9 320.2
Percentages
By age groups 0-14 15-39 40-59 60 and over Total % of women by age group 0-14 15-39 40-59 60 and over Total By marital status Single Married Widowed Divorced Total
Source:
12.8 50.2 26.6 10.4 100.0
15.3 52.4 26.2 6.1 100.0
6.1 21.9 30.2 41.8 100.0
8.6 31.5 28.9 31.0 100.0
49.0 52.6 57.9 62.4 54.5 36.1 53.7 4.5 5.7 100.0
48.7 52.8 52.5 57.1 52.3 38.1 54.5 2.4 5.0 100.0
48.7 51.7 54.0 60.6 56.0 19.2 55.1 17.8 7.9 100.0
48.8 52.2 54.7 60.6 55.3 25.0 54.8 13.2 7.0 100.0
Central Population Register.
Naturalisation The new citizenship laws adopted in October 1993 have led to a sharp drop in the number of applications for Hungarian nationality (see Table II.11). However, after special provisions were adopted making it possible for some categories of migrant to be naturalised after three years legal residence, the number of foreigners acquiring Hungarian nationality again rose in 1996 to reach approximately 12 300. The vast majority of people naturalised were nationals of Romania (70 per cent), former Yugoslavia (20 per cent) and Ukraine; most were able to provide proof that they were ethnic Hungarians. Illegal migrants The few estimates available on undocumented immigration suggest that this problem remains a cause for concern, despite the harsher penalties
119
imposed on undocumented workers and those who employ them. Almost 10 000 people were apprehended at the border in 1996 (compared with 29 000 in 1991). Two-thirds of them were trying to cross the border into Western Europe, which shows that Hungary is not so much a country in which these migrants wish to reside as a stage on their journey to Western Europe. The route taken by these migrants crosses the country from the south or the east (at the borders with Romania and former Yugoslavia) to reach Western Europe (through Austria) or southwestern Europe (through Slovenia), a route that makes it possible to reach Germany via Italy. In 1996, some 53 000 foreigners were turned back at the border, of whom over 14 000 were deported, mainly Romanians and nationals of the former Yugoslavia (see Table II.11). The fact that there is an informal economy tolerated by the authorities has long made it easy to employ undeclared Hungarian workers and undocumented migrants. Although the recent measures taken to prevent the employment of undocumented migrants have proved relatively ineffective, they have had the merit of obliging observers to reect more carefully on the complexity of the problem. Undocumented migrants are mainly employed in the construction and textile sectors and in seasonal activities in agriculture and, more recently, in household service jobs. These foreigners provide a more exible workforce, while the use of undocumented workers enables employers to keep labour costs down and simplify hiring. Lastly, employing highly skilled individuals without a work permit is a fairly common practice, which raises the issue of the complexity of the legislation in force, even though some think it provides protection for native workers. More generally, these undocumented foreign workers are often ethnic Hungarians who return regularly to their country of residence. According to many experts, new forms of temporary employment should be developed rather than limiting the number of work permits, a strategy which would make possible the promotion of co-operation with the principal countries from which undocumented workers come. Labour migration All foreigners legally entering Hungary for the purpose of work must have a work permit and a visa (which can be obtained at a consulate abroad). Access to the labour market is strictly regulated. The countrys employment situation may constitute
grounds for refusing the issuance of a work permit. Moreover, permits are generally issued for a short time and are always for a specic activity. If a foreigner changes employers, a new permit must be obtained. Since August 1995, some categories of workers (for example, experts from international organisations, managers employed by foreign rms, refugees living in camps) do not need work permits. After levelling off at around 20 000 per year between 1993 and 1995, the number of new work permits issued in 1996 fell to 14 500, for two principal reasons: the new restrictions on the employment of foreigners and the growing number of exemptions from the requirement of a work permit for activities involving skilled workers. Nearly 90 per cent of permits granted during the rst half of 1997 (including renewals) were for periods of six to twelve months, but these gures vary considerably depending on the nationality; for example, Slovak nationals are more frequently employed as seasonal workers or workers paid on a piecework basis in the textile industry, and over two-thirds of them were granted permits for less than six months during the period considered. The majority of foreigners coming to work in Hungary are Romanians, but there are also nationals of the former USSR, the former Yugoslavia, Poland and other OECD countries (primarily the United States, the United Kingdom and Germany). According to the labour force survey, both the proportion of people of working age and the participation rate are higher for foreigners than for Hungarian nationals. Contrary to the commonly held impression, foreign residents tend on average to work in skilled jobs more frequently than Hungarian nationals. This is true of temporary residents in particular, who more often come from developed countries than do permanent residents. Policy developments By the mid-1980s, migration issues had become a major concern. Today, because of the more restrictive admission policies of Western European countries and the different level of development of its eastern neighbours, Hungary is no longer only a transit country, but is becoming a host country for many migrants, and especially for ethnic Hungarians. During the 1990s, the emergence of social and economic problems linked to immigration made it necessary to adopt a new legislative framework. Two acts were passed in 1993 and 1994, each of which
120
was based on European legislation. The rst of these dealt with citizenship, and set the minimum residence requirement to obtain Hungarian nationality at eight years. The second concerned the entry and settlement of migrants, except for refugees and asylum seekers. The nancial requirements for the settlement of foreigners in the country have become more stringent. Only foreigners who have resided legally in Hungary for three years are eligible to settle in the country and obtain a permanent residence permit. There are exceptions to this legislation for many categories of migrant. In addition, the immigration police have been given more extensive powers to monitor the entry and stay of immigrants. Nevertheless, this legislation stipulates that individuals who are sent back or expelled to another country should not be to ill treated. A new law on asylum was adopted at the end of 1997 and entered into force in March 1998. It denes three different kinds of status for asylum seekers: refugees as dened in the Geneva Convention (adopted by Hungary in 1989); war refugees, who are eligible for temporary protection; and recognised refugees, who are victims of persecution in their home country. IRELAND Introduction There are currently two main issues with regard to migration in Ireland. First, reductions in outows and increase in inows in recent years have resulted in positive and increasing net migration. Second, the small but rapidly increasing number of asylum seekers has placed the processing of claims under strain and also caused a certain amount of controversy. Many elements of the 1996 Refugee Act have, so far, not been implemented, including the new administrative structure proposed for dealing with applications for refugee status. The government has introduced interim measures for processing applications and has also used provisions contained in previous legislation in an attempt to stem the inow of asylum seekers. Emigration Ireland was unique among European countries in experiencing almost continuous population decline through emigration over a long period of time (see Chart II.10). The population of what is now the Republic of Ireland stood at over 6.5 million in
1841, by the beginning of this century it had fallen to about 3.2 million. Thereafter the rate of decline diminished, even though it continued with considerable variation until 1961. In the 1990s, the population has increased at a moderate pace, to reach just over 3.6 million in 1997. Figures based on the Annual Population and Migration estimates and the Census show that emigration has declined steadily in the 1990s from 56 000 in 1990 to 29 000 in 1997 (see Chart II.10). The destinations of these emigrants appear to be broadening. Whereas in the late 1980s and early 1990s roughly 60 per cent of all emigrants went to the United Kingdom, in 1992 the proportion began to decline and in 1997 was about 44 per cent. The 1997 gures indicate a further 28 per cent go to the United States and Europe and 27 per cent to other destinations. In earlier periods, emigration was a permanent event for most migrants. As they were mainly unskilled and could obtain only low-wage employment there was little prospect of even a temporary return in the short term. The position has changed greatly over time. Todays emigrants are better equipped educationally and can avail themselves of better job opportunities. The facilities afforded by the speed, convenience and relatively inexpensive nature of current air travel mean that emigrants are, for the most part, highly mobile with a tendency to return to Ireland at fairly frequent intervals, either for leisure purposes, or for intermittent periods of work. This greater mobility has contributed to the fact that migrants are now much more responsive to changes in relative economic conditions, a feature which helps to explain some of the volatility evident in migration ows in recent years. Immigration There are now signicant migration inows to Ireland. This migration consists mainly of returning Irish emigrants or their families. However, it also includes non-Irish nationals coming to reside in Ireland, in particular persons coming to work or study, and their dependants. Data on the age-sex distribution of immigrants indeed supports the notion of return migration, the largest group of emigrants are those aged 15-24 (about 60 per cent of the total) whilst the largest group of immigrants are aged 25-44 (about 40 per cent of the total) (see Chart II.10).
121
Chart II.10. Trends and characteristics of migration, Ireland

B. Migration flows,2 1987-1997 Thousands
A. Components of population change1 Intercensal periods Thousands Natural increase 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 Net migration Total change
Emigration
Immigration
Net migration 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80
-81 -91 901 -11 -26 -36 -46 -51 -61 -71 -81 -91 -96 71 81 -1 01 11 26 36 46 51 61 71 81 91 18 18 891 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19
1
1987
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
1997
C. Age distribution of migrants,2 1997 Percentages Emigrants 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Net migration (thousands)
D. Net migration and unemployment rate 1971-1997 Correlation coefficient = 0.67 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50
Immigrants
0-14
15-24
25-44
45-64
65 and over
10
12
14
16
18
20
Unemployment rate (%) 1. Annual average. 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, preliminary report; CSO.
Net migration The growing number of immigrants and the decline in the number of emigrants has resulted in increasing, and positive net migration to Ireland, with the net inow in 1997 estimated to be 15 000 (see Chart II.10). These trends appear to be linked
122
quite closely with labour market conditions. For example, there is reasonably high negative correlation between the volume of net migration and the unemployment rate in Ireland. Chart II.10 shows the relationship between the annual volume of net migration and the annual unemployment rate in Ireland between 1971 and 1997 and indicates a neg-
ative correlation of 0.67 between the two variables. Unlike international migration in many other contexts, the inuence of economic conditions is perhaps more transparent in Ireland. This is due to the fact that a large proportion of ows are with the United Kingdom, a country with which Ireland maintains open borders and shares a fairly high degree of historic and cultural links. Note that the correlation shown in Chart II.10 is largely illustrative. In more sophisticated models, the relationship has been shown to be somewhat more complex. Usually, the variables used to successfully explain changes in net migration have been both Irish and UK unemployment rates and the relationship between Irish and UK average earnings. Foreign population and employment in Ireland In comparison to other European countries the total number of foreign residents in Ireland is relatively small. Data based on the annual Labour Force Survey for 1996 show that out of the current population of 3.5 million, it is estimated that there are some 118 000 foreign nationals, i.e. about 3.2 per cent. This represents a signicant increase in the number of foreign residents compared with 1995 when the gure was just over 96 000. The great majority (87 000) are European Union passport-holders (most from the United Kingdom) and about 31 000 are from other countries (of which 13 000 are from the United States). Given the relatively small size of the non-Irish population, assessment of the labour market characteristics of this group is difcult. Some estimates are available from the labour force survey, however these are thought to be heavily inuenced by sampling issues and may not accurately reect the position of the non-Irish population in the labour market. In the case of non-EU nationals wishing to takeup paid employment in Ireland, the prospective employer must obtain, in advance, a work permit for the immigrant from the Department for Enterprise and Employment. The number of work permits issued or renewed has been rising fairly rapidly, from about 2 500 in 1989 to about 4 200 in 1993, but has remained more or less constant since that time (see Table II.13). A high proportion of the permits (about 80 to 90 per cent) are issued to persons employed in the service sector including medicine/ nursing, commercial/nancial, entertainment/sport,
education and catering activities. People from the United States, Canada, Pakistan and India receive a relatively large numbers of permits. The majority are skilled or highly qualied workers who enter the country to ll specic posts. Another signicant (but smaller) group consists of the self-employed in the catering trade (mainly from Asia) who may also employ unskilled workers of the same nationalities. Refugees and asylum seekers Ireland has not traditionally received many asylum seekers, however numbers are growing rapidly. The number of applications for refugee status in Ireland was nearly 3 900 in 1997, compared to less than 40 in 1992. Note that these gures do not cover programme refugees, such as several hundred Bosnians which the Irish Government agreed to accept in 1992. One of the reasons suggested for this trend is the rather more open policy approach to asylum seekers as Ireland adjusted legislation in line with the Dublin Convention. Another possible reason is the tightening of policy in other EU member-states, leaving Ireland as a more attractive target for asylum applications. Policy developments The 1996 Refugees Act provided a number of measures to clarify and codify asylum procedures. However, the only signicant part of the Act implemented so far is that which enables Ireland to ratify the Dublin Convention. The principal reason is that the measure requiring the appointment of an Applications Commissioner (who can independently assess applications for asylum and make recommendations to the Minister for Justice) has not been implemented as it has been the subject of a High Court challenge. The rapidly increasing numbers of asylum seekers has resulted in interim action by the Government to stem the inow of persons seeking refugee status. In June 1997, the Government also enacted a Statutory Order under the 1935 Aliens Act which gives immigration ofcers the right to examine persons (other than EU citizens) arriving from the United Kingdom for the purpose of determining whether they should be allowed to enter the country. This is a signicant and controversial step for two reasons: i) it runs counter to the spirit of the 1996 Refugee Act; and ii) it is the rst occasion (apart
123
Table II.13.
Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force, Ireland
1993 1994 1995 1996
Immigration by country of United Kingdom Other European countries United States Other countries
origin1
34.7 17.5 6.6 5.0 5.6 35.1 16.4 7.3 5.6 5.8 0.4 3 574.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.7 0.1 4.2 1.4 0.9 2.0 1 152.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
30.1 15.2 5.8 4.3 4.8 34.8 14.8 5.5 9.6 4.9 4.7 3 585.9 3 494.4 91.1 58.2 12.2 9.4 11.3 2.6 0.4 4.3 1.5 0.9 1.9 1 188.0 1 156.6 31.2 14.0 5.0 2.8 9.4 33.1 34.2 24.1 41.0 29.8 83.2
31.2 15.6 6.3 3.8 5.5 33.1 13.3 5.1 8.2 6.5 1.9 3 601.3 3 505.3 95.5 60.0 13.0 8.2 14.3 2.7 0.4 4.3 1.4 0.7 2.2 1 248.0 1 213.3 34.3 21.3 5.7 2.6 4.7 34.6 35.9 35.5 43.8 31.7 32.9
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 3.8 0.6 0.9 2.3 1 297.0 1 253.2 43.4 27.6 7.1 3.0 6.3 35.7 36.8 38.7 46.1 23.6 34.8
Emigration by country of destination1 United Kingdom Other European countries United States Other countries Net migration1 Total population by nationality2 Irish nationals Total foreign population of which: United Kingdom Other EU countries United States Other countries % of foreign population in total population Asylum seekers Labour market Work permits issued and renewed of which: India and Pakistan United States and Canada Other countries Employment by nationality2 Irish nationals in employment Foreigners in employment of which: United Kingdom Other EU countries United States Other countries Employment to total population ratio Irish nationals (%) Foreigners (%) United Kingdom (%) Other EU countries (%) United States (%) Other countries (%)
Note: Figures for the EU refer to the 12 rst members of the Union. 1. Figures are provisional and may be subject to revision when the 1996 Census results are available. 2. Estimated from the annual Labour Force Survey. Fluctuations from year to year may be due to sampling error. Sources: Central Statistical Ofce; Labour Force Survey.
124
from war-time restrictions) that any immigration procedures have been applied to persons arriving from the United Kingdom. The justication given for this measure is that many asylum seekers have recently been entering via the United Kingdom and there are serious doubts as to whether many of them are genuine refugees.
ITALY Introduction Over the past two years, major changes have been seen in Italy with regard to immigration legislation, the trend and control of ows and the regularisation of undocumented foreigners. Immigration
ows have tended to stabilize. In October 1997 Italy joined the group of European Union member countries which apply the Schengen Agreements. Migration and the resident foreign population Slightly over one million foreigners held residence permits at the end of 1996, or about 1.7 per cent of the total population (see Table II.14). Only 15 per cent of them were from European Union countries. A marked change took place between 1990 and 1996 in the relative sizes of the various foreign communities. The number of foreigners from Central and Eastern European countries rose by a factor of six, from 43 000 to 250 000, while the increase in the number of Africans was lower, from 238 000 to 315 000. Of the latter, almost two-thirds were from North Africa, with a very large majority of Moroccans, whose numbers will probably increase when all those whose situation was regularised in 1996 appear in the Ministry of the Interiors statistics. The recent arrivals of Albanian nationals (around 17 000 between March and August 1997) conrm the trend of the increasing size of this new community. In all, almost 65 000 Albanians were resident in Italy in 1996. The number of residents from the former Yugoslavia and Turkey has also risen over the last ve years. The immigrants, who are unevenly distributed over the country, are heavily concentrated in northern and central Italy where the major manufacturing and urban centres are located. Milan and Rome are the immigrants two principal centres of residence, with Turin far behind in third position. The breakdown of foreign residents by gender shows that the number of women varies greatly from one country of origin to another. Most immigrants from Morocco, Tunisia, Senegal and Egypt are men, while women predominate among immigrants from the Central and Eastern European countries. Lastly, the overwhelming majority of immigrants from the Philippines and Cape Verde are women. So far, immigrants have usually been single, although recent trends seem to show a marked increase in the number of residence permits granted for family reunion. By using the data available on residence permit holders, immigrants can be classied on the basis of the reasons why permits were issued. In 1996, work was the main reason for the presence of immigrants in Italy (over 60 per cent of cases, or 10 points more
than in the previous year). As foreigners residing and working legally in Italy may be joined by their spouses, dependent children and parents, family reunion was the second-ranking reason after work. In 1996, 18 per cent of all residence permits held by foreigners had been issued for family reunion, as against 13 per cent in 1990. Naturalisations Some 7 000 individuals acquired Italian nationality in 1996 (over two-thirds were women). The breakdown of naturalised immigrants by country of origin shows that Romanian nationals formed the largest group, followed by Swiss, Dominican Republic, Moroccan and Polish nationals. Considering the volume of recent immigration ows from countries outside the European Union, the number of naturalisations can be expected to decline owing to the provisions of the new Nationality Act of 1993, since it has raised from ve to ten years, the residence requirement before which non-European Union nationals may apply for naturalisation. Asylum seekers In 1991, there were some 30 000 asylum seekers (including 18 000 Albanians). Asylum applications then fell signicantly, to about 6 000 in 1992 and to almost ten times fewer in 1996. However, owing to the deterioration in Albanias economic and nancial situation and the recent arrival of Kurds (of Turkish or Iraqi nationality), the Italian authorities granted political asylum or protection on humanitarian grounds to a greater number of asylum seekers in 1997. Foreign workers and the labour market According to Ministry of the Interior data, based on residence permits held by foreigners, the number of foreign workers (dependent and selfemployed, including the unemployed) was approximately 700 000 in 1996, or 27 per cent more than in the previous year. Foreigners from outside the European Union are usually employed in unskilled jobs mostly involving hard manual work. In northern and central Italy, immigrants mainly work in small and medium-sized industrial rms, in the building trade and in the tertiary sector (transport, cleaning services, hotels and catering). In the South they are employed mainly in agriculture, the service sector and as attendants for the elderly and sick.
125
Table II.14.
Current gures on foreign population, Italy

1993 1994 1995 1996
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) Retirees Asylum seekers/refugees Other and not specied By region of residence North Central South Acquisition of Italian nationality
residence1
987.4 363.9 287.6 172.5 157.4 5.9 506.9 152.6 65.4 52.3 64.4 46.2 13.4 86.1 475.9 343.6 167.9 6.5 85.0 76.2 19.7 3.4 0.7 19.9 36.0 14.8 29.3 304.8 76.3 42.0 34.4 23.6 1.6 17.1 29.0 52.3 10.0 54.2 22.3 45.9 5.4
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 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 11.0 54.3 22.4 56.6 6.1
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 7.4 111.3 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 .. 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 28.4 552.2 412.7 209.4 7.0 129.2 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 .. 69.0 23.6 34.5 5.1
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 Mixed marriages Legal action taken against foreigners Foreigners for whom a penal action has been undertaken Foreigners under arrest Foreigners who are to be expelled Expelled foreigners
1.
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. The decrease observed for 1994 is a result of a clean-up of the register of foreigners: duplicate entries and entries of persons who had returned to their country of origin were removed. 2. 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 local employment Ofces. Sources: Ministry of the Interior; ISTAT.
126
As regards seasonal employment in agriculture, the number of non-EU seasonal workers rose between 1994 and 1995 by over 40 per cent, from 6 400 to 11 000. This increase was accompanied by a slight drop in the number of Italian seasonal workers. In 1996, around 9 000 work permits were issued to foreign seasonal workers in this sector. In 1995, the Ministry of Labour conducted a country-wide survey covering 29 000 enterprises which employed some 740 000 workers, 2.2 per cent of whom were non-EU foreign workers. About 37 per cent of them were undocumented (the percentage varying according to the sector of activity and the region). A third of these undocumented workers did not hold a valid residence permit. The others were in an irregular situation for reasons connected with undeclared employment, which is not limited to foreign workers, since it is estimated that over 10 million Italian workers are undeclared. The number of non-EU foreigners registered with unemployment ofces as of 31 December 1996 was 147 000, considerably more than in the previous year (98 500). Almost two-thirds of the unemployed were looking for their rst job. Most of them (75 per cent) were unskilled workers. The majority of the unemployed (70 per cent) had been looking for a job for less than a year. Policy developments
Table II.15. Regularisation requests of immigrants in an irregular situation, three last regularisation programmes, by region of residence, Italy
Thousands
1986 1990 1997
North Centre South Islands Total
47.2 37.8 19.0 14.4 118.3
89.2 75.9 30.6 39.1 234.8
115.3 75.8 48.2 19.4 258.8
Sources: Ministry of Labour; Ministry of the Interior.
legitimate (see Table II.15). At that date the number of applicants for regularisation was equivalent to over 20 per cent of all foreigners already in possession of a legal residence permit. To qualify for this programme, applicants had to be able to prove that they had worked for at least four of the previous twelve months or had a relative they wished to join who had lived in Italy for over two years and had sufcient means to support and accommodate them. Self-employed workers were excluded from the programme. According to preliminary data, it appears that virtually all applications are work-related. The largest number of applicants for regularisation are, in descending order, Moroccans, Albanians, Filipinos and Chinese. In most cases they are immigrants who had previously held a residence and work permit which had not been renewed: this points to the endogenous nature of undocumented migration in Italy.
Flow control and regulation

According to available information, it would appear that illegal immigration in Italy in the recent past is due more to endogenous than exogenous reasons, since the authorities, in particular the police, have imposed tighter border controls since 1991. The number of personnel assigned to border control has increased considerably and the army and navy have been more actively involved. In addition, a number of illegal immigration channels organised and run by foreigners and Italians have been dismantled. In the past three years, the number of arrests and deportations of foreigners has risen steadily. This has mainly concerned Tunisians, Moroccans, nationals of the former Yugoslavia, Algerians and Albanians. At the end of 1995 the Italian Government issued a decree providing for a third regularisation programme for foreigners in irregular situations (this followed those of 1986 and 1990). Between November 1995 and 15 January 1997, some 260 000 applications were led with around 230 000 deemed
New legislation on entry and residence by foreigners

A new Act regulating entry and residence of foreigners was adopted in Italy in early 1998. It reafrms that basic human rights also apply to foreigners, whatever their legal situation. With regard to immigration ows, this Act provides for an active and concerted policy at both national and regional levels, including the co-operation of the employers and employees organisations. Quotas for foreigners eligible for entry into Italy will be xed, for work, family reunion and temporary asylum for humanitarian reasons. The Act species the papers required and the means of subsistence that must be available to a foreigner during his stay in Italy. It also provides for the issue of a permanent residence permit to foreigners who have resided in the country
127
for over ve years and who meet certain other requirements. Spouses and under-age children also benet from this provision. Holders of this residence permit may take part in local community affairs and are entitled to vote in local elections. The sections of this new Act dealing with undocumented immigration focus on the arrangements for rapidly deporting illegal migrants, turning them back or escorting them to the border. The penalties for those who facilitate the illegal entry and exploitation of foreigners have been increased. The same applies to the exploitation of foreign minors and to the recruitment of foreigners for prostitution. The employment regulations stipulate that preferential quotas limited to the nationals of the States with which Italy has concluded agreements on regulating entry ows or on re-admission procedures will be dened by annual decrees. The regulations governing the recruitment, accommodation and remuneration of foreign workers have also been tightened. The penalties for employers using foreign workers who are in an irregular situation have also been increased. Seasonal employment is reserved mainly for workers who have respected the time limits of their previous seasonal permits (from twenty days to six months and, in exceptional cases, nine months) by returning to their country when their contract has ended. There is also a provision for converting seasonal work permits into xed or indenite-term permits, subject to certain conditions. Seasonal workers rights to social security benets have also been reafrmed. Lastly, family reunion has an important place in this new legislation: any foreigner applying for family reunion will have to prove that he has sufcient means to support and accommodate the members of his family.
tance, literacy programmes). The main obstacle to the integration of immigrants is the growth of the underground economy, which encourages them to remain in an irregular situation and to accept very poor living and working conditions. JAPAN Introduction The recovery of the Japanese economy which started in the middle of 1995 was not yet in full swing when it lost its momentum in 1997. Unemployment remains relatively high by Japanese standards. Due to the slow pace of economic recovery and to mounting efforts to combat illegal immigration, foreign labour inows have been stable over the last three years. However, the inow of South Americans of Japanese descent (Nikkeijin) continues to increase. Inow of foreign nationals Entries of foreign nationals, excluding temporary visitors and persons entering Japan with reentry permits, rose by 7 per cent in 1996 to total 225 000 (see Table II.16). The 12 per cent decrease in the total in 1995 was due largely to an over 50 per cent fall in the number of those entering under the status of entertainer. The slight rebound in their numbers in 1996 (an almost 4 000 increase), coupled with a steady increase in the number of those entering under the category of spouse or child of a Japanese national (mostly Nikkeijin) and the slight growth in the number of trainees largely account for this overall increase. Foreign population The number of foreign nationals registered under the Alien Registration Law increased again in 1996. In 1995, the rise was just sufcient to keep their share of the total population stable. In 1996, the 53 000 rise brought the proportion up to 1.1 per cent. Despite some increase in absolute terms, the proportion of nationals from other Asian countries keeps declining with the continually rising inow from South America. This trend is expected to continue given that Brazil and Peru together contain an estimated potential pool of approximately 1.4 million Nikkeijin. Permanent and long-term residents combined make up three-quarters of the foreign population. The number of permanent residents has continually registered an almost negligible decrease over recent years. This decrease is due mainly to
Active policy for the integration of immigrants

An active policy for the integration of immigrants is being implemented by local authorities; they received the necessary powers and funds from the government under an Act passed in 1990. Most of the activities at municipal level are run by an ofce which is responsible for the initial reception of immigrants and for providing them with guidance on how to obtain access to public and private services. Action, guidance and training programmes have made government employees more aware of issues concerning the integration of immigrants. Many nongovernmental organisations are engaged in urban activities (accommodation, health care, legal assis-
128
Table II.16.
Current gures on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Japan
Thousands
1993 1994 1995 1996
Inows of foreign nationals1 of which: Workers Stock of total 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 Illegal immigrant statistics Estimates of illegal residents5 Number of foreign nationals deported Foreign employment, by status of residence6 Specialist in humanities and international services Entertainers Engineers Skilled labour Instructors Other
1. 2. 3.
234.4 97.1 124 764 1 320.7 682.3 210.1 154.7 73.1 42.6 157.9 631.8 359.2 222.4 7.4 129.5 95.4 234.3 10.5 7.7 2.2 296.8 70.4 95.4 23.5 28.5 9.9 5.9 6.2 21.4
237.5 111.7 125 034 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 2.5 288.1 65.6 105.6 24.8 34.8 10.1 6.8 6.8 22.3
209.8 81.5 125 568 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 3.2 284.7 55.5 88.0 25.1 16.0 9.9 7.4 7.2 22.4
225.4 78.6 125 864 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 4.0 283.0 54.3 98.3 27.4 20.1 11.1 8.8 7.5 23.5
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 cover 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 of overstayers in November of each year (except for 1996: 31 December 1996). Most of them are thought to be working illegally. 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. Source: Ministry of Justice.
naturalisations, mostly of Koreans and Chinese, holders, since 1992, of special permanent resident status. Foreign workers in Japan The foreign labour force in Japan, excluding trainees in the public and private sectors (who number 14 000 and 31 500 respectively), was estimated by the Ministries of Labour, of Foreign Affairs and of
Justice at approximately 630 000 in 1996. The proportion of foreign workers to the total labour force in Japan (0.9 per cent) has not changed since 1992. The Nikkeijin account for one-third of the foreign labour in Japan (including workers in an irregular situation, see Table II.17). According to the results of the Reporting System on the Employment of Foreigners under the direction of the Ministry of Labour, of those foreign
129
Table II.17.
Estimates of foreign workers in Japan by status of residence, 1996

Thousands
Status of residence
Foreign workers with permission of employment by category Specialist in humanities or international services Entertainer Engineer Skilled labour Instructor Intra-company transferee Investor and business manager Religious activities Professor Researcher Journalist Artist Medical services Legal and accounting services Total Estimates of students engaged in part time jobs Estimates of Japanese descents engaged in gainful activities1 Illegal Total
1. 2.
27.4 20.1 11.1 8.8 7.5 5.9 5.0 5.0 4.6 2.0 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.1 98.3 20.0 211.2 300.0 629.4
Organisation (JITCO), regular trainees, who pass certain skill tests after a period of training, can become technical intern trainees, change their status of residence and be treated equally with Japanese in terms of laws such as labour standard law, minimum wage law, and other labour-related laws. As of March 1997, over 12 000 trainees had applied for the programme, of whom almost 11 000 had been accepted. The government has expanded the range of the skill test categories from 19 at the beginning of the TITP to 53; in so doing it has effectively relaxed the eligibility criteria. Illegal immigration In parallel with the number of foreign nationals deported, the estimated number of illegal workers has decreased to 283 000 from its peak in 1993 (see Table II.16). Of the 54 270 who were deported after having been caught violating immigration laws and regulations, almost 90 per cent were found to have been working illegally. Interestingly, the gap between illegal male and female workers continues to narrow as the number of illegal female workers increases while the number of illegal male workers decreases. The measures taken to combat illegal immigration appear to be fruitful. However, the number of attempts to smuggle aliens by boat from neighbouring countries such as China has registered a rapid rise over recent years. The number of aliens caught attempting to enter Japan in this manner over the period December 1996 to May 1997 was over 1 200. Policy developments A number of changes in laws and policies on migration have been implemented. The most important change took place in May 1997 by amending the Immigration Control Act to cope with the rapid increase in the smuggling of aliens, mostly potential illegal workers. The amendments provide for the imposition of severe penalties against those organising or abetting the activity. The co-operation of the Immigration Bureau with the police and the Maritime Safety Agency has also been strengthened. Under a new guideline issued by the Immigration Bureau, foreign nationals can enter and stay in Japan under the status of long term resident in order to support the children, legitimate or illegitimate, of Japanese nationals. Furthermore, the maximum period of stay for the Technical Intern Trainees has been extended from two years to three. This
workers2
Estimates made by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Estimates made by the Ministry of Justice on the basis of the number of overstayers. Sources: Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Ministry of Justice.
workers (not including students, part-time workers, trainees, and seasonal workers) who were registered by their employers as of 1 June 1996, almost twothirds were employed by the manufacturing sector and 20 per cent by the service sector. It was found that 80 per cent of foreign workers employed in the manufacturing sector were Nikkeijin. Trainee scheme and Technical Internship Training Program In 1996, the number of entries of foreigners under the trainee status of residence rose to 45 500, a 12 per cent increase on 1995. Asians accounted for more than 80 per cent of the total of whom the largest number came from China. The Technical Internship Training Programme (TITP), an extension of the general trainee scheme, was introduced in 1993 with the aim of transferring more effectively technology and skills to developing countries via international co-operation for human resource development. Under the TITP program, supervised by the Japan International Training Co-operation
130
decision was made partly in response to a number of requests from companies seeking to enhance the skill level of their trainees and therefore desirous of the opportunity to offset the increased training cost by a prolonged period of work experience. In addition, the July 1997 decision of the Immigration Bureau made it possible for graduates of certain vocational and technical training colleges to change their status of residence from student to other statuses of residence which would allow them to work legally. Finally, 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.
tity. China, for example, has facilitated the retention of ethnic Koreans cultural identity by the establishment of the Korean Autonomous Prefecture (total population, 218 000) under the Regulations on the Autonomy of Minority Areas enacted in 1952 and by the operation of a pluralistic minority policy. On the other hand, it is estimated that only around 10 per cent of those of Korean descent in Central Asia and Russia use the Korean language. The proportion is likely to be similar in Japan.
Labour emigration
The chief characteristic of labour migration from its earliest stages through to the 1980s was the governments active involvement. Labour emigration began in 1963 when 247 workers were sent to West Germany under an agreement between the two governments. Shortly afterwards a special institution was established to promote manpower exports. During the 1970s and 1980s, almost 2 million Korean workers were dispatched overseas for temporary employment of whom over 60 per cent, typically construction workers, went to the Middle East. With the slowdown of the economies of the Middle East, however, Korean labour emigration declined substantially. In 1990, only 56 000 Korean workers went abroad, over 80 per cent of whom were seamen. This is a 70 per cent decline compared with the 1982 gure, the peak year of Korean labour emigration. The downward trend has continued accompanying the strong growth in Korean real wages; over the past ten years average real wages in Korea have risen by just over 100 per cent. Foreign population in Korea The rate of growth in the number of foreign nationals, staying more than 90 days and registered as required under the law, having remained low through to 1991 has since increased substantially (see Table II.18). Registered foreign nationals now number almost 150 000, though still account for less than half of one per cent of the population. The recent increases are attributable to the 1992 normalisation of diplomatic relations with China which led both to substantial increases in the number of trainees entering from neighbouring countries and to substantial inows from China of Chinese and of ethnic Koreans.
KOREA Historical background Large scale emigration of Koreans to China and Russia started in the 1880s. The emigrants were predominantly poverty-stricken farmers living in the northern provinces (now in North Korea). The vast majority moved to the border area in the northeastern China, to Siberia and to the far eastern part of Russia. A major outow of Korean migrants to Japan, mostly involuntarily, occurred in the years following Koreas formal annexation by Japan in 1910 having come under effective Japanese control in 1905. Further movements followed the 1919 uprising against Japanese rule. In 1937, an estimated 175 000 Korean immigrants in the far eastern part of Russia were forcibly displaced to Central Asia (now Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan) by the Soviet government. During the Second World War, tens of thousands of Koreans, mostly older males, were sent to work in Japan under the 1944 Japanese Labour Conscription Act; Korean males of military age were conscripted into the Japanese army. According to an unofcial estimate, the Korean population in Japan in 1945 was close to 2 million; over half returned to Korea at the end of the war. At present, an estimated 2 million ethnic Koreans live in China, 500 000 in Central Asia, nearly as many in Russia, and 666 000 in Japan. Due largely to the policies (most importantly those concerning education) of the respective governments, ethnic Koreans in China, Russia, Central Asia and Japan display varying degrees of ethnic and cultural iden-
131
Table II.18. Stock of foreign population in Korea by nationality, 1986, 1994-1996

Thousands
of which: Women
1994 1995 1996
Table II.19. Foreign workers in Korea by category, 1993-1996

Thousands
1993 1994 1995 1996
1986
1994
1995
1996
China United States Chinese Taipei Japan Philippines Vietnam Indonesia China (Chinese with Korean descents) Bangladesh Canada Sri Lanka Other Total
8.4 24.8 3.0 0.2 0.4 4.8
11.3 19.6 23.3 8.4 5.7 2.7 1.6 4.7 1.3 1.2 1.2 4.0
19.2 22.2 23.3 9.4 9.0 5.7 3.4 7.4 2.7 3.0 1.7 3.2
26.7 26.4 23.3 12.4 10.8 10.3 9.6 9.3 6.3 3.7 2.9 7.0
4.3 9.3 10.7 4.7 2.1 0.9 0.4 1.4 0.6 0.6 1.5
8.4 10.4 10.7 5.1 3.7 2.5 0.9 2.8 0.9 0.8 0.8
11.3 12.2 10.7 7.6 4.3 3.6 1.9 3.4 1.8 1.0 2.0
Skilled workers Trainees Estimates of the number of overstayers Total

Source:
Ministry of Justice.
3.8 8.6 54.5 66.9
5.3 28.3 48.2 81.8
8.2 38.8 81.9 128.9
13.4 68.0 129.1 210.5
41.6 84.9 110.0 148.7 36.3 47.0 59.7
Note: Foreign nationals staying more than 90 days and registered as required under the law. Source: Ministry of Justice.
formal education and an heightened disinclination to take-up so-called 3 D (Dangerous, Difcult and Dirty) jobs, the shortages have since intensied, in particular, among small and medium sized companies in the manufacturing sector. Companies suffering from labour shortages typically lack the nancial resources necessary to invest in automated production lines or to relocate their production bases overseas and thereby take advantage of cheaper labour.
Skilled foreign workers

In principle, all legal foreign workers in Korea are skilled since the government does not allow the entry of unskilled workers. Having grown steadily through to 1994 their inow has since grown rapidly. At just over 13 000 in 1996, however, their stock remains negligible relative to the total foreign labour force (see Table II.19). Under the Immigration and Emigration Law, skilled foreign workers are permitted to work under the following categories of employment: technology transfer, professional activities, foreign-language teaching, research and entertainment. Employment in additional categories requires the specic approval of the government. Language teachers are numerically the most important accounting for approximately 55 per cent of the total. Their numbers increased by over three quarters to reach almost 7 500 in 1996. Those under the entertainment category, the second largest number, increased by only slightly less.
Foreign workers in an irregular situation

Accompanying the intensication of labour shortages, the number of foreign workers in an irregular situation has been growing. The vast majority have entered Korea on a short-term visa (typically as a tourist or as a foreign national of Korean descent visiting relatives) and overstayed lling the unwanted unskilled jobs. According to the immigration authorities, the number of overstayers (most of whom are expected to be working illegally) increased threefold between 1991 and 1996 to reach almost 130 000. By country of origin, China accounts for the largest share at almost 40 per cent. Due to their physical similarity to Koreans, once on Korean territory they are more difcult to detect than other foreigners, so permitting them a wider choice of occupations. In addition, approximately 30 per cent of the trainees admitted under the Industrial and Technical Training Programme (ITTP) have deserted their workplace to join their ranks. The increasing number of illegal foreign workers is a source of considerable public concern. In order to cope with the rapid increase in the number of illegal foreign workers, the government has rendered more severe the system of penalties against the illegal workers and their employers. The sanctions vary according to the period of overstay. The costs of repatriating illegal workers are borne by their employers.
Labour shortages
In the mid 1980s, coinciding with the attainment of near full-employment, Korea began to experience acute shortages of labour in certain industries. As a result most notably of the rapid ageing of the population, an increase in the length of time spent in
132
Trainee scheme
At the end of 1996 there were about 68 000 trainees, the majority working in small and medium sized manufacturing companies (see Table II.19). Prior to a revision in 1992 which established the ITTP for the labour-shortage suffering manufacturing companies, the purpose of the trainee programme was to upgrade the skills of foreign workers employed by the overseas subsidiaries of Korean rms. Initially, trainees admitted under the ITTP could stay for up to one year. The maximum period of stay has since been extended twice, in late 1993 and in 1996, to bring the period up to three years. Over 90 per cent of the trainees admitted do so under the ITTP which is organised by the Korea Federation of Small Business (KFSB) which is also charged with distributing the trainee quotas. A small number are admitted through the Korea Fishery Federation. The remainder are selected by the overseas subsidiaries of Korean rms.
which trainees can be employed as legal workers upon completion of a certain period of training. Concerning skilled foreign workers, in order to stimulate foreign investment in Korea the government has revised the Immigration and Emigration Law to abolish the ceiling on their period of stay and has simplied the administrative procedures governing the issuing of their visas. LUXEMBOURG Introduction Since the end of the nineteenth century, the proportion of foreigners in the population of Luxembourg has steadily increased. Foreigners accounted for barely 3 per cent of the population in 1875, 10 per cent at the end of the Second World War and slightly over 34 per cent at 1 January 1997 (out of a total population of 418 300). Luxembourg is the OECD country with the highest proportion of foreigners in its population. Because of its growing importance as a nancial and banking centre, the fact that insurance companies and large media groups are based there and the presence of international organisations, Luxembourg attracts large numbers of skilled individuals. Migration ows and the resident foreign population Since 1990, the annual ow of foreigners has averaged some 10 000 arrivals and 6 000 departures. Net migration is positive for all nationalities. Most of the new immigrants come from European Union countries (see Table II.20). The Portuguese still account for the largest number of new arrivals. Although net migration by the Portuguese fell by some 30 per cent in 1994 in comparison with the previous year, it increased slightly in 1995. Based on the initial estimates available, the foreign resident population at 1 January 1997 amounted to nearly 143 000. The largest group was the Portuguese, followed by Italians, French, Belgians and Germans (see Table II.20). Over the years, the structure of the resident foreign population by nationality has changed. Between the end of the Second World War and the end of the 1970s, the Italians constituted the largest foreign group. They were subsequently overtaken by the Portuguese, whose numbers increased steadily during the 1980s to reach 53 100 at 1 January 1997, that is to say 37 per cent of the total foreign population.
Social protection for foreign workers in Korea

Under the Constitution, legally registered foreign workers are entitled to the same social protection rights as nationals. As trainees are admitted under the status of student they do not benet from the same degree of protection. They 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 under the Industrial Accident Compensation and Insurance Act. Policy developments A lack of consensus within the country has had the effect of limiting the governments scope to formulate a coherent policy concerning the immigration of unskilled foreign workers. Despite the no entry principle adopted towards unskilled foreign workers, many have had their status regularised under a series of amnesties introduced by the government from June 1992 onwards. The initial six month amnesty has since been renewed three times. Social protection policies have been developed for trainees and illegal foreign workers. In 1997, after a great deal of nation-wide debate concerning the possible introduction of a work permit system, a small revision was made to the ITTP under
133
134 Table II.20. Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Luxembourg
1993 1994 1995 1996 1993 1994 1995 1996
Components of total population change Natural increase of which: Foreigners Net migration of which: Foreigners Population on 31 December of the years indicated of which: Foreigners Migration ows by country of origin/destination Inows Portugal France Belgium Germany Other countries Net migration Portugal France Belgium Germany Other countries Foreign population by main nationality1 Portugal Italy France Belgium Germany Spain Other countries Acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality2 Italy France Germany Belgium Other countries Mixed marriages % of total marriages
1.4 1.5 4.2 4.2 400.9 127.6 10.1 2.9 1.2 0.8 0.7 4.5 2.6 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.2 1.4 127.6 47.1 19.7 13.8 10.9 9.2 2.7 24.3 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 22.2
1.7 1.7 4.0 3.9 406.6 132.5 10.1 2.4 1.3 0.9 0.8 4.8 2.8 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.2 1.5 132.5 49.4 19.7 14.3 11.3 9.5 2.7 25.4 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.5 23.2
1.6 .. 4.6 4.7 412.8 138.1 10.3 2.4 1.5 0.9 0.6 4.9 2.6 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 1.4 138.1 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 .. 3.7 .. 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 .. 31.9 0.8 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.5 24.4
Inows of foreign of which: Women Inows by region or country of origin EU of which: France Germany Portugal Belgium 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
15.4 5.6 13.9 5.4 2.6 2.5 2.1 0.5 1.4 0.2 1.1 2.1 6.2 0.9 2.3 0.3 2.2 5.7 9.6 203.2 48.0 52.0 47.3 50.7 31.1 18.2 3.5 51.1
16.2 5.7 14.7 6.0 2.5 2.2 2.5 0.6 1.5 0.2 1.1 1.6 7.5 1.0 1.9 0.3 2.4 5.5 10.7 208.3 46.0 54.0 51.3 51.0 30.5 18.5 4.6 53.6
16.5 5.9 15.5 6.7 2.2 2.2 2.6 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 44.0 56.0 55.8 .. .. .. 5.1 54.3
18.3 6.7 17.2 8.1 2.5 2.1 2.9 0.6 1.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 219.0 46.2 53.8 57.8 .. .. .. 6.4 57.7
1. Data are from population registers and refer to the population on 31 December of the years indicated. 2. Children acquiring nationality as a consequence of the naturalisation of their parents are excluded. 3. Data cover arrivals of foreign workers to Luxembourg and foreign residents entering the labour market for the rst time. 4. Annual average. The data for 1995 and 1996 are provisional. 5. Data as of 31 March of each year. Sources: STATEC; Inspection gen erale de la Securit e sociale (IGSS); Administration de lemploi.
Over the last twenty years, the difference in fertility rate between Luxembourg women and foreigners has all but disappeared. In 1970, the fertility index was 1.9 for nationals and 2.4 for foreigners, while in 1994, the gures were 1.7 for nationals and 1.8 for foreigners. Since 1990, the proportion of mixed marriages has increased, from 22 to 24 per cent in 1996; this relative increase is essentially due to marriages between Luxembourg men and foreign women. Naturalisations The number of naturalisations (779 in 1996) rose considerably at the end of the 1980s, a temporary phenomenon due in part to changes to the relevant legislation (Act of 11 December 1986 lowering the required age to 18). In theory, some 50 000 foreign residents meet the criteria required for naturalisation or an option to it but do not apply for Luxembourg nationality. This is largely because 90 per cent of the resident foreign population is composed of EU nationals. They have little to gain from acquiring Luxembourg nationality unless for political reasons or with a view to applying for a post in the Luxembourg civil service. Moreover, Luxembourg does not allow double nationality which means that applicants have to give up their previous nationality. Refugees and asylum seekers Until 1987, most asylum seekers in Luxembourg were 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, there have been ups and downs in the number of asylum seekers, which reached 266 in 1996. 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. Beneciaries receive social assistance from the government, free medical care, clothing and a work permit valid for the length of stay corresponding to their status. From the beginning of the war until 1 November 1995, over 3 000 nationals of the former
Yugoslavia had registered. 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). Employment of foreigners On 1 January 1993, the transitional provisions regarding the free movement of persons, following the accession of Spain and Portugal to the European Community, ceased to apply. As a result, nationals of these two countries are free to visit and establish themselves in Luxembourg. Migration for employment purposes essentially concerns European Union nationals mainly Portuguese but also crossborder workers from the three neighbouring countries (France, Belgium and Germany). The foreign workforce amounted to 118 000 persons in September 1996, including both resident and crossborder workers. Some 113 000 of these were wageearners, representing more than half of all such workers, which gives a good indication of the vital importance of foreign labour for Luxembourgs economy and labour market. The slowdown in economic growth and the increase in unemployment since 1991 have not yet led to a fall in the numbers of foreign and cross-border workers. New hirings of foreign workers reached a little over 18 000 in 1996 (see Table II.20). The majority of foreigners in employment were blue collar and ofce workers in the private sector. The main sector for the employment of foreigners was commerce, and to a much lesser extent construction and the hotel industry. The foreign active population is younger, on average, than that of the Luxembourg one. For Portuguese workers, the discrepancy is greater still; in the last census, taken in 1991, over 70 per cent were between the ages of 15 and 39, compared with only 60 per cent of workers of Luxembourg nationality. Since the beginning of the 1970s, the number of cross-border workers employed in Luxembourg has increased considerably, from 7 200 to some 60 000 in 1996. Whereas in 1970 the majority of cross-border workers lived in Belgium, the distribution began to change in 1992. Today, more than half of such workers live in France, 30 per cent in Belgium and 18 per cent 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 twothirds are men, although women are relatively more numerous in the category of ofce workers, as far as
135
cross-border workers from France and Germany are concerned. On average, German cross-border workers are more frequently employed in the construction and public works sector, while Belgians more often work in the nancial sector and the French in business services and real estate. Policy developments In recent years, a number of measures have been introduced supplementing the legislation and regulations governing the employment of wageearners who are nationals of a country that does not belong to the European Economic Area. The impact of these new provisions is not yet clearly reected in the available statistics. Of the considerable legislation passed during this period, the following are worthy of mention: 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 species the conditions under which resident foreigners from 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 nonprot 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 nonLuxembourg nationals to exercise certain political rights, in particular with regard to local elections. This constitutional amendment was taken into account by the Act of 3 July 1995, which abolished the requirement that candidates for elections to professional institutes be of Luxembourg nationality. The Act of 18 August 1995 includes several provisions updating the basic law on immigration (1972) with regard to the entry, stay, medical examination and labour market access of foreigners. These new provisions took account in particular of the entry into force of the 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 European countries can participate in local elections. The Act of 19 July 1997 increased the sanctions applicable to the offence of slander or libel for belonging to 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 difculties, notably linguistic ones. The trilingual basis of education (Luxembourgish, French and German) is reafrmed as a cornerstone of national identity, but special arrangements apply to 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 specied that foreign pupils are to be integrated into Luxembourg schools with due regard to their native culture and mother tongue (primarily Portuguese). MEXICO Introduction Mexico went through a period of transition and change during the 1980s as far as migration is concerned. The economic situation, which has been difcult since the crisis of 1994, has prevented any reduction in the wage and income differentials with the United States. Emigration to the US continues (see Table II.21) and the two countries have tried to act jointly to control the ows, combat illegal immigration and labour trafcking, and promote the integration of immigrant populations in observance of human rights. Mexico also has to deal with immigration ows from Central America, which as yet are not well identied or controlled (refugees and undocumented workers). Finally, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has brought Mexico into a new economic area; this is causing new migration ows linked to economic co-operation. Emigration It is difcult to estimate permanent emigration ows since the available statistics include tourist
136
Table II.21.
Mexican emigration to the United States, 1911-19961

Thousands
of which: Immigrants who had beneted from the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)
Period
Numbers
1911-20 1921-30 1931-40 1941-50 1951-60 1961-70 1971-80 1981-90 1991-96 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
1.
219.0 459.3 22.3 60.6 299.8 453.9 640.3 1 655.8 1 653.8 405.7 680.2 947.9 214.1 126.6 111.4 90.0 163.7
962.7 1 042.3 339.2 623.5 894.9 122.5 17.5 4.4 3.0 3.6
This, then, is essentially a labour migration, motivated by the wage and income differential between the two countries. Jobs held in the United States are very varied and are no longer conned to agriculture. In many cases, the skill level of jobs held in the US by Mexican immigrants is lower than that of the jobs for which they would be qualied in Mexico, but the pay is higher. Even so, the employment of Mexican workers in certain segments of the US economy helps to keep wage levels down and explains why the economic situation of migrants is a difcult one: 25 per cent of families with indenite stay permits have a low income level (in 1996, 11 per cent had an annual income of less than US$500). Moreover, the unemployment rate for Mexicans in the United States is twice that for Americans. Immigration Traditionally a country of emigration, Mexico is now receiving a growing number of immigrants. This is essentially transit migration due to Mexicos geographical location as the gateway from Latin America to developed countries. The statistics for recorded migration ows (including tourists) show large incoming and outgoing movements of persons. From the beginning of the 1990s, the annual number of entries into Mexico has been of the order of 8 million, for all categories of persons. In 1996, the inow increased to around 9.5 million persons, of whom 2.5 million were Mexican nationals. Although these ows reect the intensity and steady growth of cross-border population movements, they do not reect the reality of foreign migration to Mexico. All told, only 73 000 aliens obtained the status of permanent migrant (immigrant or resident) in Mexico in 1996, a number which has remained relatively stable since the beginning of the decade. In addition to these recorded ows there are the inward movements of refugees, not registered as such since Mexico has not yet ratied the Geneva Convention, and those of undocumented alien workers. The latter are farm workers, most of them Guatemalan, recruited for the sugar cane and banana plantations. Each year an estimated 100 000 aliens, without stay or labour permits, come to work on Mexican farms. The absence of any legal status for these foreign workers makes their economic and social situation extremely precarious (very low wages, no social protection, insecure employment, etc.). Refugees are in a situation similar to that of the migrant farm workers. For ten years or so Mexico has been receiving refugees, mostly from Guatemala
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, 1996 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
movements and naturally exclude unauthorised migrations of Mexicans to the United States. For several decades the principal destination of Mexican migrants has been the US, followed by Spain and Canada. In 1996, it was estimated that between 7 and 7.3 million Mexicans were living in the US of whom approximately 2.3 million were undocumented. The Mexican population remains predominantly male (55 per cent) despite an increase in the proportion of females. Even though Mexican immigrants are older on average than in the past, the Mexican population in the US is younger than the average for other migrants and for the US population as a whole: 70 per cent of Mexican immigrants are aged between 15 and 44. This population is more educated and skilled than before and more urban in origin. The results of a recent survey by the National Population Council (CONAPO) on Mexican workers in the United States point to an even more striking picture: the majority of Mexican migrants are male (95 per cent), young (more than 56 per cent aged between 24 and 44), of urban origin (55 per cent) and undocumented (64 per cent). More than 50 per cent settle in California.
137
but also from El Salvador and Honduras, who have been unable to obtain any legal status. They live in camps the majority of which are located in the three states of Chiapas, Campeche and Quintana Roo. Given the length of their stay (more than ten years for some), these populations have become integrated into the local community. To deal with the increase in immigration ows, the Mexican government has introduced a regularisation programme (see below, southern border programme). It is also attempting to tighten border controls. These measures are being accompanied by crackdowns. In 1996, 78 000 persons (an increase of 37 per cent on 1995) were expelled on account of illegal residence in Mexico (unauthorised extension of stay after authorised entry, change of circumstances invalidating the right of residence, destruction of identity papers, etc.). Signicant numbers of entries are also being refused: in 1996 a little over 100 000 persons were refused entry to Mexico. Most of the aliens concerned are from Central America (Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador principally).
Table II.22. Inows of temporary visitors for business under NAFTA, by category and nationality, 1994-19961, Mexico
1994 1995 1996
Nationals of Canada Business persons Traders and investors Intracompany transferees Professionals Nationals of the United States Business persons Traders and investors Intracompany transferees Professionals Total Business persons Traders and investors Intracompany transferees Professionals
1.
1 935 1 500 30 45 360 43 200 37 500 510 1 245 3 945 45 135 39 000 540 1 290 4 305
3 075 2 550 45 75 405 54 540 48 750 405 1 440 3 945 57 615 51 300 450 1 515 4 350
2 984 2 569 53 55 307 87 970 78 515 1 039 1 503 6 913 90 954 81 084 1 092 1 558 7 220
Holders of an FMN visa are allowed to come to Mexico as often as they wish for 30 days (renewable). The 1994 and 1995 gures are an estimation based on a gure of 30 090 and 38 410 permits respectively delivered in May-December 1994 and January-August 1995. Source: National Migration Institute.
Entries of business persons in the context of NAFTA

NAFTA does not provide for the free movement of persons. However, provisions specic to the treaty facilitate the movement of business persons within the North American area. Business people from the United States and Canada receive the status of temporary visitors to Mexico, with a residence permit valid for up to one year subject to certain conditions regarding nancial resources. This category covers different purposes of stay in Mexico: visitors on business, intra-rm transfer of employees, persons belonging to the scientic and medical professions, teachers, etc. The total number of these temporary migrants has been rising steadily since 1994 and has shown a further increase of 43 per cent for 1996 (i.e. 90 900 entries, see Table II.22); this trend seems to have been conrmed in the rst few months of 1997. Because of Mexicos proximity to the United States, most of the business people (97 per cent) come from that country. More than 89 per cent enter as visitors on business. Intra-rm transfers and movements of qualied personnel account, then, for only 10 per cent of these entries. In addition to entries of business persons in the context of NAFTA, there are the temporary entries of non-migrant visitors and advisers. In 1996, 11 400 persons entered Mexico under this heading in connection with commercial, industrial, technological and nancial activities. These entries chiey involve French and Japanese nationals. Developments in migration policy The continuing growth of the foreign presence in Mexico has led the government to clarify and amend the legislation applying to entry, stay and exit of aliens. The national development plan (1995-2000) incorporates a revision of migration legislation (as part of the population law) and a redenition of migration policy. The new policy is an extension of the programmes introduced earlier (southern border programme, Paisano programme, control of labour trafcking). Migration policy is now built around four major concerns: Evaluation and strict denition of migration policy in order to ensure conformity with national objectives. The approach adopted is, on the one hand, to evaluate the alien population present in Mexico and give legal status to undocumented immigrants who have been residing in the country for some time and, on the other, to improve control of migration ows. Thus the regularisation operations (see below) in the southern part of the coun-
138
try have given rise to a census enumeration of aliens (creation of a data bank on refugees, Guatemalan in particular), an evaluation of labour requirements and an identication of foreigners work places. Control of entry ows in observance of the law and the rights of aliens. In response to the recent increase in immigration, the Mexican government is insisting on the need to give resident aliens a clearly dened status whilst at the same time tightening border controls. Mexico has in fact adopted the present position of the principal countries of immigration: strict control of entry ows together with a policy of integration. Thus the amended population law provides for the granting of residence permits to aliens already living in Mexico. In 1996, the regularisation of Guatemalan refugees living in the states of Chiapas, Campeche and Quintana Roo continued. Depending on their situation, the government grants them the status of migrant (permanent) or non-migrant (temporary visitor). This operation concerns 16 000 Guatemalans, but also family members, as in the case of mixed couples or families with children born in Mexico of foreign parents. Clarication of the conditions of stay and regularisation measures are also being applied to foreign farm workers in the south (continuation of the southern border programme). The population law also stresses the right to family reunion, the right for aliens to set up businesses and, more generally, respect for the rights of migrants (even if they are undocumented), in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. In return, migrants must comply with existing legislation to gain entry or to stay in Mexico. To facilitate short authorised stays in Mexico, temporary permits have been created. The government has also made provision for stricter enforcement of the law on entry and stay, and has introduced penalties for infringements. Law enforcement agencies are authorised to determine the penalties to be imposed for offences according to their seriousness, without necessarily ordering immediate expulsion. Penalties are now heavier for persons engaging in labour trafcking (amendment of the law of 8 November 1996), notably where minors are concerned. Improvement of the quality of services rendered to aliens, by simplifying procedures, promoting collaboration between the different administrations dealing with aliens, and supporting charitable and
religious associations. The population law authorises the registration of children born on Mexican soil, without regard for the legality of the parents status, and grants minors, regardless of their status, access to social welfare and healthcare services, public services and education. In order to facilitate procedures, the migration authorities have competence for the settlement of disputes in the case of divorces of mixed couples. Consequently, all marriages between aliens and Mexicans must be entered in the population registers. These different developments form part of the national programme for migrants protection introduced earlier by the National Immigration Institute (INM), the aim of which is to co-ordinate national, federal and local action (inform aliens of their rights and obligations, develop awareness in the Mexican population of different immigrant cultures, etc.). International co-operation. Since 1996 Mexico has hosted a number of international conferences on migration in which many countries of the region have participated: Belize, Canada, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama and the United States. The governments of those countries have formed a regional consultative group on migration for the purpose of pursuing the joint action decided upon at the different conferences. The joint activities are mainly concerned with the exchange of information on migration in the region, the protection of migrants and the control of labour trafcking.
NETHERLANDS Introduction Following falls in immigration both in 1994 and 1995, provisional gures for the immigration of foreigners in 1996 show an increase on the previous year which may be linked to improved conditions in the Dutch labour market. In the latter half of 1997 increased inows of asylum seekers have been reported. Naturalisation has reached historically high levels, reducing growth in the stock of foreign nationals. Current policy initiatives include tightened control of entry points for asylum seekers and the development of a policy to encourage the voluntary return of immigrants and asylum seekers.
139
Migration and settlement Currently, the main means of permanent settlement in the Netherlands, for non-European Union nationals, is through family reunion. Historically, the important source countries of migrants have been Germany, Indonesia, Morocco, Surinam and Turkey. In recent years refugee ows from the former Yugoslavia have made a signicant contribution to the net inows of migrants.
Population register data show that following relatively little change in 1995, gures for 1996 indicate an approximately 15 per cent increase in the inow to bring the total inow of foreigners to 77 100 (see Chart II.11 and Table II.23). Data for the rst six months of 1997 reveal an inow of about 35 000 foreigners suggesting that the nal gure for the year may be a little lower compared to 1996. Note that these data include asylum seekers who live in pri-
Chart II.11. Migration flows and components of foreign population change, 1980-1996, Netherlands Thousands
A. Migration flows1 Nationals and foreigners B. Flows of asylum seekers Requests and grants3 New requests for asylum Total grants of asylum Total requests for asylum heard
Immigration of foreigners Immigration of nationals Total net migration 90 75 60 45 30 15 0 1980 82 84 86 88
Emigration of foreigners Emigration of nationals Net migration (adjusted figures2)
90 75 60 45 30 15 0 90 92 94 1996 1986 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 1996
C. Components of foreign population change4 Total change Net migration Statistical adjustement 90 60 30 0 30 60 90 1980 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 1996 Natural increase Naturalisation
1.
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.
140
vate dwellings (such individuals are usually only counted as immigrants if they are granted asylum). A number of factors are considered to have driven the recent pattern of immigration. The introduction of new rules relating to waiting periods for family reunion in 1993 is thought to partially account for the fall in immigration in 1994. However, since then, immigrants, in particular from Turkey, Morocco and Surinam, have become eligible for admission under these new rules. Also, conditions in the Dutch labour market are improving with falling unemployment rates which may provide additional incentives to immigrate. Although migration ows of Dutch nationals are relatively stable compared to those of foreigners, recent years have shown rises in outows and falls in inows such that the emigration of Dutch nationals has become relatively signicant (11 000 in 1996). Combining this with the net migration of foreigners gives a positive net surplus of 43 000 in 1996, 10 000 more than in 1995. The former Yugoslavia, European Union countries and Turkey were particularly signicant in terms of net migration (see Table II.23) in 1995. The gures for 1996 indicate increases in net migration from the European Union countries and Turkey but a substantial decrease in net migration from the former Yugoslavia. In assessing the net migration gures it should be noted that the population register data relies on accurate reporting of residence by individuals. Using additional information, statistical corrections are calculated by the Dutch Central Statistical Ofce. For example, in 1996, the correction was calculated to be to 22 000, pointing to the predominance of unregistered departures over entries. To date these administrative corrections have been roughly of the same magnitude each year, therefore the net migration trend which includes these corrections has been similar to that without corrections (see Chart II.11). Refugees and asylum seekers Data for 1995 and 1996 indicated a signicant reversal of the previously upward trend in the number of individuals seeking asylum (see Chart II.11 and Table II.23), partly as a result of a tighter policy. However, provisional estimates suggest that the nal gure for 1997 will be greater than the previous year (around 29 000), the increase being due to the rising numbers of asylum seekers from Afghanistan and Iraq (both signicant sources of asylum seekers
in 1996 too). One reason for the latest increase may be due to publication of the Note on Return Policy (3 June 1997) by the Ministry of Justice. This report stated that at that time asylum seekers from Afghanistan, Bosnia, Burundi, Iraq, Liberia, Rwanda, Sudan, Somalia and Zaire were not being returned. In addition, asylum seekers from these countries received a conditional stay permit. Reecting the upward trend in asylum seekers, there have been increasing numbers granted aslum with 23 600 grants in 1996. There has been a rapid rise in the number of expulsions of individuals from the Netherlands. These gures include those who have been expelled by force and those who have left voluntarily but with the encouragement of the authorities (each of which accounted for 37 per cent of the total in 1996). The remainder are those whose residence cannot be traced and are said to have left the country (26 per cent), although in reality many are thought to have in fact remained in the Netherlands. The foreign population and naturalisation The population of foreign nationals has been falling in recent years (see Chart II.11). This is largely attributable to large increases in the number of naturalisations, rather than net migration. The increase in the number of naturalisations is generally considered to be the result of the recognition of dual nationality which came into effect in 1991. The naturalisation rate (measured by the number of naturalisations compared to the foreign population at the beginning of the year) reached almost 12 per cent in 1996 (see Table II.23), a very high gure compared to other European countries. Demographic data show that at the beginning of 1996 the total population of the Netherlands was 15.5 million, 8 per cent (1.4 million) were born overseas, of whom 58 per cent were Dutch nationals. The top ve countries of origin for the foreign born (in descending order) are Surinam, Indonesia, Turkey, Morocco and Germany (see Table II.24). Foreigners and the labour market In September 1995 a new law on foreign labour was introduced with the aim of further regulating the employment of non-EU nationals (see below). There were 218 000 foreign nationals in employment in 1996, about 30 per cent of the total foreign population see Table II.23).
141
142 Table II.23. Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force, Netherlands
1993 1994 1995 1996 1993 1994 1995 1996
Migration Total population Inows Outows Net migration Dutch nationals Inows Outows Net migration Foreigners Inows Outows Net migration Total net migration by selected regions and countries European Union Former Yugoslavia Turkey Morocco Surinam Net administrative corrections2 Adjusted total net migration gures 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 United Kingdom Naturalisation rate (%) Refugees and asylum seekers New requests for asylum Total requests for asylum heard Total grants of asylum Expulsions Total of which: Asylum seekers
ows1
119.2 59.2 59.9 31.6 37.0 5.4 87.6 22.2 65.4 10.6 8.6 6.0 4.8 7.2 16 44 15 341.6 779.8 164.6 202.6 52.1 44.7 24.7 43.1 18.0 7.8 5.0 2.1 0.5 5.7 35.4 30.8 15.0 20.2 7.2
99.3 62.2 37.2 30.9 39.4 8.5 68.4 22.7 45.7 5.8 8.1 2.7 2.0 2.4 17 20 15 421.5 757.1 158.7 182.1 53.4 43.0 29.9 49.5 23.9 8.1 5.4 1.9 0.5 6.3 52.6 51.5 19.3 31.2 13.3
96.1 63.3 32.8 29.1 41.6 12.5 67.0 21.7 45.3 6.0 7.1 3.5 1.9 1.4 18 15 15 493.9 725.4 149.8 154.3 53.9 41.1 33.5 71.4 33.1 13.5 4.0 1.7 0.8 9.4 29.3 50.8 18.5 40.0 14.5
109.0 65.6 43.4 31.8 43.2 11.4 77.2 22.4 54.7 8.7 3.0 5.0 3.2 2.5 22 21 15 567.1 679.9 138.7 127.0 53.5 39.3 32.8 82.7 30.7 15.6 4.5 2.2 1.2 11.4 22.9 75.3 23.6 51.5 16.5
Labour force Total number of foreign population in employment4 As a per cent of all foreign population Dutch nationals born in the Netherlands Working age population Labour force Employment Unemployment Dutch nationals born abroad and foreigners Working age population Labour force Employment Unemployment Participation rates (%)5 Dutch nationals born in the Netherlands Dutch nationals born abroad and foreigners of which: Turkey Morocco Other Mediterranean countries Other European countries Surinam Netherlands Antilles Indonesia Other Unemployment rates (%)6 Dutch nationals born in the Netherlands Dutch nationals born abroad and foreigners of which: Turkey Morocco Other Mediterranean countries Other European countries Surinam Netherlands Antilles Indonesia Other
219 28.1 9 340 5 826 5 452 374 1 080 580 473 107 62 54 43 33 60 63 59 57 59 53 5.4 17 32 36 15 7 16 23 7 22
216 28.5 9 340 5 859 5 435 423 1 133 608 484 123 63 54 42 40 56 61 60 56 57 53 6.4 19 36 31 18 9 18 30 7 21
221 30.5 9 391 5 986 5 574 412 1 107 610 489 122 64 55 44 42 59 62 63 58 58 51 5.8 19 41 27 19 8 15 28 8 28
218 32.1 9 406 6 061 5 678 383 1 124 620 509 111 64 55 44 42 54 64 63 63 54 53 5.4 19 36 25 21 7 16 28 9 25
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.
Table II.24.
Foreign-born population by birthplace, 1 January 1996, Netherlands

of which: Dutch nationals
Dutch nationals (as a % of total foreign-born population)
employment of foreigners (1995). At present, the main initiatives relate to concerns about inows of asylum seekers and the development of policies to encourage the voluntary return of immigrants.
Birthplace
Total foreign-born
Europe Turkey Western Germany Asia Indonesia Americas Surinam Africa Morocco Oceania Total
Source:
552 167 130 311 178 302 181 229 141 12 1 407
240 60 82 236 170 262 165 75 36 10 823
43 36 63 76 96 87 91 33 26 83 58
Continued measures to control inows of asylum seekers

Concern about the growing number of asylum seekers continues, especially the increased inows originating from Iraq and Afghanistan. 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 trafcking, particularly from Iraq and Afghanistan; increased use of ngerprinting as a means for checking identity; proposals for a change in the Aliens Law which will give an opportunity to declare an asylum claim unfounded if it is proved that the asylum seeker was responsible for the destruction of proper documents; intensication of behind-border controls (e.g. extension of pre-boarding checks on certain ights), especially with regard to air travel.
Central Bureau of Statistics.
When evaluating relative labour market performance between migrants and non-migrants, the Dutch authorities dene those of Dutch origin as Dutch nationals who were born in the Netherlands and those of non-Dutch origin are therefore those who are born overseas and foreign nationals born in the Netherlands. According to this approach, the 1995 labour force survey indicates that out of the total working age population, just under 10 per cent are not of Dutch origin. The participation rate for those of non-Dutch origin is 55 per cent compared to 64 per cent for those of Dutch origin. These rates vary by nationality and sex. For example, particularly low participation rates are found amongst Moroccan and Turkish women. Unemployment for those of Dutch origin fell between 1995 and 1996 from 5.8 to 5.4 per cent. This was not matched for the non-Dutch where the unemployment remained constant at 19 per cent. Those of European and Indonesian background have unemployment rates rather closer to those of Dutch origin, whilst other groups have unemployment rates considerably higher than the average for the non-Dutch (see Table II.23). Policy developments Over recent years the principal policy developments have included: recognition of dual nationality (1991), revision of the Aliens Act (1992), new rules for family reunion (1993) and a new Act regulating the
Measures to encourage voluntary return

Recently, the Ministry of Development Cooperation has set up pilot projects which are designed to encourage the voluntary return of immigrants to their native lands. Both legal immigrants and rejected asylum seekers are targeted in the projects, measures include: General support to the respective country of origin. Specic programmes to support the reception and return of refugees within the region, for example from neighbouring countries. Specic programmes to support the training, reception, accommodation, employment etc. for those who return to their country of origin. The support will not be given on an individual basis: it
143
has instead to be of benet both to the communities and to the returnees. Agreements with Ethiopia, Eritrea and Angola have so far been struck. However, as of November 1997, none had yet been fully implemented and have been received with mixed opinions by Dutch NGOs and organisations of refugees and asylum seekers. There are also two pilot projects supporting voluntary return to Surinam. These are slightly different from the projects based in Africa, involving payment of transport and removal costs for the return of highly-skilled Surinamese who transfer posts from the Netherlands, and subsidised employment for highly skilled Surinamese who nd government posts in Surinam. In 1998, details of a project for the return of Bosnians will be announced. In addition to these pilot projects there is an initiative to introduce a new Act on Remigration, which is expected to be discussed in spring 1998. The Act would aim to provide travel and removal expenses with additional encouragement for the return of older age groups. NORWAY Introduction In 1996, the Norwegian economy maintained a higher level of growth, with GDP increasing by 3.7 per cent, a trend that continued in 1997. Economic expansion stimulated the labour market, and over a one-year period there was a one point drop in unemployment, which stood at 3.8 per cent at the end of 1997. Migration and the foreign population Between 1993 and 1996, the net migration gain declined signicantly, falling from 12 800 to 5 800 (see Table II.25). Net entries of foreigners (7 100 in 1996) more than offset net departures of Norwegian nationals (1 300). Swedish nationals still accounted for the vast majority of net inows, but there was an increase in net entries from developing countries. Since 1993, immigration has declined and then levelled off, after having risen steadily at the beginning of the 1990s. The number of new arrivals has remained stable since 1994 at approximately 26 000 entries per year (including asylum seekers). Inows from Bosnia-Herzogovina have fallen sharply, dropping from 6 000 in 1993 to slightly more
than 1 000 in 1996. Immigrants from Nordic countries still account for one-quarter of the entries. At 1 January 1997, the total number of foreigners residing in Norway stood at some 158 000, or 3.6 per cent of the total population (see Table II.25). Approximately 60 per cent of the foreign population consisted of European nationals, followed by Asian nationals (22 per cent), whose numbers have been falling steadily since 1995. Although the share of foreign nationals in the total population declined slightly between 1995 and 1996, the share of individuals born abroad continued to rise. In 1996, some 247 000 people were foreign born, or 5.6 per cent of the total population residing in Norway. Naturalisations, which averaged approximately 5 000 a year at the beginning of the 1990s, have risen sharply since then; some 12 200 people were naturalised in 1996. Of these, 13 per cent were of Pakistani origin, 11 per cent of Vietnamese and 10 per cent of Iraqi origin. Refugees and asylum seekers Large numbers of asylum seekers started to arrive in Norway in 1985. The inow 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 inow, 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, asylum ows from the former Yugoslavia fell dramatically. The total number of asylum seekers was relatively low in 1996 (1 800). The main groups of applicants were, in descending order, nationals of Sri Lanka, Poland, Somalia, Iran and Iraq. Norway receives a xed number of refugees in co-operation with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) under a resettlement quota. Between 1992 and July 1996, Norway received approximately 6 000 resettled refugees under this quota, more than half from the former Yugoslavia. For the three-year period 1995-97, Norway planned to accept 3 500 refugees for permanent settlement and temporary protection. Persons granted either refugee status or collective protection (see below), and hence temporary work or residence permits, are entitled to family reunion irrespective of their ability to provide economic support. However, those granted residence permits on humanitarian grounds must prove that
144
Table II.25.
Current gures on ows and stocks of foreign population, Norway

1993 1994 1995 1996
Total % of foreigners
population1
4 324.8 3.8 22.3 1.6 1.7 8.0 1.1 10.5 0.7 1.4 1.1 1.1 11.8 0.9 0.3 6.9 0.1 12.9 0.3 0.3 0.1 162.3 86.2 45.3 11.1 11.6 6.5 1.6 5.5 2.7 1.6 0.6 0.4 0.1 2.8 14.1
4 348.4 3.8 17.9 1.9 1.9 4.0 0.8 9.6 1.0 1.6 0.8 0.9 8.3 1.0 0.3 3.2 0.1 3.4 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.2 164.0 90.7 43.1 10.9 11.6 6.0 1.6 8.8 4.6 2.5 0.9 0.6 0.1 .. ..
4 370.0 3.7 16.5 2.1 1.6 2.3 0.8 9.0 1.0 1.7 0.5 0.9 7.5 1.0 0.1 1.8 1.5 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 160.8 93.2 39.5 10.7 10.7 5.1 1.5 11.8 6.0 2.7 1.8 1.2 0.1 2.9 13.6
4 392.7 3.6 17.2 2.9 1.6 1.2 0.9 10.0 1.1 1.4 1.0 1.0 7.2 1.8 0.2 0.2 0.1 1.8 0.4 0.2 0.2 157.5 95.9 34.9 10.6 10.0 4.6 1.6 12.2 7.1 2.4 1.7 0.8 0.1 3.2 13.8
Inows of foreigners by main nationality of which: Sweden Denmark Former Yugoslavia United Kingdom Outows of foreigners by main nationality of which: Sweden Denmark Former Yugoslavia United Kingdom Net migration ows of foreigners by main nationality of which: Sweden Denmark Former Yugoslavia United Kingdom Asylum seekers by main nationality2 of which: Sri Lanka Poland Somalia Iran Foreign population by group of nationality Europe Asia North America Africa South America Other Acquisition of Norwegian nationality, by region of origin Asia Europe Africa South America North America Mixed marriages % of total marriages
1. Data on 31 December of the years indicated, taken from population registers. 2. In 1993, asylum seekers from former Yugoslavia were the most numerous (11 198). Sources: Statistics Norway; Directorate of Immigration.
they have sufcient nancial means until they can obtain a permanent residence permit (after three years stay in Norway). Following the recommendation by a ministerial working party, the government has proposed to eliminate this requirement. The 1995 White Paper on Refugee Policy reinforced the refugee repatriation programme. It facilitates and supports individual refugees who wish to return by providing pre-departure assistance and travel expenses.
Migration and the labour market Those who come to Norway to work, except for Nordic nationals, must rst obtain a work permit the issuance of which is conditional on either an offer of employment with 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
145
countries may work in Norway without a special permit. Nationals of the other countries of the European Economic Area (EEA) who reside in the country for longer than three months are only required to have a residence permit. Consequently, the gures for foreign workers, which are based on the number of work permits issued, underestimate the real size of the total stock of foreign workers. Seasonal work permits were granted to 5 400 people in the agricultural sector in 1996. In over 90 per cent of cases, they were from Central and Eastern Europe, mostly from Poland. 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. At the same time, since there was high unemployment in both these sectors in Sweden, measures were implemented to promote recruitment of staff in these sectors 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 believes that it might be necessary to recruit as many as 10 000 people in 1998. Unemployment among foreigners declined (from 11.5 per cent in May 1996 to 9.9 per cent in May 1997). However, it is still three times higher than for Norwegian nationals. Foreigners from Africa, Asia, Central and Eastern Europe and Latin America are the hardest hit by unemployment, while nationals of Nordic countries, Western Europe and North America have unemployment rates similar to those of Norwegians. Recognition of qualications and diplomas from other countries is often difcult in Norway. Immigrants may therefore experience a disparity between their qualications and their work. Measures have been implemented by the Ministry of Local Government and Labour, in part based on proposals set out by a government committee in 1993, to both increase the participation rate of immigrants through an active policy of vocational training and language teaching, and to reduce the aforementioned disparity between work and qualications. The Ministry of Local Government and Labour has also commissioned a three-year study on immigrants and the labour market. Moreover, the govern-
ment has tabled a proposal prohibiting racial discrimination in the labour market. Illegal migration A central illegal immigration intelligence unit was established in the national Bureau of Crime Investigation and became operational in 1994. The unit is responsible for collecting, processing and recording information on illegal immigration provided by other authorities. In 1996, approximately 2 000 people were required to leave the country, some 200 more than in 1995. As an indication of the problem, 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 development In line with the four other Nordic countries, Norway signed a co-operation agreement with the Schengen countries in December 1996. As Norway is not a member of the European Union, it has, like Iceland, the status of an associated country in the agreement. Following adoption by Parliament, a new policy on refugees was recently implemented in Norway. Under the new policy, the instrument of collective protection will be used in the case of large-scale refugee ows and will offer temporary protection after consultation with the UNHCR and the affected country. In principle, those granted collective protection will be accorded the same rights as those granted refugee status, including family 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 vocational and language skills of the refugees, and to the implementation of special measures for children, youth and women. Several other areas have been targeted in the governments long-term planning programme for 1994-97. The idea that legal migrants should be guaranteed the same rights and obligations as the rest of the population was re-afrmed. Based on this idea, the government provides continuing education for immigrants, in particular Norwegian language teaching for all age groups, assists with access to the
146
labour market and continues its efforts to eradicate racism and ethnic discrimination. The Ministry of Local Government and Labour, in co-operation with a number of other ministries, is currently revising the Action Plan against Racism and Ethnic Discrimination dating from 1992. The new action plan will be completed in early 1998 and will focus on discrimination in the labour market and the need to raise the skills of public sector employees in contact with a multicultural population. The plan will also try to dene a clearer and more rapid means of dealing with racial violence and to improve documentation and statistical data on xenophobic crimes. A group of twenty experts was set up in 1996 to advise local governments on how to combat racism and xenophobia. It has made it possible, in particular, to set up a network of parents with children aged 13 and 14 who had been recruited by far-right groups. Experience has shown that the assistance given to parents enables them to help their children leave these groups. In 1996, the Norwegian Statistical Ofce 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 lived safer and to promoting greater diversity among the population there. POLAND Introduction The momentum of economic growth, which has averaged 6 per cent since 1994, has barely abated with real GDP set to rise at a rate of over 5 per cent per annum through to 1999. Continued steady progress in reducing ination from its present level of 14 per cent is similarly projected. Helped by tighter benet eligibility rules, the rate of unemployment has declined steeply, to below 11 per cent in September 1997. It is expected to continue falling, albeit at a more moderate pace due to the arrival on
the labour market of large cohorts of school leavers and to continual labour shedding in restructuring enterprises. Emigration
Permanent emigration
The second half of 1995 saw a stabilisation in the emigration ow. This appears to have marked the end to a short-lived (two year) rising trend. The 1996 annual gure, 21 300, proved to be of the same magnitude of the relatively low 1990-92 average level (see Table II.26). The decline has continued into the rst semester of 1997. The recent fall in the number of emigrants has been quite evenly distributed among the various destination countries. Germany remains the principal receiving country (almost 70 per cent in 1996). As registered by Polish statistics, permanent emigration continues to be the almost exclusive domain of the lowest educated stratum of Polish society. Immigration Having uctuated at between 1 000 and 2 000 from the late 1960s to the late 1980s, the number of permanent immigrants then steadily increased, reaching 8 100 in 1995. No signicant change was observed in 1996 or during the rst semester of 1997. As of the end of 1997 around 40 000 foreigners had legally settled as permanent residents. According to the newly passed Alien Law (see below) they will all shortly qualify for naturalisation. The share of permanent immigrants from Asia (originating mostly from Vietnam and Kazakhstan) increased from 6.5 per cent in 1995, to 9 per cent in 1996 and 12 per cent over the rst half of 1997. Between 1995 and 1996 Germanys share rose from 24 to 26 per cent. In contrast, the proportion of immigrants coming from North America dropped from 29 per cent in 1995 to just over 23 per cent in 1996 (see Table II.26).
Return migration
In May 1996 formal steps were taken by the Polish government to facilitate and channel the repatriation of ethnic Poles from the former Soviet Union. Local administrations (urzad gminy) were given the responsibility for providing the return migrants with housing and jobs and assisting them in their integration into the community. Between 1993 and 1996 fewer than 600 people from
147
Table II.26.
Permanent immigration and emigration, 1993-1996, Poland

Thousands
1993 1994 1995 1996
Permanent immigration by region or country of Europe Germany Former USSR Other Europe Americas United States Canada Other America Other regions Total of which: Women
origin1 4.0 1.5 0.8 1.6 1.3 1.0 0.3 0.1 0.7 5.9 2.9 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 1.2 2.0 17.0 15.3 1.7 4.0 2.6 1.4 0.4 21.4 10.8 4.5 1.8 1.1 1.5 1.6 1.2 0.3 0.1 0.8 6.9 3.3 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.1 1.4 2.5 21.2 18.9 2.3 4.2 2.8 1.5 0.5 25.9 10.7 4.9 2.0 0.8 2.1 2.4 1.4 1.0 0.1 0.9 8.1 3.8 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.5 3.1 21.0 18.2 2.8 4.9 3.2 1.7 0.5 26.3 13.0 5.2 2.2 0.8 2.2 1.9 1.3 0.5 0.1 1.1 8.2 4.0 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 1.2 2.8 17.0 14.8 2.2 3.9 2.5 1.3 0.4 21.3 10.4
Permanent residence permits issued by nationality2 Ukraine Russian Federation Vietnam Kazakhstan Belarus Other countries Total Permanent emigration by region or country of destination3 Europe Germany Other Europe Americas United States Canada Other America Other regions Total of which: Women
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. Source: Central Statistical Ofce.
148
Kazakhstan were granted permanent residence in Poland (but not necessarily Polish citizenship). At the end of 1996 the repatriation programme was greatly expanded: between 1 January 1997 and 30 September 1997 a further 1 080 persons (278 families) living in Kazakhstan were received upon invitation by a total of 200 local Polish communities (gmina). At the same time, over 500 applications for repatriation were submitted to Polish consulates (of which 96 per cent in Kazakhstan). Given that the Aliens Act which came into effect at the end of December 1997 removes the requirement for repatriation applicants to be invited by a local community in Poland, the pace of repatriation can be expected to accelerate. Their relatively high level of
education notwithstanding, newly repatriated ethnic-Poles frequently meet with integration difculties, primarily linguistic.
Temporary and permanent immigration

In 1996 Poland hosted 5 300 foreign students and approximately 1 000 to 2 000 foreign trainees. In addition almost 12 500 foreign non-permanent residents were granted a work permit. Estimates of the number of foreign citizens who stay in Poland for over one year on the basis of temporary residence permits issued for reasons other than education or work are not available.
The estimated minimum number of foreigners legally staying in Poland has been put at 70 000, with citizens of Ukraine, Russia, Belarus and Vietnam predominating. The number of undocumented foreigners resident in Poland is believed to be lower than this. Research projects conducted in Poland between 1993 and 1997 do point however to the existence of growing enclaves of undocumented settlers from Armenia, Romania, Ukraine and Vietnam. Labour migration
and transportation, and one-tenth in education. Over one-third of the Ukrainian workers were employed in agriculture, over 90 per cent of the Vietnamese worked in trade and in catering and over half of the British were employed in education. Documented foreign labour continues to be strongly polarised according to professional status. Highly skilled non-manuals (managers, experts, consultants, teachers, etc.) accounted in 1996 for almost two-thirds of all new work permit holders. Compared to 1995, three professional groups increased above the average rate: experts and consultants, teachers and instructors, and owners. The number of permits issued to unskilled workers rose by only 10 per cent. Undocumented workers The Ministry of Labour and Social Policy is of the opinion that each year some 100 000-150 000 foreign workers illegally take-up employment in Poland. A survey-based estimate conducted in Ukraine and Poland between 1994 and 1996 suggests that there might be around 800 000 Ukrainians (on annual basis) who illegally take up employment during their sojourns in Poland. The overwhelming majority come to Poland with the primary intention of purchasing merchandise for resale in Ukraine but also engage in various forms of extremely short term work in the black economy as a supplementary activity. Refugees and asylum seekers Since 1994 the inow of asylum seekers and refugees has intensied. In 1996 over 3 200 people applied for refugee status, almost four times more than in 1995. Figures for the rst half of 1997 point to an almost 10 per cent increase on 1996. Citizens of Sri Lanka were the principal refugee status seekers followed in descending order by citizens of Afghanistan, Armenia, Iraq, Pakistan and India. Almost all recent asylum seekers have applied in one of three following situations: after being apprehended by the Border Guard during illegal border crossing; after being arrested by the Police inside Poland because of the lack of appropriate documents; or after being expelled from Germany on the basis of their readmission agreement. After being released from arrest many applicants immediately disappear.
Polish workers abroad

The Ministry of Labour and Social Policy estimates that around 220 000 Poles found employment abroad in 1996 within the framework of intergovernmental agreements. Between 1994 and 1996 the number of persons so employed increased by over 50 per cent. In 1996, Germany absorbed nearly 97 per cent of those workers employed abroad through inter-governmental agreements. Germany, Austria, Greece and Italy (in that order) received the largest number of Polish migrant workers who found legal employment beyond the framework of intergovernment agreements. The majority of documented Polish migrant workers nd employment in the inferior segment of the labour market: the duration of their contracts is usually very short and their wages relatively low.
Foreign workers in Poland

Almost 12 500 work permits were issued in 1996, a 19 per cent increase on 1995 (foreigners with permanent resident status do not require a work permit). Ukrainians accounted for nearly 20 per cent. Vietnam, the United Kingdom, Germany, Russia, the United States and China (in that order) each accounted for between 5 and 10 per cent. Over 50 per cent of these permits were issued in Warsaw. Almost 15 per cent of the permits were granted to foreign employers in possession of a license to operate in Poland. Of these, almost three-quarters were issued to citizens of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine. About one-third of the Ukrainians so employed worked in the (state-owned) Szczecin shipyard. Various attempts by other large stateowned enterprises to replace Polish workers by workers from the ex-USSR through licensed foreign employers were recently prevented by the National Labour Ofce. Over one-third of the new permit holders were engaged in trade and catering, one-fth in industry
149
Illegal migration and transit migration
Recent policy developments
Illegal immigration
Three statistical sources shed some light on the incidence and national composition of illegal immigration: the Border Guard data on apprehensions of illegal migrants at the time of border crossing; data on expulsions of foreigners based on decisions taken by district administration in Poland; and data on foreigners accepted or expelled on the basis of readmission agreements. The number of people caught attempting to enter Poland declined by 6 per cent between 1995 and 1996. Romanians traditionally constitute by far the largest group of migrants arrested on the Polish border; their number has decreased from around 7 000 in 1993 to around 1 200 in 1996. In the case of Ukraine the number fell from almost 900 to just over 600 and in the case of Russia fell by almost one hundred to just below 400. The number of Czech citizens caught increased, however, from 750 in 1995 to almost 1 000 in 1996. The number of foreigners arrested at the border having come from remote countries of origin (mainly from Moldova, Armenia, Afghanistan, Iraq and Sri Lanka) increased substantially. They appear to be the major clients of trafckers, the activities of whom have increased dramatically of late according to a report prepared by the Department of Migration and Refugee Affairs. In 1996, district authorities issued just over 5 000 expulsion decisions. During the rst six months of 1997, almost 3 000 such decisions were made. In addition, on the basis of readmission agreements with neighbouring countries, Poland expelled in 1996 over 2 400 foreigners (of whom 1 860 to Ukraine). On the same basis, over 4 800 foreigners were expelled from Germany to Poland.
The new Aliens Act

Having awaited endorsement since September 1995, the Aliens Act was passed by Parliament in June 1997 and came into effect at the end of December. The new Act is primarily designed to create the legal framework necessary to combat the inow of undesirable immigrants. It completely replaces the Aliens Act of 1963. The old regulations, together with all related ordinances based on it, were both too general and too incomplete. Their specic shortcomings included: a lack of clarity as to which ministry was responsible for migration policy; the lack of clear principles guiding the issue (or withdrawal) of permanent residence permits; inadequate rules pertaining to expulsions and detentions; and the lack of a legal foundation for setting up registers of foreigners. The new Aliens Act has the following key features: It introduces clear and consistent basic concepts relating to inow of foreigners and to their sojourn in Poland. It establishes admissions criteria for foreigners seeking to enter Poland, in particular as they concern the repatriation of aliens of Polish nationality or extraction. It provides for the possibility of according an alien permission to reside for a specied period or to settle permanently, and sets out the relevant conditions, the relevant time limits, and the rights and obligations of an alien while in Poland. It sets out in a coherent manner (and in accordance with the Geneva Convention and the New York Protocol) basic rules concerning refugee status and asylum. It determines the appropriate circumstances and relevant procedures for expelling aliens. In addition, the act stipulates that the costs of expelling aliens should generally be borne by the aliens themselves. It does, however, establish two exceptions to this rule: if the expulsion occurs as a result of irregular employment, the costs should be met by the employer; if an alien stays in Poland upon invitation from a Polish resident, the costs should be met by that person. It provides for the setting up of various registers of aliens and species the authority responsible for running each particular register.
Transit migration
It is believed that Poland has become one of the principal transit countries for illegal migrants heading towards Western Europe. Two major international routes appear to run through Poland. The rst originates in the Indian sub-continent (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka), the western part of Asia (Armenia, Iran, Iraq and Turkey) and certain countries of Africa (Ethiopia, Liberia, Nigeria, Somalia and Sudan). The second route starts in various places in Armenia, Moldova, Macedonia, Romania and Turkey.
150
It establishes that carriers are to be held responsible and liable for bringing into Poland aliens who do not hold entry permits. It sets out the principles for the establishment of a coherent framework of government agency responsibilities. It species the penalties for illegal entry, sojourn or use of forged documents.
PORTUGAL Introduction At 31 December 1996, the total population of Portugal stood at nearly 10 million, an increase of 1.3 per cent on 1995. There was a net migration gain in 1996 of 10 000 people (or twice as many as the previous year). Of the Portuguese regions, the Alentejo was the only one in which both components of population growth were negative (i.e. deaths outnumbered births and there was a net migration loss). The Algarve was the region with the highest net migration gain. Emigration and Portuguese communities abroad In the second half of the 1970s, the emigration of Portuguese nationals decreased, a trend that became a great deal more pronounced during the 1980s. In 1980, approximately 18 000 permanent departures (for more than one year) were recorded, compared with only 9 500 in 1988. Departures after 1988 are not comparable, since the type of passport on which the earlier data were based was abolished in 1988. Free movement of Portuguese nationals within the European Union as of 1992 does not seem to have produced any signicant upturn in permanent emigration to Member countries. Since 1993 the National Statistical Institute has been conducting a sample survey to estimate outows. Results indicate that approximately 33 000 Portuguese nationals emigrated in 1996 (an estimated 10 000 more than in 1995) (see Table II.27). The main destinations were Germany, France and Switzerland. Seasonal migration accounted for a signicant portion of these outows. Temporary emigration has generally increased over the last decade. The major sectors employing temporary migrants (agriculture, the hotel industry and construction) all experience strong seasonal and cyclical uctuations in their demand for labour. Alongside the slowdown in permanent emigration, the trend for Portuguese migrants to return home, which started in the 1980s, continues. In 1996 there were slightly over 20 000 returns, 60 per cent from European Union countries (mostly France) and 25 per cent from Switzerland and South Africa. At the beginning of 1996 the Portuguese community abroad totalled about 4.6 million, of whom more than a quarter are in Brazil. The other major countries of residence are France, followed by Canada, the United States, Germany and Switzerland. Remittances from Portuguese nationals
Other developments
In October 1996, Poland concluded an agreement with Luxembourg concerning the exchange of trainees. This brought the number of countries with which employment-related agreements have been signed to 12 (the other countries are: Belarus, Belgium, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Libya, Lithuania, Russia, the Slovak Republic, Switzerland and Ukraine). Readmission agreements have been signed with the co-signatories to the Schengen agreement as well as with Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Croatia, Greece, Hungary, Moldova, Romania, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia and Ukraine. Poland failed to conclude a readmission agreement with her three neighbours Belarus, Lithuania and Russia. However, in the case of Lithuania and Russia the talks are well advanced. Negotiations are also in progress with the following countries: Albania, Algeria, Austria, Bangladesh, Canada, Estonia, India, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Vietnam. In an attempt to better co-ordinate migration affairs in Poland, the Prime Minister issued in September 1997 an ordinance setting up an InterMinisterial Team for Migration Affairs to serve the Council of Ministers as an advisory body. The team is led by an under-secretary of state in the Ministry of the Interior and Administration and includes highlevel representatives of eight other ministries and state organs. Its main duties include the evaluation of the principles of migration policy; the evaluation of specic regulations concerning migration and refugee affairs; contributing to the co-ordination of activities of various state organs in the area of migration; taking initiatives on counteracting undesirable aspects of migration, initiating research and preparing reports on migration for the Prime Minister.
151
Table II.27.
Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force, Portugal
1993 1994 1995 1996
Emigration1 of which: Women Emigration according to the anticipated duration of stay abroad Less than a year More than a year Emigration by region of destination Europe Africa North America Other Returns of nationals (estimates) First requests for a permit of permanent residence by region or country of residence EU of which: United Kingdom Germany Brazil Other 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 Sale, hotels and restaurant Other4 By professional status Self-employed Wage earners
1. 2. 3.
33.2 10.5 17.6 15.6 25.1 2.8 2.2 3.2 31.7 9.9 1.8 0.5 0.4 1.8 6.3 131.6 70.6 11.9 49.1 55.8 37.2 21.9 10.5 6.2 0.1 1.6 2.3 63.1 16.2 4.3 3.0 5.2 3.1 0.9 30.4 15.7 47.3
29.1 6.9 21.3 7.8 25.5 1.5 1.3 0.7 20.3 5.7 2.3 0.6 0.6 .. 3.4 157.1 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 13.4 8.1 20.8 1.0 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 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 16.7 69.7
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.
152
remain very high, amounting in 1996 to nearly 4 per cent of GDP, the majority coming from France, Switzerland, the United States and Germany. Although Portuguese communities abroad are highly adaptable, they are nonetheless being increasingly affected by unemployment, even though sometimes to a lesser degree than other foreigners and even nationals themselves. Immigration and the resident foreign population For 1996, inows of new immigrants have been estimated at roughly 4 600. Two-thirds of migrants, mainly men, come from the Portuguese-speaking African countries and about 12 per cent each from Brazil and European Union countries. According to a survey by the National Statistical Institute, nearly 5 000 immigrants made their rst application for a permanent residence permit in 1995, 1 000 less than in the previous year (see Table II.27). Over half of these people are thought to have entered Portugal for the rst time in 1995. Most of the new holders of residence permits are concentrated in the Lisbon area, the Tagus valley and the Algarve. Half are less than 30 years of age. Overall, nationals of OECD Member countries account for nearly 60 per cent of these new residents. The other immigrants come mainly from Brazil (14 per cent) and Portuguesespeaking African countries (6 per cent for Cape Verde and the same percentage for Angola). According to the data available, some 2 400 foreigners ceased to reside ofcially in Portugal in 1996 (over a third of them were from South America, 20 per cent from Africa and 18 per cent from the European Union). Of this total, 950 left the country ofcially (departures) and 530 became Portuguese citizens by naturalisation; deaths account for the remainder. In 1996 approximately 173 000 foreigners were legally resident in Portugal, or 1.7 per cent of the total population (see Table II.27). Men (58.4 per cent) outnumbered women. Over half of foreigners lived in the area (distrito) of Lisbon. 12.5 per cent lived in the Faro area, followed by Setubal (9.2 per cent) and Porto (6.2 per cent), while Bragan ca had the lowest percentage of foreigners (0.1 per cent). By nationality, Cape Verde nationals are the most numerous (nearly 40 000), followed by Brazilians (20 000) and Angolans (16 500). There are nearly 57 000 foreign nationals from OECD countries (75 per cent from the European Union), who account for one-third of the total foreign population. In 1996
some 110 400 births were recorded in Portugal. Of these, 7 420 children had a foreign mother or father. Portuguese law has allowed dual nationality since 1981, but the number of naturalisations still remains low (see Table II.27). Mixed marriages accounted for just over 2 per cent of all marriages in 1996. The majority were between Portuguese women and foreign men. These Portuguese women mainly married Brazilians, Venezuelans, Germans and Cape Verde nationals. The foreign wives of Portuguese men were mainly from Brazil, Cape Verde and Venezuela. Refugees and asylum seekers Portugal experienced an exceptional increase in the ow of asylum seekers in 1993 (about 2 000 people), with Romanians accounting for nearly twothirds of the total and Angolans for 20 per cent. Requests for asylum dropped sharply in 1994 and 1995. This trend continued in 1996 with only 216 applications. Foreigners and the labour market The employment of foreign workers in Portugal is governed by the Decree-Law of 17 March 1974 under which the number of foreigners employed in rms with ve or more employees must not exceed 10 per cent of the total workforce. This rule does not apply to nationals of European Economic Area countries, nor to nationals of countries which have bilateral agreements with Portugal (notably Brazil and Cape Verde). The rules governing the employment of foreigners are however under review with the aim of eliminating employment quotas, improving their legal status and combating illegal employment. In December 1996 the foreign labour force totalled around 90 000 persons, which was 2 500 fewer than the previous year. Most foreign workers are engaged in four types of activity: agriculture, manufacturing industry, building and civil engineering, and services. Europeans are employed mainly in scientic professions and service jobs, whereas the vast majority of Africans are employed in industry and construction. Most Brazilians are employed in services (teaching, health and other scientic and technical professions). Nearly 80 per cent of foreign workers are wage earners. Entrepreneurs and self-employed workers (nearly 17 000) are mainly European, followed by Brazilians (see Table II.27).
153
At the end of 1996 there were approximately 444 000 persons unemployed in Portugal, 57 per cent of whom were women. Unemployed foreigners (4 100) accounted for fewer than 1 per cent of the total. Angolan nationals were most vulnerable to unemployment, for although they were only 9 per cent of the foreign labour force they accounted for 18 per cent of the unemployed foreigners. Policy developments Migration policy in Portugal has two facets, one applicable to Portuguese residing abroad and the other applicable to immigrants in Portugal. The two aspects of this policy reect coherent goals and explain the focus on migrants rights, their political and social integration in the host country, and objective information concerning their contribution to development.
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 though better border control, the strengthening of the police force and more systematic detection of falsied documents. The Act of 3 March 1993 describes conditions for the entry, residence, departure and expulsion of foreigners, with the goal of making all procedures clearer and more effective. This Act is currently under review. Moreover, there are plans to set up temporary centres to house foreigners attempting to enter Portugal illegally. In May 1996 Parliament unanimously passed a law providing for an amnesty for illegal immigrants. The amnesty exercise was conducted between June and December 1996. Eligibility was simplied compared with the previous exercise (October 1992-March 1993), in particular concerning the foreigners economic circumstances. In addition, management and labour organisations and immigrant 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. 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 nancial 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. 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.28). The ofcials responsible for this exercise were careful to correct one of the main difculties encountered during the
Links with Portuguese nationals abroad

Portuguese residents 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 emigration policy 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, provide links between the communities, and defend the interests 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 nancial assistance, legal, economic and social services, special bank accounts and preferential credit through an emigrant savings scheme which makes capital loans. Further measures were introduced in 1996, chiey focusing on developing and modernising the services of Portuguese consulates abroad and improving the dissemination of legal information to Portuguese communities abroad (using the Internet, for instance). In September 1996 Parliament unanimously passed a law setting up the Council of Portuguese Communities, a body to advise the government on policies for emigrant communities, which
154
Table II.28. Regularisation programmes of immigrants in an irregular situation by country of origin, 1992-1993 and 1996, Portugal
Thousands
1992-1993 1996
Angola Cape Verde Guinea-Bissau Sao Tome and Principe Brazil China Mozambique Other Total
Source:
Ministry of the Interior.
12.5 6.8 6.9 1.4 5.3 1.4 0.8 4.1 39.2
6.8 5.0 4.0 2.0 0.3 .. .. 3.7 21.8
previous regularisation, since many workers had not been able to obtain written proof of employment from their employer. This difculty was resolved in 1996 since proof of employment could be provided by the trade union associations in the sector in which the applicant was employed or by the local authorities of their place of residence.
discrimination against immigrants and combat xenophobia and racism. Other measures adopted in 1996 concern the improvement of housing conditions, extending immigrants entitlement to social security services and the right of immigrant associations to provide assistance in criminal proceedings arising out of racially motivated and xenophobic acts and 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.
Migration and development

Under the heading of co-operation policy, measures have recently been taken to assist in the development of university structures and vocational training centres in Portuguese-speaking African countries. Supporting the peace process and the consolidation of emerging democracies in Africa is another aspect of co-operation policy, 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 At the beginning of the 1990s, considerable outows of Romanian citizens both of non-Romanian and Romanian origin took place. Current estimates of the outow now suggest that it has fallen substantially and is stabilising at a relatively low level. Return migration is showing signs of increasing, although the numbers recorded remain relatively small. Romanias importance as a transit destination in the East-West emigration ow is becoming increasingly apparent, however. Recently signed readmission agreements can be expected to check this trend. The present governments resolute policy reform which involves, inter alia, the liquidation or privatisation of loss making enterprises in industry
Integration of immigrant populations

Other measures and resolutions recently adopted in Portugal aim to facilitate the integration of foreigners by guaranteeing assistance and by combating 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. 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. 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 coordinate 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
155
and agriculture can be expected to have some impact on migration ows: newly unemployed workers may seek to emigrate; conversely, under foreign ownership (which is likely for many companies) the immigration of foreign technical and managerial personnel can be expected to increase. Emigration Estimates of emigration made by the Ministry of the Interior are based on two sources. First there are compulsory customs forms completed by those intending to leave the country on a permanent basis. Added to these gures are data on those already abroad who apply for the renewal of their passport at a local embassy or consulate. The signicant increase in 1995 was in all likelihood merely a statistical aberration reecting an abnormally high number of requests for passport renewals. Abstracting from this, the medium-term trend of recorded permanent emigration appears to be one of moderate steady growth following the sharp decline registered after the initial surge in the period 1990-92. Over 95 per cent 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 per cent of the total as recorded by the Romanian authorities (21 500), it accounted for half of those accepted by the European Union. Reports from the German authorities indicate that the migration ows between the two countries are even greater. Reecting the requirements laid down by the authorities in the recipient countries, almost 40 per cent of these permanent emigrants were in the 26-40 years of age bracket (see Chart II.12). They tend, moreover, to be relatively highly qualied. The proportion of those having passed through higher education increased by 4 per cent in 1996.
under individual contracts of one to two years. Recent policy developments point to an extension of such activities. Most notably, based on an agreement between the Governments of Germany and Romania, 442 employment contracts of eighteen months duration have recently been approved as well as a further 4 800 contracts of three months duration. The beneciaries of these latter are young workers aged 18-35 years in possession of a solid understanding of the German language. Unofcial estimates of temporary labour migration greatly exceed the modest gures above. For example, between 35 000 and 40 000 Romanians are believed to be working in Israel. The main ow of seasonal workers is directed towards Hungary. In 1996 such seasonal workers numbered approximately 2 000, the majority of whom are ethnic Hungarians from Transylvania. Some have work permits whilst others manage to secure work through the illegal labour market. For many the motivation to engage in such work is solely pecuniary, for others the accomplishment of seasonal work in Hungary constitutes a preparatory stage of their integration in Hungary or in their further westward migration. 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 existed no institution with the authority to grant this status, the stock of immigrants with permanent resident status continues to decline, standing at present at just over 1 600. The institutional deciency is expected to be remedied in the near future. Relatively liberal regulations governing entry to the country, in particular visa-free entry for tourists, render futile any attempt at ascertaining the number of temporary foreign residents. This caveat notwithstanding, it would appear that the overwhelmingly important stock of temporary residents continues to increase; the estimated total in 1996 was 81 000 (see Table II.29). Temporary residents can be classied 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 young professionals from Western Europe and North America who work for foreign companies or international corporations.
Temporary emigration
There are a number of forms of temporary emigration from Romania, mainly related to employment. Unlike permanent emigration which the Ministry of the Interior monitors through customs forms and passport registrations, temporary labour emigration is registered in the general ow of those temporarily leaving Romania (5.7 million in 1996). A labour force survey conducted in 1995 suggested that approximately 6 900 employees of public and private sector companies were engaged in activities abroad (predominantly construction)
156
Chart II.12. Demographic characteristics of permanent emigrants1, 1990-1996, Romania Percentages

Sex Age groups
Women 18 18-25 26-40 40+ 100
Men 100
80
80
60
60
40
40
20
20
0 1990 91 92 93 94 95 1996 1990 91 92 93 94 95 1996
Ethnic groups
Romanians2 100 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 1996 1990 91 92 93 94 95 1996
Educational attainment
Post-Secondary Primary 100 Secondary Other Vocational
80
60
40
20 1. 0 1990 91 92 93 94 95 1996 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.
157
Table II.29.
Current migration gures, Romania

Thousands
1993 1994 1995 1996
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 Naturalisation 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 Stock of people from Romania in Germany Stock of Romanian nationals Acquisitions of German nationality by former Romanians
2.1 53.3 .. .. .. .. .. 20.7 6.0 4.7 1.7 0.3 3.3 0.9 1.6 .. 20.0 .. 0.2
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 0.1 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 0.1 6.3 0.6 0.1 1.0 4.2 15.0 18.1 1.2
5.8 81.6 101.9 73.7 162.6 28.3
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 16.6 100.7 9.8
B.
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 1996 almost 23 000 foreign citizens, over half of whom from Greece or the Republic of Moldovia, came to Romania for the purpose of education and training, an increase of almost 10 per cent on 1995. This increase is in large part attributable to an increase in the number of scholarships awarded by the Romanian government.
Work permit holders

Work permit holders remain few in number less than 700 were issued in 1996. They are issued solely to unskilled workers. It would appear that their cost US$200 for the initial issue to which is added US$50 for each subsequent six-month renewal is a signicant disincentive to their obtention. Workplace inspections conrm the growing presence of undocumented workers.
158
Naturalisations
Naturalisations remain few in number (none were granted in 1996, fewer than one hundred in the rst half of 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 number of employees with permanent contracts. In almost all cases naturalised foreign citizens have retained their original citizenship.
Asylum seekers and refugees

Romania receives few applications for asylum. At less than 600 principal beneciaries the number of claims is slightly down on 1995. Taking into account the UNHCR Recommendations and with the intention of bringing Romanias asylum and refugee procedures into line with those of the European Union, the Law on Refugee Status and their Regime in Romania approved in May 1996 was enacted in November of the same year. The general tone of the law appears to be one of increased clarication as to the processing and rights of asylum seekers rather than a shift in the degree of stringency. Asylum seekers who fail to receive refugee status are not necessarily returned. In most cases they voluntarily leave Romanian territory to continue their westward journey.
increasingly well organised year on year. It is within this context that the fact that the number of those detected at the border in 1996 fell by 14 per cent compared to 1995 should be viewed. Similarly, that the number of illegal immigrants caught having successfully penetrated the border increased by only 5 per cent in 1996 despite a doubling of the internal controls effected should not be taken as an indication that the illegal ow is diminishing. Over one quarter of those apprehended at the border were Turkish. Romanias neighbours accounted for a further 20 per cent. In addition to citizens of these countries, important ows of illegal immigrants are directed by emigration networks from Asia (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Iran and Pakistan) and Africa (Ethiopia, Kenya and Somalia). Since 1990, over 38 500 immigrants staying illegally have been apprehended on Romanian territory of whom 87 per cent were subsequently granted a prolongation of their original temporary visa. In 1996 over 1 200 illegal immigrants were expelled, an increase of just over 70 per cent on 1995 (see Table II.29). Readmission of Romanian citizens Over 18 000 Romanian citizens were expelled and repatriated in 1996, an increase of over 70 per cent on 1995. Almost 60 per cent of these were returned from Germany, with which Romania has recently concluded a readmission agreement. A further 1 700 Romanian citizens were apprehended at the border whilst attempting to leave the country illegally, a 14 per cent increase on 1995. The vast majority were apprehended on the Hungarian border. Policy developments In May 1996 the Romanian authorities extended the list of States listed as countries of emigration to 77. They set up at the same time a procedure whereby individuals and legal entities who invite citizens of these countries to Romania are in general required to pay a surety. Legislation was enacted in 1997 to facilitate foreign direct investment (FDI). The provisions include a reduction in registration formalities, signicant tax breaks and the freedom to transfer prots and dividends abroad. These measures coupled with an increase in investment opportunities due to the privatisation programme can be expected to stimulate growth in FDI inows and with them the inow of foreign labour, in particular, of managerial and technical personnel.
Return migration
In contrast to the position pre-1990, return migration is now actively encouraged. Repatriates do not have to pay import duty on goods acquired overseas and are given priority in purchasing a dwelling (if it is paid for in foreign currency). As a complement to this policy, young persons of Romanian origin are eligible for a limited number of university scholarships (in 1995, 1 200). Between 1990 and 1996, 28 000 repatriation applications were registered. In 1996, they numbered 6 265, a 16 per cent increase on 1995. The gure for the rst half of 1997, 3 300, conrms the upward trend. The proportion of males among the repatriates increased markedly in 1996 to two-thirds having remained steady at 52 per cent over the preceding four years. Illegal immigration Romania is an important transit country in the East-West migration ow. The entry, illegal temporary stay and transit of foreigners is becoming
159
Readmission agreements
The doubling of internal checks, mentioned above, is associated with the negotiation of a series of readmission agreements between the Romanian government and those of other countries. In the rst half of 1997, agreements were signed with France, Hungary and Spain. These agreements also include provision for increased co-operation between enforcement agencies, the exchange of expertise and technical assistance. SLOVAK REPUBLIC Introduction Since 1994, the Slovak economy has been performing strongly: real GDP has grown, labour productivity has increased, ination has been brought under control, and progress is being made in the implementation of industrial policy. However, it is still heavily dependent on foreign trade. The structure of its exports, most of which consist of labourintensive products, could eventually impede its development. As regards migration, continuing unemployment and low employment growth constitute the main incentives to emigrate. Furthermore, the Slovak Republic, unlike the Czech Republic, is a country of transit, not of immigration. Finally, unequal regional development and the ethnic diversity of the population are major sources of concern for the government. Emigration For administrative reasons, emigration ows to the Czech Republic were concentrated mostly over the period 1992-94. When the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic (CSFR) was divided on 1 January 1993, Czech law did not allow Slovak nationals working in Czech territory to keep double nationality. In order to obtain Czech nationality, many of them registered as permanent residents of the Czech Republic. This resulted, in the statistics of the Czech Republic, in a ow of immigration from the Slovak Republic. Since 1994, Czech sources show a steep decline in ows of permanent migrants from the Slovak Republic, though those ows are still larger than those of Czech residents settling permanently in the Slovak Republic. Slovak nationals abroad
160
Since the separation of the CSFR, the number of Slovak workers in the Czech Republic has been rising steadily (72 200 in 1996, see Table II.30), accounting for nearly half of all foreign workers. In Austria, the total number of Czech and Slovak workers (including those who do not specify to which of the two republics of the former CSFR they belong) has been falling since 1993. Immigration Given the unreliability of the sources, it is not possible to determine the exact size of migration ows. As the immigration monitoring system is being overhauled, the data collected by the National Statistical Institute and the police services are still very piecemeal. If one considers only permanent migration ows (registered changes of permanent residence), in 1994 the migration balance became negative for the rst time since the Slovak Republic was established. This can be attributed to two reasons: rst, the growing imbalance of ows between the two republics, and second, the small scale of permanent immigration ows. Long-term residence permits (for employment purposes) or permanent ones (for family reunion) were issued mainly to nationals of neighbouring countries: the Czech Republic, Ukraine, Poland and Hungary. Ofcial immigration for employment purposes has been falling steadily since 1993 (see Table II.30). However, ows of permanent residence permit holders are rising very slightly, probably due to family reunion of Czech nationals. Refugees and asylum seekers Flows of asylum seekers, insignicant in 1993, have since been rising steadily. From January to June 1997, over 400 applications were led and processed with a slight delay. In January 1997, nearly 350 refugees were resident in the Slovak Republic. Another 450 or so have the (temporary) status of war refugee. Foreign community and ethnic composition of the population For historical reasons, the ethnic composition of the Slovak Republic is diverse. In the last census, over 10 per cent of the population declared that they were of Hungarian origin, 1.4 per cent Gypsy, and 1 per cent Czech. The political weight of the Hungarian minority is considerable at both the local
The main host countries for Slovak nationals are the Czech Republic, Austria, Germany and Hungary.
Table II.30.
Current migration gures, Slovak Republic

1993 1994 1995 1996
Inows of permanent residents Arrivals (excluding those from the Czech Republic) Arrivals from the Czech Republic Outows of permanent residents Departures (excluding those to the Czech Republic)1 Departures to the Czech Republic2 Net migration Residence permits granted by category Long-term residence permits Employment Business Study Other Total Permanent residence permits Family reunication Other Total Inows of asylum seekers Illegal migrants caught at the border Holders of a long-term residence permit, by country of Czech Republic Former Yugoslavia Ukraine Poland 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.
9.1 1.9 7.2 7.4 0.1 7.3 1.8
4.9 1.8 3.1 4.1 0.1 4.1 0.8
4.6 3.1 1.5 4.1 0.2 3.8 0.5
2.5 1.5 1.0 3.6 0.1 3.5 1.1
3.7 1.2 0.6 0.3 5.7 0.9 0.2 1.0 0.1 2.2 origin3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1.4 23.3 45.3 .. .. 0.5 0.2
1.7 1.1 1.0 0.3 4.1 2.2 0.1 2.4 0.1 1.9 .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.5 0.4 0.2 1.6 2.7 1.2 39.2 54.4 3.4 2.5 1.8 0.7
1.1 0.9 0.6 0.4 3.0 1.9 0.3 2.2 0.4 2.9 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 7.4 11.2 0.4 0.3 0.2 1.8 2.7 1.2 59.3 53.0 3.5 2.5 2.8 1.4
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.4 .. 2.5 .. .. .. .. 18.0 0.6 0.5 0.4 1.8 3.3 .. 72.2 50.4 3.7 2.6 3.7 1.4
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 long-term residents as of 31 August 1995 and 30 September 1997. 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. Estimates of Czech workers are made by the Ministry of Labour. Sources: Ministry of Labour and the Slovak Republic Employment Service; Czech Statistical Ofce.
161
and national levels. It has also has a large press group. Gypsies are the second largest minority and the one that poses the biggest integration problem in the eyes of the public. Aggressive policies targeted specically at this group are called for by the level of education of this ethnic group, which on average is lower than that of the rest of the population; its greater vulnerability to unemployment; a certain amount of rejection by the rest of the community; and problems of delinquency. The foreigners legally residing in the Slovak Republic (see the number of long-term residence permit holders in Table II.30) come mainly from bordering or neighbouring countries the Czech Republic, the former Yugoslavia, Ukraine and Poland and live mainly in Bratislava and western Slovak Republic. Employment of foreigners Excepting permanent residents, refugees, Czech nationals and other foreigners employed under intergovernmental agreements, a foreigner wishing to work in the Slovak Republic must have a work permit. The number of work permit holders increased from 2 700 to 3 000 between 1995 and 1996. Over half of them are in the Bratislava area. Ukrainian, Polish, US and UK nationals are the most numerous (see Table II.30). Nearly a third of them are employed by foreign companies. Recent migration trends In response to the growing number of persons crossing Slovak borders (90 million in 1995 compared with 41 million in 1993), the Slovak Republic decided to require foreign migrants to show that they have the means to support themselves during their stay. The new law on the employment of foreigners in the Slovak Republic and on the employment abroad of Slovak nationals with the assistance of the Ministry of Labour took effect on 1 January 1997. Bilateral agreements govern both the employment of Slovak nationals abroad and that of the cosignatorys nationals in the Slovak Republic. Such agreements have been concluded with Germany, the Czech Republic, Poland and the Federation of Russia, and are being negotiated with Austria, Ukraine, Romania and Hungary. Agreements on exchanges of trainees have been signed with Switzerland, Luxembourg, Finland, and Austria.
SPAIN Introduction A number of policy measures have had an impact on the recent trend of migration ows in Spain. It has been made easier for people of Spanish nationality or origin to return to Spain, and, since 1993, a quota for the number of new non-EU workers admitted has been in place. The legislation on the right of asylum has been amended in order to make the criteria for eligibility more stringent. Since 26 March 1996, the Schengen Agreements have been in force and Spain has reinforced controls of the Schengen Areas external borders. Lastly, Spain implemented a third regularisation programme between 23 April and 23 August 1996. Spanish emigration and return ows The number of Spaniards emigrating as recorded by the Directorate-General for Migration has been falling steadily since the 1980s; in 1996 it was only about 9 000 (see Table II.31). Spanish emigration was limited almost entirely to three European countries: France (60 per cent), followed by Belgium and Switzerland (16 per cent each). Most of these new migrants do not wish to settle in the host country and generally hold temporary or seasonal jobs, mainly in agriculture and construction. Spanish emigration to other continents, and in particular to the Americas (3.5 per cent) and Africa (3 per cent), is almost negligible. Spanish investments in South America and expanding trade with the countries of this region have had little impact on migration ows. On the other hand, the number of Spaniards returning to Spain has increased. Thus, in 1996, the number of individuals whose names were struck from the lists at consulates (27 000) rose sharply in comparison with the previous three years. Nearly two-thirds of the returns recorded concerned individuals previously residing in European countries, primarily, in descending order, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, Germany, and France. Emigrants returning from the Americas came mainly from Venezuela, the United States, and Argentina. Immigration and the foreign population Foreigners must rst obtain a legal right of establishment (not required for EU nationals) before a residence permit can be issued. The number of residence permits granted rose from 12 300 in 1993 to 15 700 in 1994. These gures give only an approxi-
162
Table II.31.
Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force, Spain
Thousands
1993 1994 1995 1996 1993 1994 1995 1996
Outows of nationals of which: Outows to a European country Returns of nationals Stock of foreign residents1 By region of origin Europe America Africa Asia Oceania Stateless Not specied By region of residence Madrid Barcelona Alicante Other Acquisition and recovery of Spanish nationality Applications for recovering Spanish nationality Applications for acquiring Spanish nationality Grants of Spanish nationality (excluding persons recovering their Spanish nationality)
1.
13.0 8.8 21.0 430.4 217.5 96.8 79.3 34.9 0.8 1.1 86.1 57.7 36.6 250.1 9.7 8.8 8.4
12.1 6.6 20.4 461.4 238.5 103.3 82.6 35.7 0.8 0.3 93.7 65.1 38.8 263.9 8.3 10.9 7.8
14.4 9.1 18.5 499.8 254.5 108.9 95.8 38.5 0.9 0.3 0.9 93.0 78.0 39.5 289.4 6.6 12.7 6.8
9.0 8.1 26.6 539.0 273.3 121.3 98.8 43.4 0.9 0.4 0.8 111.1 84.5 42.7 300.7 .. .. 8.4
Total work permits of which: Women By industry division Agriculture Industry Building Services Not specied By region of origin Africa Central and South America Asia Europe (except EU)3 North America Oceania and other By type of permit Long term work permits Employees Self employed One-year work permit Employees Self employed Other4 Stock of foreign workers5
granted2
93.7 26.4 13.2 9.0 12.6 58.9 49.3 22.8 11.3 8.1 2.1 0.2 12.4 2.1 65.5 10.9 2.7 117.4
88.6 25.3 18.7 6.9 9.4 50.6 3.1 49.5 20.2 11.0 6.1 1.7 0.2 6.6 2.3 68.2 9.6 1.9 121.8
100.3 29.5 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 2.0 139.0
121.7 39.0 24.0 8.4 11.8 70.8 6.7 66.8 30.0 15.2 8.0 1.6 0.2 28.1 4.6 79.9 6.9 2.1 161.9
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 1991 and 1996 regularisation programmes. 2. Total permits issued, including seasonal and cross-border workers and renewals of permits. Provisional gures for 1996. 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 1991 and 1996 regularisation programmes. Provisional data for 1996. Sources: General Directorate on Migration; Ministry of Labour and Social Security; Ministry of Justice.
163
mate indication of inows since EU nationals are not counted and exemptions from the residence permit requirement (11 000 in 1994) are generally granted to individuals already living in Spain. At the end of 1995, some 500 000 foreigners held residence permits, of whom nearly 60 per cent were either nationals of an EU country or relatives EU national citizens (this gure does not include permits valid for less than six months and those granted to students). At 31 December 1996, the foreign population (approximately 540 000 people) accounted for 1.3 per cent of the total population (see Table II.31). The rise in the proportion of EU nationals and of relatives of EU citizens (nearly 320 000 in 1996 as compared with 180 000 in 1992) in the total foreign population reects both the increase in trade with neighbouring countries (France and Portugal, but also Germany and the United Kingdom) and the tighter immigration policy regarding non-EU nationals. The annual rate of increase of non-EU immigrants has remained relatively low and stable over the past ve years (an annual average of 0.7 per cent). In 1996 Moroccan immigrants were the largest single group (78 000), followed by nationals of the United Kingdom (69 000) and Germany (46 000). There were some 38 000 Portuguese and 33 000 French nationals. The presence of nationals of South American and Caribbean countries reects Spains continuing ties with the Americas. Yet, the number of Argentineans fell between 1994 and 1996 and the number of Chileans has remained stable since 1993. This trend coincides with a period of economic development and political stability in these two countries. The fact that a large number of Argentineans and Chileans living in Spain have acquired Spanish nationality has also held totals down. On the other hand, migration ows from the Andean area (Peru, Colombia, and Ecuador) and the Dominican Republic have followed a rising trend during the 1990s, largely because there are networks of these communities established in Spain and because of the deteriorating economic, political and social situation in these countries. It should be pointed out that migration from the Andean area has a signicant female component. This is due to specic demand for domestic services and care for the elderly in the Spanish market. At the end of 1996, two out of three foreign residents were living in one of four Spanish provinces or the Balearic or Canary Islands. On the main-
land, one out of two foreigners lives in Madrid, Barcelona, Alicante or Malaga. The rst two cities are major economic hubs, while the last two are mainly tourist centres. In Madrid and Barcelona non-EU workers are predominant, especially Moroccans and Peruvians, while UK citizens are by far the most numerous in the cities with large tourist populations. Asylum seekers The number of persons applying for asylum in 1995 (5 700) fell by half compared with the previous year. This decline continued in 1996 with 4 700 applications. The more restrictive measures that came into force in mid-1994 no doubt lie behind this trend. In 1996 applicants came mainly from Romania, Iran, Cuba, Liberia and Nigeria. According to the statistics of the Ofce for Asylum and Refugees, a total of nearly 72 000 individuals applied for asylum or refugee status between 1988 and 1996. Poles were the largest group, followed by Romanians and Peruvians. In all, these three nationalities accounted for over a third of the applications. However, during this period refugee status was primarily granted to nationals of Cuba, BosniaHerzegovina and Iran. On average, roughly 9 per cent of requests for asylum were granted during this period. Naturalisation In 1996 the number of individuals acquiring Spanish nationality increased (nearly 8 500 compared with 6 800 in 1995). Roughly two-thirds of them were from South American (Argentina, Peru and Colombia) and Caribbean countries (Dominican Republic and Cuba). Naturalisation of individuals of Asian origin (Philippines and China) rose sharply, as did that of nationals of Equatorial Guinea. The downward trend in the naturalisation of Moroccans that began in 1993 continued in 1996. Foreigners and the labour market According to preliminary data, some 122 000 work permits were issued in 1996 (compared with 100 000 in 1995). This 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 per cent in 1996 because of the regularisation programme carried out that year (see Table II.31). Since 1992 EU nationals are no longer required to have work per-
164
mits and are therefore not included in these statistics. Of the 120 000 foreigners who obtained a permit in 1996 (or whose work permit was renewed), over half came from Africa (primarily from Morocco) and nearly a quarter from Latin America (Dominican Republic and Peru). Among the nationals of Asian countries the Chinese and Filipinos were most numerous, and Poles were the largest group from non-EU European countries. If a comparison is made based on the number of permits granted by sex, more work permits were granted to women than to men for nationals of the Dominican Republic, Peru, the Philippines and Colombia. Holders of work permits are mainly employed in domestic or social services (30 per cent), agriculture (19 per cent), construction and transport (9 per cent), and hotels and catering (9 per cent). Nearly 20 per cent of the permits granted in 1996 were issued to skilled workers and roughly 10 per cent to self-employed workers. Since 1993 quotas for non-EU workers have been set annually by the government. In theory, these quotas for recruiting new workers (between 15 000 and 20 000, depending on the year) were a means of lling vacancies left unlled by nationals. Another objective was to prevent the employment of undocumented foreigners in strenuous or seasonal jobs (agriculture, construction, domestic services, hotels and catering). In reality, the workers who obtained permits were mostly undocumented immigrants, to whom the authorities had given priority over other forms of recruitment. The regularisations of 1991 and 1996 clearly showed that this was the case. The 1996 regularisation programme The amnesty for undocumented immigrants decided in 1996 was carried out over a ve-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. Preliminary results show that a substantial proportion of those who beneted from the programme (some 20 000 people) had previously held a permit (see Table II.32). 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.
Table II.32. Regularisation programmes of foreigner in an irregular situation, 1991 and 1996, Spain
Thousands
1991 1996
Kind of permits granted and sector of activity Combined residence and work permits Agriculture Industry Construction Personal services Hotel Trade Transport Other services Other Residence permits
1.
108.4 108.4 15.5 8.4 16.6 23.3 13.6 9.3 1.2 16.8 3.8
21.31 13.8 1.7 0.5 2.1 3.1 2.2 1.6 0.3 1.7 0.7 7.5
During this programme, two kinds of permits could be issued: a two-year (three-year in some cases) combined residence and work permit without restriction on geographical or professional mobility. The duration of the permit is limited to one year for the members of the family. a residence permit which does not allow to work. Source: Ministry of the Interior.
Policy developments New legislation on the right of asylum took effect in June 1994. Its main objective is to bring the legislation into line with international standards. The distinction between asylum seekers and refugees was abolished, while the rights of refugees (as dened by the Geneva Convention) with respect to residence and work were strengthened. The processing of applications has been speeded up. A more direct link has been established between the rejection of an application and the expulsion of the individual concerned. The Act of 2 November 1995 amended the legislation regarding the recovery of Spanish nationality. Prior to this Act returning emigrants who wished to recover their Spanish nationality had to obtain an exemption from the ten-year legal residence requirement. This formality is no longer required. Under the new Aliens Act (February 1996), a programme of regularisation was implemented between April and August 1996 (see above). The programme largely beneted foreigners who had not been able to renew their residence or work permits. A quarter of the foreigners covered by the 1991 regularisation programme had not had their permits renewed in 1994. In January 1996 there was an initial assessment of the policy for integrating immigrants laid down by the Plan for the Social Integration of Immigrants
165
approved by the Spanish government in December 1994. New measures were decided upon in order to improve the legal situation of foreigners. A free legal assistance and protection network was created. Furthermore, under amendments to the Penal Code, various offences can be sanctioned more heavily when racist or xenophobic factors are involved. Since January 1997 a special body under the supervision of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs has been responsible for the social integration of immigrants and assistance programmes for refugees. The General Electoral System Act was amended in May 1997 to enable all European citizens residing in Spain to vote or run for ofce in municipal elections. A clause in the legislation provides non-EU foreign residents the same rights, subject to reciprocity. SWEDEN Introduction Since 1993 unemployment has been around 8 per cent in Sweden, having previously been under 5 per cent. Workers in the construction sector were the hardest hit by this increase in unemployment. However, it appears that Swedens economy is currently in a period of expansion and that the effects of the policies recently implemented to stimulate the labour market should be felt in the course of 1998. Migration movements and change in the foreign population In 1996, the net migration gain was 6 000, only one-fth of the average of previous years. In 1993 and 1994, inows rose signicantly, peaking in 1994 at 75 000, to then fall substantially in 1995 (see Table II.33). These uctuations were mainly due to inows from the former Yugoslavia, with 42 000 entries in 1994 and only 7 000 the following year. In 1996, immigration rose slightly in comparison with the previous year, returning to the average annual level of the late 1980s and early 1990s, i.e. some 40 000 entries. While entries of Swedish nationals are rising and accounted for one-quarter of total arrivals in 1996, inows of foreigners fell by 20 per cent to roughly 29 000. The very sharp rise in total emigration between 1995 and 1996 was exclusively due to departures of
Swedish nationals, which jumped from 1 000 to nearly 20 000. Outows of foreigners have ranged between 11 000 and 16 000 since the end of the 1980s, standing at 14 500 in 1996, most of whom were nationals of Nordic countries. Foreigners, other than Nordic country nationals must have a residence permit in order to reside in Sweden. In 1996 some 32 000 people obtained permits. Three-quarters of these were issued to immigrants entering for the purpose of family reunion or to refugees. Of the remaining permits, 5 200 were granted to nationals of countries of the European Economic Area (see Table II.33). Immigration specically to enter the labour market remained marginal, with fewer than 300 permanent resident permits being granted for this purpose in 1996. These are restricted to highly skilled individuals recruited in industry, self-employed workers and those in the liberal professions. There are also temporary work permits, which are not counted in the annual migration statistics. These short-term permits are mainly granted to seasonal workers. In 1996, for example, 8 400 temporary permits were issued, mostly in the horticultural sector. The overall contribution of immigration to Swedens total population can be evaluated by adding the stock of foreigners residing in the country, the stock of individuals born abroad and children at least one of whose parents was born abroad. After eliminating any double counting, the gure for 1996 amounted to 1.6 million people, or 18 per cent of the total population. At the end of 1996 there were some 940 000 persons living in Sweden who were born abroad (see Table II.33). Over half of them had Swedish nationality. Nearly 40 per cent had lived in Sweden for more than 20 years, while 20 per cent had only arrived within the last ve years. Half of these recent immigrants were born outside Europe, whereas most of the immigrants who had been in the country for over ten years ago were born in a Nordic country. At the end of 1996 there were slightly more than 630 000 Swedish nationals who were born in Sweden of at least one foreign born parent. At the end of 1996 there were approximately 527 000 foreigners residing in Sweden, more than 80 per cent of whom were born abroad (see Table II.33). Nationals of Nordic countries accounted for nearly one-third of the foreign population.
166
Table II.33.
Current gures on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Sweden
1993 1994 1995 1996 1993 1994 1995 1996
Inows of foreigners by region and country of Nordic countries of which: Finland Norway Denmark Other countries of which: Iraq Former Yugoslavia United States Outows of foreigners by nationality1 Nordic countries of which: Finland Norway Denmark Other countries of which: United States United Kingdom Net migration of foreigners by nationality1 Nordic countries of which: Finland Norway Denmark Other countries of which: United States Asylum seekers of which: Iraq Former Yugoslavia
origin1
54.9 5.2 2.5 1.5 1.2 49.7 4.6 24.0 0.7 14.8 7.4 2.9 2.9 1.6 7.5 0.5 0.4 40.0 2.2 0.4 1.4 0.4 42.2 0.2 37.6 2.3 28.8
74.8 6.2 2.8 1.6 1.8 68.6 3.5 41.5 0.8 15.8 6.6 2.6 2.4 1.6 9.2 0.8 0.5 59.0 0.4 0.2 0.8 0.2 59.4 18.6 1.7 10.6
36.1 6.3 2.8 1.7 1.8 29.8 2.3 7.1 1.1 15.4 6.7 2.9 2.2 1.6 8.7 0.8 0.4 20.7 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.2 21.1 0.2 9.0 1.8 2.3
29.3 5.6 2.6 1.5 1.4 23.8 2.1 2.0 1.1 14.5 6.5 2.9 2.0 1.6 7.9 0.8 0.5 14.9 1.0 0.2 0.5 0.2 15.8 0.3 5.8 1.6 1.0
Grants of permanent permits by category of Family reunication Refugees EEA-agreement Foreign students Adopted children Employment Stock of foreign population3 Nordic countries Finland Norway Denmark Other countries of which: Former Yugoslavia Iran Iraq Persons with foreign background4 Foreign-born Swedish citizens Foreigners Born in Sweden Swedish citizens5 Foreigners Stock of foreign labour6 Nordic nationals Non nordic nationals
admission2
58.9 19.8 36.5 1.6 0.9 0.2 507.5 169.4 108.9 33.9 26.6 338.1 32.4 36.1 16.3 1 163.6 869.1 455.6 413.4 294.5 200.4 94.1 221 97 124 42.7 10.9 4.2 3.1 24.4 6.8 18.3
79.1 26.0 44.9 6.0 1.1 0.9 0.1 537.4 166.4 106.7 33.0 26.7 371.0 40.4 32.7 19.0 1 598.5 922.1 477.9 444.2 676.5 583.2 93.2 213 91 122 35.1 6.4 2.7 3.0 23.0 6.4 17.4
32.4 19.7 5.6 4.7 1.5 0.8 0.2 531.8 163.7 104.9 32.3 26.5 368.1 38.4 29.3 21.3 1 630.1 936.0 497.3 438.7 694.0 613.8 80.2 220 91 130 32.0 3.6 2.8 2.1 23.5 6.4 17.7
31.7 18.8 4.8 5.2 1.5 1.1 0.3 526.6 160.8 103.1 31.7 26.0 365.8 36.6 27.2 22.8 1 656.6 943.8 510.6 433.2 712.8 632.3 80.5 218 90 128 25.6 2.4 2.0 2.0 19.1 6.2 17.2
Acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality Former Yugoslavia Turkey Finland Other countries Mixed marriages % of total marriages
1. Data are from population registers and refer to persons who declare their intention to stay in Sweden for longer than one year. Figures do not include asylum seekers who are waiting for decisions and temporary workers. 2. Residence permits are not required for Nordic citizens. 3. Data are from population registers and refer to the population on 31 December of the years indicated. 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.
167
Approximately 53 per cent of foreign immigrants born abroad have acquired Swedish nationality. The number of naturalisations has been declining steadily since 1993, dropping from 42 700 that year to 25 600 in 1996. Nationals of the former Yugoslavia and Turkey are the two largest groups acquiring Swedish nationality. Refugees and asylum seekers There were only 5 800 asylum seekers in 1996, a small number in comparison with the peak gure of 84 000 applications in 1992. This decline was 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. This change was due not only to the improved situation in Bosnia, but also to the introduction of visas for nationals of BosniaHerzegovina 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 Cote dIvoire, the Gambia, Niger, Togo and Uganda. In 1996, Iraqis were the largest group of asylum seekers (1 600). In 1996, only 4 800 asylum seekers obtained a residence permit in Sweden, nearly 2 000 of whom were Iraqis. Some 100 people obtained Geneva Convention refugee status, but there are other forms of refugee status in Sweden for which the required conditions are less stringent. However, the terms de facto refugee or war-resister will no longer be used in dening refugee status. Following a government decision in April 1994, some 20 000 Kosovo Albanians who entered Sweden as asylum seekers before 1 January 1993 were granted permanent resident permits on humanitarian grounds. Foreigners and the labour market There are 218 000 foreigners in the labour force in Sweden, or 5 per cent of the overall total. The participation rate of foreigners is relatively low compared to that of nationals, which was roughly 80 per cent in 1996. That of nationals of Nordic countries is just under 60 per cent, and that of nationals of nonNordic countries is particularly low at 35 per cent. Between 1991 and 1994, 17 per cent of entrepreneurs were foreigners. They are found in all sectors of activity, but mostly in the service sector (family businesses). Foreigners born in Turkey, Syria,
Greece, Italy, Tunisia and Morocco are the most likely to start their own business. The unemployment rate of foreigners was 14 per cent in 1996, compared to 6 per cent for Swedish nationals. Between 1990 and 1996, the unemployment rate of foreigners rose considerably, climbing from less than 4 per cent to 13 per cent for nationals of Nordic countries, and from roughly 5 to 31 per cent for the nationals of other countries. 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 dened refugee status more exibly 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 afraid of being persecuted in their country because of their race, nationality, membership of a social or religious group or political opinions. This denition applies whether the refugees are afraid of being persecuted by their government, or whether the latter is unable to provide adequate protection and safety from persecution. The law also covers stateless persons. In September 1990 Sweden ratied the United Nations Convention on Childrens Rights. This Convention has not been incorporated into Swedish legislation, but the government announced that the legislation on aliens was in compliance with the UN Convention on Childrens Rights, and that only a few clarications 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 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 a pluralist society From immigration policy to integration policy. The objectives of this policy are to
168
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 In Switzerland, 1996 was considered a year of economic recession. Once again, annual GDP growth was negative; ination ran at only 0.8 per cent. Unemployment, which had been held at less than 1 per cent in the early 1990s, reached 4.7 per cent in 1996. Migration and changes in the resident foreign population As of 31 December 1996, the resident foreign population of Switzerland, i.e. persons holding permanent or one-year permits, stood at 1.3 million. Since 1984 the share of foreigners in the total population has consistently risen from 15 to 19 per cent in 1996 showing an overall increase of more than 40 per cent in 12 years. Yet, the rate of increase has slowed since year-end 1993 due to reduced inows as well as a greater number of recorded departures. Between 1995 and 1996 the foreign population grew by 7 000 (see Table II.34). This rise can be attributed to positive net migration and natural growth (at 6 600 and 14 000 respectively), as well as to conversions of seasonal permits to one-year permits, which augments the number of resident foreigners. Conversely, naturalisations, along with acquisitions of Swiss nationality through adoption and recognition of citizenship, helped to reduce the foreign population. Since the early 1990s, the number of naturalisations has grown considerably, rising from 6 000 in 1991 to 19 000 in 1996 (see Table II.34). Much of this increase can be explained by a 1992 amendment of the legislation pertaining to Swiss nationality. The law allows for double citizenship and facilitates the naturalisation of the foreign spouses of citizens. The number of naturalisations in 1996 was roughly equal to the number of foreign births, approximately 18 200. In 1996, as in 1995, the net migration of Italians and Spaniards was negative. The same phenomenon occurred for the rst time with regard to Portuguese, with 2 300 more departures than arrivals in 1996. Inows into Switzerland in 1996 were led by nation-
als of the former Yugoslavia (19 per cent), followed by Germans (12 per cent), Portuguese (7 per cent), and Italians (7 per cent). Of these arrivals, women outnumbered men by a slim margin (52 women to 48 men). Conversely, 77 women left Switzerland for every 53 men. On average, immigrants were younger than emigrants, with the under-35 age group accounting for 67 and 61 per cent, respectively. Refugees and asylum seekers After dropping sharply (by 35 per cent between 1993 and 1994), applications for asylum rose once again, reaching 18 000 in 1996 (see Table II.34). A third of those applications were from citizens of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and the others primarily from Sri Lanka (11 per cent), Turkey (7 per cent), Bosnia and Herzegovina (7 per cent), and the Democratic Republic of Congo (formerly Zaire, 4 per cent). That same year, persons granted refugee status accounted for 12 per cent of all adjudicated cases. Acceptance rates varied widely, depending on nationality and the political situation in the applicants home countries. For instance, the rate was 1 per cent for Sri Lankan citizens but 90 per cent for Vietnamese. Employment of foreigners The number of foreigners entering Switzerland in order to work not including cross-border or seasonal workers totalled 25 000 in 1996, representing a third of that years new foreign immigrants. Therefore, among those arriving, the non-employed outnumbered the employed by two to one. At year-end 1996, the foreign labour force amounted to some 900 000 persons, down 3 per cent from 1995 (see Table II.34). Of this population, settled immigrants accounted for more than 60 per cent, annual permit-holders 21 per cent, crossborder workers 17 per cent, and seasonal workers less than 2 per cent (rising to 5 per cent in August). Both the numbers of seasonal and cross-border workers continue to decline. These two categories of workers are the most sensitive to the market forces and to corporate restructuring. Their numbers diminish whenever unemployment in frontier-zone cantons rises, particularly in Geneva and Ticino. Foreigners are proportionately more affected by unemployment than the Swiss are since their share of total unemployment in December 1996 was nearly
169
170 Table II.34. Current gures on the components of total population change, on ows and stocks of foreign population and labour force, Switzerland
1993 1994 1995 1996 1993 1994 1995 1996
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 Portugal Italy France Other countries Outows by main nationality3 Former Yugoslavia Germany Portugal Italy France Other countries Net migration by main nationality3 Former Yugoslavia Germany Portugal Italy France Other countries Asylum seekers Acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality Italy France Former-Yougoslavia Turkey Other countries
6 969.0 18.1 46.9 46.5 13.3 12.9 104.0 34.2 8.6 10.0 7.3 4.5 39.3 71.2 7.0 7.3 8.7 11.7 3.8 32.7 32.8 27.2 1.4 1.3 4.4 0.8 6.6 24.7 12.9 2.8 0.9 1.5 0.8 7.0
7 019.0 18.6 39.8 39.4 14.2 13.8 91.7 25.3 8.7 8.6 6.9 5.0 37.2 64.2 8.0 6.2 7.5 9.9 3.5 29.2 27.5 17.3 2.5 1.1 3.0 1.5 8.0 16.1 13.8 3.3 0.9 1.8 1.0 6.8
7 062.0 18.9 30.5 26.8 13.3 16.8 7.2 87.9 22.3 8.6 7.6 6.7 5.0 37.7 67.5 8.7 6.6 7.4 10.3 3.8 30.6 20.4 13.6 2.0 0.2 3.6 1.2 7.0 17.0 16.8 4.4 0.9 2.5 1.2 7.9
7 085.0 19.0 7.0 12.0 14.1 19.4 0.2 74.3 14.1 8.7 5.5 5.4 5.0 35.7 67.7 9.0 6.2 7.9 10.8 3.6 30.1 6.6 5.1 2.4 2.3 5.4 1.4 5.6 18.0 19.4 5.2 1.0 2.8 1.4 8.9
Foreign population by main Italy Former-Yougoslavia Portugal Spain Allemagne France Autres pays
nationality1
1 260.3 367.7 245.0 121.1 105.9 87.1 51.7 281.6 899.0 310.7
1 300.1 364.0 272.4 128.6 103.7 89.1 52.7 289.5 911.6 319.0
1 330.6 358.9 294.2 134.8 101.4 90.9 53.6 296.7 895.7 319.1
1 337.6 350.3 305.0 137.1 97.7 92.7 54.3 300.5 869.7 313.6
Foreign workers4 of which: Women Inows by status of residence % of resident workers % of cross-border workers Foreign resident workers1 By main nationality Italy Former Yugoslavia Portugal Spain Germany Others By major industry division Agriculture, forestry Extractive and manufacturing industries Building Trade Hotel, restaurants Other services Cross-border workers by nationality France (% of the total) Italy (% of the total) Germany (% of the total) Others (% of the total)
80.7 17.4
725.8 228.0 121.3 74.5 67.9 55.0 179.3 12.4 132.1 93.3 87.3 72.7 328.1 156.3 48.6 24.3 20.6 6.5
81.2 16.7
740.3 224.7 133.0 78.8 66.6 55.7 179.2 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 63.5 56.3 179.5 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 59.8 56.7 174.6 14.5 117.4 87.4 90.6 80.4 318.9 147.0 49.5 23.4 21.1 6.0
1. Data cover only foreigners with annual or settlement permits and include conversions of seasonal work permits into annual or settlement permits. 2. The introduction of a new data processing system explains the peculiarly high gure for 1995. 3. 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 seasonnal permits. Sources: Ofce fed eral des etrangers; Labour Force Statistics, 1976-1996, OECD.
45 per cent, whereas they accounted for only 24 per cent of the labour force. The breakdown of foreign workers by residence status varies widely by nationality. As a rule, there are more residents than commuters. Among Italians there is one commuter for every ten residents, and among Germans and Austrians there is one for every three. In contrast, French commuters outnumber residents 73 000 to 54 000. Half of foreign residents work, and their employment rate varies by nationality. In 1996, the proportion ranged from 43 per cent for Turks to 69 per cent for Austrians. There would seem to be an inverse correlation between this rate and marital status: 80 per cent of working Turks were married, versus 57 per cent of Austrians. Age categories directly inuence these rates as well. The proportion of the under-15 age group is much higher for Turks and nationals of the former Yugoslavia (onethird of the population) than for Austrians, Germans, French, or Italians (for whom the proportion ranges from 7 to 15 per cent). At the end of December 1996, it was once again the metalworking and machinery industries which employed the greatest number of foreigners (17 per cent of all working foreigners). That sector was also the leading employer of registered cross-border workers (of whom there were 147 000 in 1996, see Table II.34), employing 20 per cent of the commuters. Nearly half of all commuters were French, followed by Italians (just under a quarter), Germans (20 per cent), and Austrians. Policy developments Since 1994, the social integration of foreigners has been a predominant concern. The Federal Commission for Foreigners (CFE) is to a large extent responsible for this activity, which was extended in 1995 to the integration of refugees. The CFE has organised national seminars on migrants health and on the integration of the Islamic community, and has founded a magazine to improve mutual understanding between foreign and Swiss nationals. From a legislative standpoint, the objective of social integration motivated a proposal in December 1995 for full revision of the law on asylum and a partial revision of the law on the residence and settlement of foreigners. In this context, a Federal Anti-Racism Commission was set up in March 1995 to combat all forms of racial discrimination.
Under an Act on the entry of seasonal workers, approved on 19 October 1994, seasonal permits are now limited to nationals of traditional recruitment countries belonging to the EU and EFTA, and only in special cases issued to other nationals (before, only new work permits had been subject to this rule). The Act came into effect at the end of 1996. The consequences of this measure explain the fall in the total number of seasonal workers, which in over 90 per cent of cases involves nationals of the former Yugoslavia. The CFEs top priority in 1996 was the revision of the law on the residence and settlement of foreigners, proposing for the rst time to commit the federal government to political and nancial support for integration. In 1997, a group of experts appointed by the Federal Council looked into the development of a new migration policy for Switzerland. It determined to explore four principal policy areas, corresponding to the four phases of the migration process: admissions, integration, expulsion and repatriation, and lastly, foreign policy with respect to migration. Admission policy currently factors global economic concerns with Swiss demographics and any integration-related matters that might ultimately be raised as a result of migration. Integration policy aims to strengthen the participation of the resident foreign population in political life. It seeks to ensure equal opportunity in education, irrespective of nationality, and to give the resident foreign population the same opportunities as Swiss nationals in the occupational and social spheres. It also promotes the development of foreigners professional skills. Expulsion and repatriation policy is designed to ensure that foreign nationals are not allowed to reside in Switzerland without proper authorisation. Foreign policy with regard to migration aims to combat the causes of forced migration and to protect the interests of the labour market, while at the same time lending support to European efforts to adopt common policies for migration, security, and asylum. TURKEY Introduction Buoyant private sector spending, strong merchandise exports and tourism extended the strong recovery following the 1994 nancial crisis: output is now back to its medium-term trend. Notwithstanding, open and disguised unemployment remain high. The desire to emigrate, particularly among the
171
young highly educated, is considerable. Emigration ows are being checked, however, by low demand in the potential recipient countries. Population, employment and unemployment According to the ndings of the April 1997 Household Labour Force Survey, Turkeys civilian population increased by almost 800 000 over the previous twelve months to reach just over 62 million, of whom 55 per cent were residing in urban areas. The working age population, which is dened to include all those aged 12 years or over, was estimated at just below 47 million. The labour force was estimated at 22.5 million, almost half of whom were employed in the agricultural sector. Of these latter, almost 60 per cent were unpaid family members. In April 1997, 6 per cent of the labour force were declared as unemployed, a slight decline on the corresponding gure for 1996. Unemployment among young educated people is severe, standing at almost 30 per cent. Given that there exists no unemployment benet system and that family workers and the self-employed constitute a large proportion of the active population, an estimate of underemployment is as important as that of unemployment: having been estimated as equal to open unemployment in April 1996, it fell by more than a percentage point over the following twelve months. The overall employment situation is, however, expected to deteriorate through to the end of the century: the State Planning Council predicts that by 2000 the proportion of surplus labour will have reached almost 15 per cent. Against this background the Public Employment Ofce, which has the monopoly on the placement of workers abroad, accepted over 400 000 new applications in 1996; the total number of applications pending now stands at slightly below 1 million. 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 denitions, in coverage and in time-frame are therefore frequent. Moreover, the gures are only for legal migrants. The number of Turks living abroad continues to increase. The mid-1996 estimate put the gure at 3.45 million, which represents almost 5.4 per cent of
Turkeys total resident population. The estimated number of overseas Turkish workers fell, however, by some 35 000. As a proportion of the total Turkish labour force, Turkish workers employed abroad are now estimated at 5.6 per cent. Over 80 per cent of Turkish migrant workers live in countries of the European Economic Area (EEA), primarily in Germany (almost 60 per cent and where Turks account for almost one-third of the total population of foreign workers), France, the Netherlands and Austria.
Unemployment among Turkish immigrants

Unemployment among Turks living in EU countries is widespread and signicantly higher than that for other nationals, despite association agreements signed in 1976 giving Turkish workers priority for job vacancies not lled by workers from the EU. The principal factors which account for this phenomenon include the following: health problems; the ageing of the active Turkish population; a relatively low level of integration in the host society; and insufcient formal education.
Emigration of Turkish workers

The annual emigration ow of Turkish workers organised by the Turkish authorities (which averaged 60 000 during the rst half of the 1990s) has since the beginning of 1996 registered a sharp decline (see Table II.35). Data for the rst seven months of 1997 conrm this trend which is attributable to a fall in the outow to the two principal recipient countries, Saudi Arabia and Russia. Having held rm following sharp declines in 1993 and 1994, Saudi Arabias importance as a destination country has continued to wane; it now takes less than 15 per cent of all workers dispatched by the Public Employment Ofce and accounts for only 10 per cent of the total estimated number of Turkish workers living overseas. 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 ceased expansion. Moreover, Turkish sub-contractors are faced with stiff competition from the member countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) which are suffering severe unemployment following the recent waves of privatisations. The annual ow to the European Union, having registered a steady
172
Table II.35. Number of Turkish workers sent abroad by the National Employment and Placement Ofce, by country or region of destination, 1993-1996, Turkey
Thousands
1993 1994 1995 1996
Return migration
Return migration by Turkish emigrants is relatively low. There are many reasons why Turks choose to remain in host countries: their family has already joined them abroad; second and third-generation children speak the language of the host country uently; health care and medical services are more highly developed than in Turkey; and, recent improvements notwithstanding, the Turkish economy remains weak rendering the prospect of nding a job in Turkey unpromising. 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) against a background of tightened immigration controls in other Western 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, this requirement is not rigorously enforced; despite recording a threefold increase over the past ten years their number remains almost negligible (16 300). Just under half originate from the EEA and North America. They are in general highly skilled and typically accompany direct investments. In contrast, those originating from the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEEC), the Middle East and Africa who together account for a further 40 per cent tend to be much less qualied. UNITED KINGDOM Introduction The upward trend in immigration which began in the early 1990s continued in 1996, although applications for asylum fell compared to the previous year. The increased levels of immigration may be partly ascribed to the relatively strong growth and favourable employment conditions in the United Kingdom. The falls in the number of asylum seekers are possibly linked to the restrictions on entitlement to benets introduced in July 1996. Recent policy developments include a change in the approach adopted in the assessment of applications for immigration on the basis of marriage and various policy initiatives with regard to asylum seekers.
New Independent States Saudi Arabia Israel EU1 Germany Libya United States Australia Cyprus Romania Kuwait Other countries Total
1.
21.4 35.8 .. 2.0 2.0 2.5 .. 0.2 0.2 .. 0.3 0.8 63.2
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 0.2 .. 0.3 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
From 1995 on, the data also include the other countries of the Economic European Area. Source: Ministry of Labour and Social Security, General Directorate of Workers Abroad.
increase, albeit from a very low base, during the rst half of the 1990s was constant in 1996 at just over 2 600.
Naturalisations
Many host countries have restrictive legislation rendering naturalisation difcult and typically require the renunciation of the previous nationality. For this reason in particular, Turkish nationals abroad have tended not 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 rst performed military service. The 1995 amendment to the Turkish Law of Nationality which created a special foreign nationality removed these impediments. Data from a number of countries which would reveal the degree to which this legislative change has encouraged Turks living abroad to choose the nationality of their host country is as yet unavailable. It is clear, however, that in Germany this change coupled with a relaxation of certain naturalisation requirements on the German side in 1993 have led to a marked increase in naturalisation requests. Between 1981 and 1993, a total of fewer than 36 000 Turks took German nationality. In 1995, almost 42 000 Turks applied to renounce their Turkish nationality in order to acquire that of Germany.
173
Chart II.13. Migration flows and acceptances for settlement,1986-1996, United Kingdom Thousands
A. Migration flows1 NB = Non-British citizens; B = British citizens B. Acceptances for settlement by region of origin Indian Sub-continent East Asia Americas Africa Europe 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2
Inflows (NB) Inflows (NB)2 250 200 150 100 50 0 50 100 1986 87 88 89
Outflows (NB) Net migration (B)
Net migration (NB)
90
91
92
93
94
95
1996
1986
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
1996
C. Number of asylum seekers3 Main regions of origin
D. Inflows of foreign workers Work permits4 International Passenger Survey Department of Social Security5 Labour Force Survey
Europe 30 25
Africa
Asia
160 140 120
20 15 10 5 0 1986 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 1996 1986 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 1996
100 80 60 40 20 0
Data are from the International Passenger Survey unless otherwise indicated and are adjusted to include some asylum seekers, short-term visitors who are subsequently granted an extension of stay for other reasons (study, marriage for example). 2. 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. 3. Excluding dependents. 4. 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. 5. Data are based on the issue of a national insurance card to all new workers. Sources: International Passenger Survey ; Home Office.
1.
Migration and settlement
Flows of migrants
174
General trends in international migration to and from the United Kingdom are shown in Chart II.13
and Table II.36. The gures are based on data from the International Passenger Survey (IPS) with adjustment for asylum seekers, changes of status of those already in the United Kingdom and ows between the United Kingdom and the Irish Republic. Since
Table II.36.
Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force, United Kingdom
1993 1994 1995 1996 1993 1994 1995 1996
Migration
ows1 210 120 23 97 89 213 88 21 67 124 3 32 2 30 35 55.6 1.4 3.6 7.6 10.9 14.1 2.8 8.9 2.7 3.6 7.3 44.3 4.0 253 135 29 106 118 191 83 22 61 108 62 52 7 45 10 55.0 0.6 4.0 7.9 11.9 14.1 2.6 9.2 2.9 1.8 7.7 43.4 3.9 246 155 41 114 91 192 74 20 54 118 54 81 21 60 27 55.6 0.2 4.0 8.2 12.0 14.5 2.9 8.8 3.5 1.6 6.4 44.9 4.3 258 160 52 108 98 212 75 24 51 137 46 85 28 57 39 61.7 0.1 7.4 8.5 13.0 13.6 4.8 9.5 3.5 1.4 6.7 48.6 6.5
Stock of total
population3 56 948 54 937 2 001 866 465 255 146 266 147 106 12 205 569 77 346 146 75 45.8 5.5 2.1 0.1 3.3 4.8 2.1 1.9 0.8 7.5 1.9 5.0 1.5 19.6 41.8 57 169 55 126 1 946 935 473 319 143 207 114 88 190 545 85 306 154 69 44.0 5.2 2.0 0.1 3.1 4.5 2.0 1.8 0.7 7.9 2.2 5.0 5.0 14.2 5.9 57 406 55 442 2 060 1 027 443 459 125 234 146 82 205 451 59 268 124 70 40.5 4.7 1.6 0.2 2.9 4.1 1.8 1.6 0.7 7.9 2.0 4.2 1.7 15.9 25.7 57 624 55 680 1 972 904 441 352 111 220 136 80 220 461 72 272 117 88 43.1 4.6 1.6 0.1 2.9 4.3 1.9 .. 2.4
Total inows Inows of non-British citizens of which: EU Non-EU Inows of British citizens Total outows Outows of non-British citizens of which: EU Non-EU Outows of British citizens Net migration Non-British citizens of which: EU Non-EU British citizens Acceptances for settlement2 By region of origin European Economic Area (EEA) Other European countries Americas Africa Indian Sub-Continent Middle East Remainder of Asia (mainly East Asia) Oceania Other By category of acceptance Accepted in own right Spouses and dependants Other
Total population Total number of British citizens Total number of foreign nationals, by region or country of origin Europe Ireland EU (excluding Ireland) Other Europe Americas North America West Indies Rest of Americas Africa Asia Middle East and Turkey Indian Sub-continent and Sri Lanka Rest of Asia Oceania Total grants of citizens in the United Kingdom by previous country or region of nationality Europe European Economic Area (excluding Ireland) Ireland Other Europe Americas North America West Indies Rest of Americas Africa British Dependent Territories citizens Middle East and Turkey Oceania Other Grants of citizenship in Hong Kong, China
9.1 2.1 4.4 1.5 17.1 5.5
175
176 Table II.36. Current gures on ows and stocks of total population and labour force, United Kingdom (cont.)
1993 1994 1995 1996 1993 1994 1995 1996
Asylum seekers (total applications 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 was 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
received)4
22.4 4.5 10.3 6.7 0.9 7.3 15.1 10.4 6.1 37.0 51.6 108.0 29.3 13.3 12.5 3.5
32.8 5.3 17.0 9.5 1.1 10.2 22.6 13.2 5.1 46.0 65.7 125.8 30.1 12.9 13.4 3.8
44.0 5.4 22.5 13.0 3.1 12.1 28.6 16.0 5.0 51.0 77.0 133.9 35.5 15.6 15.5 4.4
27.9 6.4 10.6 9.1 1.8 12.4 15.5 20.9 5.3 50.0 85.0 145.9 37.7 16.8 16.9 4.0
Total stock of Total population Total number of British citizens Total number of foreign nationals Europe Ireland EU (excluding Ireland) Other Europe Americas North America West Indies Rest of Americas Africa Asia Indian Sub-continent and Sri Lanka Rest of Asia Oceania Employment to population ratios (%) Total population Total number of British citizens Total number of foreign nationals Europe Ireland EU (excluding Ireland) Other Europe Americas North America West Indies Africa Asia Indian Sub-continent and Sri Lanka Oceania
employment3
25 097 24 232 862 414 222 137 55 123 68 50 78 191 112 79 52 44.1 44.1 43.1 47.8 47.7 53.7 37.7 46.2 46.3 47.2 38.0 33.6 32.4 69.3
25 278 24 411 847 468 241 172 55 92 51 37 72 171 99 72 44 44.2 44.3 43.5 50.1 51.0 53.9 38.5 44.4 44.7 42.0 37.9 31.4 32.4 63.8
25 699 24 835 899 487 216 225 46 108 68 38 83 152 95 57 53 44.8 44.8 43.6 47.4 48.8 49.0 36.8 46.2 46.6 46.3 40.5 33.7 35.4 75.7
25 962 25 095 878 432 218 176 38 111 66 41 92 158 99 59 57 45.1 45.1 44.5 47.8 49.4 50.0 34.2 50.5 48.5 51.3 41.8 34.3 36.4 64.8
Note: European Union totals from 1995 onwards include the three new member countries (Austria, Finland and Sweden). 1. Data are from the International Passenger Survey. Movements between the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom are not recorded. 2. An acceptance of settlement is not required for EU citizens. 3. Data are from the national Labour Force Survey. 4. The 1996 gure is an estimation. Sources: International Passenger Survey; Home Ofce Statistical Bulletin; Control of Immigration Statistics; National Labour Force Survey.
1993, the inow of non-British citizens has increased from 180 000 in 1993 to nearly 230 000 in 1995. The net ow of non-British citizens in 1995 is recorded as 135 000 and the total net ow is recorded as 109 000. Unadjusted IPS data indicate further rises in immigration and net migration for 1996.
26 000 in the previous year. These uctuations reect the effects of the British Nationality (Hong Kong, China) Selection Scheme. Asylum seekers Between 1995 and 1996 the number of asylum applications (excluding dependants) fell by over 16 000 to a gure of 28 000 (see Table II.36). Part of the reason for this decline may be attributed to restrictions on government benets to asylum seekers introduced in July 1996. Applications from Africa declined dramatically, with nearly 23 000 applications in 1995 and only 11 000 applications in 1996. As in previous years, in 1996, the majority of asylum applications were made from within the United Kingdom by people who had already entered in some other capacity (see Chart II.13). About 6 per cent (2 200) of the decisions made in 1995 on pending applications from earlier years recognised the applicants as refugees with full Convention status. In addition, around 13 per cent (5 100) were granted exceptional leave to remain in the United Kingdom. Population and employment of foreign nationals in the United Kingdom According to Labour Force Survey data for 1997, there are a little over 2 million foreign nationals living in the United Kingdom, or about 3.6 per cent of the total population. The composition of the foreign population has shown relatively minor uctuations as compared to the 1996 gures indicating that 40 per cent are European Union nationals, the majority from the Republic of Ireland. Those from Asia are the next largest group with 23 per cent of the total followed by Africa and the Americas accounting for approximately 10 per cent each. In evaluating these proportions the diversity in rates of naturalisation must be considered. For example, there are very few naturalisations amongst those from the Republic of Ireland, but a relatively high number from the Indian Sub Continent (see Table II.36). Labour Force Survey data indicate there were 949 000 foreign nationals working in the United Kingdom in 1997 (about 3.5 per cent of total employment), which is a slight decrease from 1994 but still reects the relatively stable trend observed since 1988. Comparing the population and employment gures across different groups of foreign nationals reveals a diverse incidence of employ-
Settlement in the United Kingdom

Settlement in the context of migration in the United Kingdom refers to individuals who acquire permanent residence status within the United Kingdom. Most of these individuals have already been resident in the United Kingdom for a period of time (often four years) in order to full qualifying periods of residence. The majority are accepted for settlement on the basis of family ties with other UK residents. Of the 62 000 accepted for settlement in 1996, more than 80 per cent were spouses and dependants. Given the nature of the settlement process, the data should be viewed as an indicator of longer term trends in permanent migration to the United Kingdom. Also, there is likely to be a lag between increased inows of migrants and increases in settlement. The relatively large increase in settlement between 1995 and 1996 (from 56 000 to 62 000) is attributable to asylum-related cases, i.e. persons granted asylum four years earlier or exceptional leave seven years earlier together with their dependants and spouses. Exceptional leave is granted where individuals are not granted full refugee status but are allowed to remain in the United Kingdom for up to seven years. Over recent years, the composition of those being accepted for settlement has changed, with noticeable increases in the proportion of those from Africa, non-EEA Europe and East Asia (see Chart II.13).
Naturalisations
Some 43 000 people were granted British citizenship in the United Kingdom in 1996, an increase on the previous years gure (see Table II.36) and a reection of increased resources devoted to processing applications. Those originating from the Indian sub-continent and Africa remain the largest group undertaking naturalisation in the United Kingdom. Naturalisations of Hong Kong (China) residents under the British Nationality (Hong Kong, China) Act (1990) fell in 1996 to about 6 000, compared to
177
ment. For example, the 1997 gures show an employment to total population ratio for Irish nationals of 48 per cent, higher than the average for British citizens, and a ratio of 39 per cent for nationals from the Indian sub-continent and Sri Lanka, much lower than the average for British citizens. The differences between employment to population ratios are driven by demographic factors, varying rates of participation in the labour force and varying rates of unemployment within the labour force. It is difcult to establish the exact numbers of foreign labour inows into the United Kingdom. For example, data from the Department of Social Security indicate that in 1996 there were about 146 000 cases of non-UK nationals arriving from abroad who registered or re-registered for national insurance purposes (see Chart II.13). At the other end of the spectrum in the same year only 38 000 work permits were issued to non-EU nationals. Perhaps the closest measure to the standard concept of migration is the Labour Force Survey data which indicates the number of individuals who were living and working abroad one year previously, in this case the gure for 1995 is 50 000. The data obviously capture different aspects of labour inows and therefore the disparities in the results are not surprising. Chart II.13 shows most of the data indicate a rising trend in inows of employees to the United Kingdom.
bill are: to provide a right of appeal for individuals liable to deportation on grounds of national security; to set up a new body with decision making powers to consider such appeals and related matters; to set the statutory framework within which the body will operate. The bill was a response to an adverse ruling in the European Court of Human Rights which judged that the UKs existing appeals procedures did not meet the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights in cases where a deportation had been made on national security grounds. Ending of the Primary Purpose Rule. This rule, introduced in 1980, said that in order to simply enter the country, those coming to the United Kingdom with the intention of marriage had to prove that the purpose of their marriage was not one of convenience. Ending the rule has allowed resources to be devoted to other aspects of the regulations, such as: intention to live together, evidence of having met before marriage and demonstration of nancial independence from public funds. Note that the burden of proof remains with the applicant. Reduced processing time for patently unfounded asylum claims and tightening of checks for illegal and bogus asylum seekers. In cases where asylum applications appear to be based on very weak grounds, the time allowed to make further representations has been reduced from 28 to 5 days. In addition, better targeting and proling techniques at Dover to check lorries for illegal immigrants and bogus asylum seekers have been introduced. These measures are partly in response to the arrival at Dover of several hundred gypsies, mainly from the Czech and Slovak Republics. Initiatives to reduce the backlog of asylum applications. A major study is being undertaken to increase the efciency of processing claims. Particularly important will be a large scale computerisation of the handling of asylum claims in partnership with the private sector. The government is considering proposals to improve conditions for foreign domestic workers who are allowed to enter the United Kingdom with their foreign employers and who suffer frequent abuse.
Employment situation of ethnic minorities

The Labour Force Survey includes a question about the ethnic background of respondents. According to the 1996 data some 2.2 million people of working age in private households belonged to ethnic minority groups. Of these, 73 per cent were not born in the United Kingdom. Among ethnic minority groups, the proportion of the economically active was lower (66 per cent) than for the total population of the same age group (80 per cent). The unemployment rate for ethnic minorities improved during the late 1980s but in the early 1990s it began to rise. In 1996, it was 18 per cent compared to 8 per cent for nationals. Policy developments Since the election of a new government on 1 May 1997 there have been a number of policy changes and initiatives: Special Immigration Appeals Bill. Introduced on 21 May 1997 the principal provisions of this
178
UNITED STATES Introduction For the rst time since 1991, the number of immigrants receiving legal permanent residence status rose in 1996, to nearly 916 000, a 27 per cent increase on the previous year. If the analysis excludes aliens receiving permanent resident status in previous years under the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), then this gure is the highest recorded since 1914. However, inows in 1996 represented only 0.3 per cent of the total US population. Migration and settlement
Family reunion
Family reunion is the predominant source of US immigration, accounting for 65 per cent of immigration into the United States in 1996. In volume terms, both components of family reunion immediate family members of US citizens and more distant relatives 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 per cent of the poverty threshold. This measure should reduce the number of sponsored immigrants.
Permanent immigration
In the United States, an immigrant is dened 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. In 1996, of all the immigrants admitted, more than half were already living in the United States as temporary residents. Family migration and refugees constitute the two main components of permanent immigration. In 1996, these two categories accounted for nearly 80 per cent of immigration. Other entries were under programmes to recruit workers or to diversify countries sending immigrants to the United States. The increase in inows in 1996 was essentially due to a rise of some 30 per cent in family immigration and of 40 per cent in employment-based immigration. Other factors also contributed to the increase. The rst of these is Section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) which, during the three scal 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 IRCA. Nearly 2.7 million individuals obtained permanent immigrant status as a result of this legalisation programme. Those who became United States citizens were then able to apply for immigration of immediate family members. Since these family members are not subject to any numerical limits, immigration of this type showed a marked increase over 1995. In the future, it should account for an increasingly large proportion of total immigration.
Employment-based immigration
Since 1992, the year in which the 1990 Immigration Act (IMMACT 90) came into force, 140 000 permits have been made available each year, although usage sometimes falls below. Table II.37 gives details of the preference system for this entry category. Immigrants coming to work in the United States represented nearly 13 per cent of total immigration, a gure which includes both the worker and his/her accompanying family members. If the spouses and children of applicants are excluded, the percentage drops to 5.6 per cent.

Under US rules, a person eeing 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 United States which, for any given year, means a time-lag between the number of refugees who entered the country and those granted immigrant status. Refugee and asylum seekers granted immigrant status increased in 1996, after declining from 1993 to 1995.
179
Table II.37.
Employment-based immigration, by preference, scal years 1993-1996, United States

Thousands
1993 1994 1995 1996
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 Principals Spouses and children 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 1.7 5.1 13.1 29.5 13.8 15.7 87.7 12.8 9.6 28.4 26.9 26.9 0.1 4.4 5.6 8.2 3.6 4.6 0.6 0.2 0.3 0.1 79.2 67.8 147.0 16.3
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 21.0 0.3 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 4.1 0.1 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 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
US Department of Justice, 1996 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
Migrants allowed to settle permanently under the programme to increase the diversity of countries sending immigrants to the United States
This programme was introduced in the 1995 scal year, and operates like a lottery. Under the programme, 55 000 permanent permits are granted every year to nationals of countries which do not send many immigrants to the United States. In 1996, those beneting from this programme accounted for only 6.4 per cent of total entries. However, it generates huge interest: 4.7 million applications were submitted during the application month (February 1997) for the allocation of permits in 1998. This lottery means that it should be possible to grant more than 21 000 permits to nationals of African countries and more than 23 000 to nationals of some European countries.
Breakdown by region and country of origin

Mexico remained the leading country of origin of immigrants entering the United States, with a total of some 164 000 individuals in 1996, an increase of more than 80 per cent on 1995. While all countries are represented in US immigration ows, other large sending countries include the former Soviet Union, the Philippines, India, Vietnam, China and the Dominican Republic. After North America, Asia continued to provide the most immigrants. Over the last ten years, nationals from Asian countries have represented a relatively stable proportion of total immigrants (around 35 per cent). Europe (with an increase in immigration from the former Soviet Union, Poland and recently ex-Yugoslavia) and the Caribbean are two other important regions.
180
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 US State Departments waiting list. Most of those waiting are applicants sponsored by a family member, particularly the brothers and sisters of naturalized US citizens (1.5 million), and the spouses and unmarried children 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), in implementation of IMMACT 90. 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 Refugees and asylum seekers have been a subject of concern in the United States, in part because of large-scale arrivals of Haitians and Cubans in the past. In September 1994, an agreement was concluded between the 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 specic conditions were laid down as to the selection of candidates. The admission of refugees into the United States is subject to an overall ceiling subdivided into ve 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 1996, nearly 75 700 refugees were admitted to the United States whereas the ceiling was set at 90 000. Ceilings increased steadily from 67 000 in 1986 to 142 000 in 1992. Thereafter, ceilings decreased, with 1997 set at 78 000. For the scal year 1998 however, the ceiling increased slightly to 83 000. As for asylum seekers, there have been several new developments 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 efcient integrated processing system has been introduced, and all 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 remains pending for 180 days. Since asylum reform came into effect in January 1995, asylum ofces have been able to complete over 235 000 of the backlog cases. Although the number of pending les remains high, it is falling every year. At 30 September 1997 there was a backlog of less than 400 000 applications. During the 1997 scal year, some 54 000 new asylum requests were submitted. Temporary migration The number of temporary migrants, called non-immigrants, is increasing every year. In 1996, there were 25 million such entries. Although 19 million of these were simply tourists, temporary migrants are playing an increasing role in the US labour market. This is due not only to the scale of the numbers involved but also the length of stay. Many temporary visa holders stay in the country for more than a year and can, in some cases, remain for up to six years. 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.38). As a result of the recent discovery of several abuses in the allocation of H-1B category visas for speciality occupations, the Department of Labor is proposing certain reforms (yet to be enacted) which would make it possible to meet the temporary needs of companies in skilled professional staff without displacing American workers. Employers applying for H-1B visas would be required to attest that they had not laid off US workers in the occupations for which they seek foreign staff. They must also attest that they rst tried to recruit US workers. Another proposal is to reduce the authorised period of stay from six to three years, to better reect the temporary nature of the labour shortage. Illegal migration Illegal immigrants are either foreigners who enter the United States illegally or who are admitted legally for a temporary period and either fail to depart or violate other terms of their temporary visa.
181
Table II.38.
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 workers 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 49.2 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 53.6 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. Source: US Department of Justice, 1996 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
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 per cent); others include the countries of Central America and the Caribbean, Canada and Poland. In recent years, there has been an increase in the number of temporary migrants staying illegally in the United States beyond the date of expiry of their visa. According to INS estimates, some 41 per
cent 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, national-
182
ity, year of immigration and parental place of origin. In 1996, according to this survey, the foreign-born population was estimated at 24.6 million, more than 9 per cent of the total. By way of comparison, the foreign-born population in 1980 was 14.1 million, representing nearly 6 per cent of the total. Between 1970 and 1990, important changes took place in the geographical origin of the foreign-born: in 1970, nearly 60 per cent had been born in Europe, compared to 22 per cent 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 11 per cent of the labour force in 1996, compared to only 5 per cent in 1970.
Naturalisations
The number of naturalisations doubled rst between 1992 and 1995 (240 000 to 488 000) and then a second time during the year 1996, to reach more than 1 million. The gure for 1997 is expected to reach around 600 000. 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 under IRCA of 2.7 million aliens; 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; 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. Although generally popular, this last measure has also been criticised since it has led to a simplication of the testing of knowledge of the English language and the history and political institutions of the United States, as well as less stringent checking of criminal records. Consequently, INS has begun proceedings to revoke the citizenship of nearly 1 000 persons and nearly 5 000 other cases are being reviewed.
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 ve years. He must, through tests, prove that he knows the English language and the 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 per cent, compared with some 12.5 per cent for Canadians and 14.5 per cent for Mexicans. Mexico remains, nevertheless, the leading country of origin of naturalised citizens: in 1996, Mexicans accounted for nearly 25 per cent 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 benets. The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 restored Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Medicaid eligibility for legal immigrants who were receiving these benets 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 benets if they become disabled. However, the Welfare Acts bar on food stamps for most legal immigrants was not lifted by the Balanced Budget Act. Another major development was the 19 November 1997 enactment of the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act which provided an amnesty to nationals of Nicaragua and Cuba who had been in the United States for at least two years. It also allowed nationals of El Salvador, Guatemala, the former Soviet Union and certain Eastern European countries to apply for suspension of deportation under the more lenient rules that existed before the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996.
183
Part III
REPORT ON THE TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT OF FOREIGNERS IN SEVERAL OECD COUNTRIES1

INTRODUCTION The admission of permanent foreign workers into OECD countries is currently limited, particularly in European countries. However, the demand for temporary foreign workers is growing. The recruitment of temporary foreign workers can provide greater labour market exibility and help alleviate sectoral labour shortages in host countries. It also promotes the movement of managerial staff and highly skilled workers. This is especially true for enterprises that wish to set up abroad. In certain cases, particularly during a period of restricted immigration, it may be a means of reducing the employment of foreigners in an irregular situation. Temporary work can also be benecial to workers home countries by reducing unemployment. In addition, under certain conditions, temporary workers, upon return to their country, can use the experience gained abroad to contribute to an acceleration in the economic reform process and to broaden job opportunities. Thus, there may be less of a risk of highly skilled workers settling permanently abroad. Lastly, certain movements of temporary workers are carried out within the framework of international cooperation between receiving and sending countries. The main distinction between temporary and permanent employment is that temporary work is not normally considered a preliminary step for foreign workers to settle permanently in the host country. The following consequences ow from this principle: the temporary worker has a xed-term employment contract, most often for less than one year; the contract often species the authorised occupation, the geographical area in which the occupation may be carried out and the employer. Moreover, in most cases, the temporary worker must leave the country on expiry of the contract, may not seek other employment and is not entitled to family reunion. The rules regarding temporary work contracts vary, however, according to the country and category of temporary work. Most OECD countries have long been favourable to the temporary immigration of workers and believe that it has a benecial impact on host countries economies. In Canada, for example, a special legislative framework was introduced in 1973 to make it possible to meet the short-term needs of the Canadian labour market without jeopardising the employment prospects of permanent residents. In the United States, a distinction between permanent immigrants and non-immigrants has been introduced. Although there had been annual entry quotas for permanent immigrants since 1921, there had been no quota for non-immigrants since their numbers had been relatively small. However, this category had grown so rapidly since that time that the Immigration Act of 1990 set quotas for some non-immigrant categories. Growing awareness of the extent of temporary work has led lawmakers to regulate and even to restrict the temporary employment of foreigners, who had been able to use their temporary status to circumvent the more restrictive legislation on permanent immigration. This is what occurred in the Netherlands, for example, with the new Aliens Employment Act that entered into force on 1 September 1995. In Switzerland, since 1963 a system of quotas has been in place for foreign temporary workers, mostly seasonal workers. This report, based on eight case studies (Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States), examines the general characteristics of temporary work (1) and identies the main categories of workers by specifying for each the conditions of recruitment and residence (2). This rst synthesis compares the main types of legislation in place which regulate temporary work for foreigners, in particular, that of skilled and highly-skilled
185
workers. Appendix describes for each country studied the main categories of temporary workers, the conditions of their admission and recruitment, the length of stay authorised, restrictions regarding professional activity as well as the possibilities for family reunion and a change of status. Certain categories of temporary workers, for example students, have not been included in the table but are discussed in the body of the paper. 1. THE GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT
In the United States, the Immigration and Nationality Act lists 20 types of visas granted based on the category or preference in which the temporary worker is classied. These categories are in turn divided into sub-categories. This procedure no doubt has the advantage of exibility, since it makes it possible to create new categories or to change existing categories without completely overhauling existing legislation. However, this proliferation of categories can sometimes create confusion as to the scope of the various visas. There is also a major difference between those countries that set quotas and those that do not. Quotas are designed to ensure a balance between the national and foreign populations, to make it possible to improve the structure of the labour market and to create favourable conditions for the integration of immigrants. Quotas make it possible to limit or channel the entry of foreigners, including temporary workers. This is the case in Germany, Switzerland, the United Kingdom (only for the Seasonal Agricultural Workers Scheme) and the United States. In Australia, except for Working Holiday Makers (see below), France and the Netherlands, there is no quota system. Temporary workers are sometimes recruited on the basis of restrictive geographical criteria. For example, Switzerland has adopted the three circles model, comprising an inner circle designating the countries of the European Economic Area (EEA), whose nationals have great freedom of movement, a middle circle which currently includes Canada and the United States, from which a limited recruitment of workers is allowed, and, lastly, an outer circle all other countries for which work permits are granted on an exceptional basis only. The other countries studied do not, in principle, lay down specic geographical criteria limiting the areas from which temporary workers may be recruited. However, the United States, Canada and Mexico, under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), have dened an area in which some categories of workers may move more freely, and the European countries belonging to the European Union and the EEA have established areas in which there is complete freedom of movement for nationals of member countries. As is often the case for permanent immigrants, temporary workers and residents come predominantly from certain countries or regions. In Australia, for example, half of the temporary residents are from Member countries of the APEC (Asia-Pacic Co-
Temporary employment is not dened in the same way in all OECD countries. As a result, it is necessary to begin by pointing out the differences between these countries before embarking upon a detailed analysis of the temporary immigration of skilled or highly skilled staff. Some countries (France, Germany, Switzerland) dene temporary workers primarily as holders of temporary residence and work permits, while others, such as Australia and the United States, view them as foreigners admitted under a specic immigration programme for which a special visa is issued. In the United Kingdom, foreigners are in principle employed on a temporary basis and are therefore subject to the same rules as all foreigners.
a)
The different approaches to temporary employment
186
The countries studied in this report do not regulate the employment of foreign temporary workers in the same way. Some enact general legislation governing temporary employment, and rely on secondary instruments such as regulations or circulars to dene the various categories, while other countries provide for a wide range of possible situations in their legislation. For example, in Germany, temporary workers are all granted a general temporary residence permit and a specic type of work permit. The duration of work permits varies depending on the country and the occupation concerned. In Switzerland and France, residence permits also authorise people to work. In the Netherlands, employers must obtain a recruitment authorisation, but may only hire workers with a valid residence permit. In Canada, work permits are generally valid for one year, but it can vary in the case of asylum seekers who are authorised to work while their claim is being considered. In both cases, it is possible to extend the permit.
REPORT ON THE TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT OF FOREIGNERS IN SEVERAL OECD COUNTRIES
operation forum), in particular the United States and Japan. In 1994-95, the Temporary Residence Programme mainly attracted nationals of the United Kingdom, Japan, the United States and Canada. In the Netherlands, temporary workers come primarily from the United States, Japan, the Philippines, China, Turkey and Morocco. In Germany, nationals of the central and eastern European countries predominate. The occupations available to temporary workers vary across countries. A relatively wide range of sectors and skills are open to these workers in Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States. In Australia, temporary worker programmes aim at meeting the needs of the labour market. The three main programmes considered in this document (highly skilled workers, students and Working Holiday Makers) provide a relatively large range of work opportunities. At the same time, the new business visa (TBE visa) is designed to meet needs of enterprises with regard to skilled personnel. In Switzerland, the vast majority of temporary workers are seasonal workers. In general, the eight countries studied allow temporary workers to work for a specied period only, in a specic eld of activity, in a given geographical area and for the same employer. In addition, there are various provisions requiring employers to ensure that no nationals or permanent residents are able and willing to do the work in question. In other words, the labour market situation is taken into consideration, except for certain occupations. Canada may require that employment authorisations be validated, i.e. checked to ensure that the employment of a temporary worker is benecial to the Canadian economy and is not detrimental to employment opportunities for Canadians. In principle, labour standards and working conditions may not be less favourable for foreign workers than for Canadian nationals. Foreign workers may not be admitted for the purpose of breaking a strike or a labour conict (Canada, Germany, Netherlands, United States). In some cases temporary workers are required to speak the language of the host country (United Kingdom). Finally, in most cases a medical examination is required if the foreigner stays in the country longer than three months (France) or six months (Canada). Temporary workers will not be admitted unless a work permit has been issued. Permits are granted
by various bodies, most often by labour ministries or occasionally by special bodies in co-operation with the ministry (for example, Frances Oce international de migrations). In the Netherlands, the Minister of Social Affairs and Employment, which dened the rules regarding the issue, extension or withdrawl of work permits, has delegated this authority to the Central Employment Board. In some cases, special procedures are required, as in the United Kingdom.2 If employers do not comply with certain procedures, they are subject to penalties, as in France,3 the Netherlands4 and the United States. Countries are also concerned about social costs. In general, the presence of temporary workers should not impose nancial costs on residents (this is the case in Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States). For example, in Australia, temporary migrants are, in theory, intended to be replaced by Australian nationals or permanent residents trained in Australia. In Switzerland and France, temporary workers are not entitled to family reunion although exceptions exist for accompanying families of highly skilled workers. For example, in Switzerland, they are issued annual permits for a specied period. In Germany, family reunion is allowed only if the temporary worker has a residence permit or permanent resident status. However, temporary workers generally only have temporary residence permits that do not entitle them to family reunion. Other countries do not prohibit the entry of family members, but they do not allow them to work (United States, Canada). Some countries do allow them to enter the labour market provided they obtain a work permit (Australia, the Netherlands). In each country, some categories of temporary workers are exempted from work permits, either because of the type or duration of the work they are doing or because of international agreements. Examples of exemptions under agreements are nationals of EU and EEA countries and, in the United Kingdom, Commonwealth citizens who are authorised to enter or reside.5 Similar exemptions are provided under the Canada-US FTA and NAFTA.
b)
Skilled and highly skilled workers
Most countries encourage the temporary admission of skilled and highly skilled migrants. For example, Australia acknowledges explicitly that these workers are benecial to the country since they contribute their talents and abilities and transfer skills
187
to the local workforce. On the other hand, Australia does not favour the admission of low-skilled workers, and the same is true of the United Kingdom. The other countries studied do not state their preference for skilled workers so clearly, and temporary workers also include low-skilled migrants employed in a limited number of specic activities (agriculture, hotels and catering, construction). This is the case in Germany, Switzerland, France and the United States. Because of the differences, mentioned above, in the ways in which countries carry out the recruitment of temporary foreign workers, making comparisons among the various countries studied is not an easy task.
for instance in Switzerland and the United States; independent executives and senior managers (Australia, France, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States and the Netherlands); specialised technicians (Australia, France, United Kingdom, United States); researchers (Australia, France, Switzerland); investors (Australia, Canada, United States); physicians (Australia, United States); business people (Australia, Canada, France, United States); and keyworkers (staff with specialised skills) in Australia, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and the United States. Table III.1 presents the growth in the numbers of foreign workers in some of these categories over the period 1992 to 1996 for the eight countries studied. In the United States, ows of skilled workers represent more than 80 per cent of entries of temporary workers (not including intra-company transferees and treaty traders and investors). In Canada, the United Kingdom the share of the skilled temporary workers is close to 40 per cent of the total of entries of temporary workers. This percentage is smaller in the Netherlands, Australia and France and ranges between 15 and 30 per cent depending on the country. The heterogeneity in the categories of skilled workers makes comparisons among different countries difcult. However, over the period 1992 to 1995, the share of skilled and highly skilled workers in the total of temporary worker ows has grown in most countries. There are no quotas on the entry of highly qualied staff in Australia, the United Kingdom, France or the Netherlands. There are quotas, however, in Switzerland (except for residence permits of less than 4 months) and in the United States (for H-1B visas, but not for O visas). H-1B visas, which are issued to workers holding a university degree, are subject to an annual quota of 65 000. Since the introduction of a quota in 1992 for this category, the number of applicants has been lower than the limit, with the exception of scal year 1997. A distinction may be made between countries in which temporary workers are legally obliged to have both a residence and a work permit (France, Germany and Switzerland), and those countries that only require them to obtain a visa, if necessary, and a work permit (United Kingdom) or the necessary visa for the specic category of worker (Australia, United States). In the Netherlands a temporary worker needs a residence permit for employment purposes and the employer needs to obtain an
2.
CONDITIONS OF RECRUITMENT AND RESIDENCE OF THE MAIN CATEGORIES OF TEMPORARY WORKERS
By examining the main categories of temporary workers, it will be possible to analyse the issues presented in Part I in greater depth. However, these categories differ from one country to the next, and consequently they cannot all be examined in detail within the limited scope of this report. Four main categories are to be found in most of the countries: (highly) skilled workers, seasonal workers, trainees and students. In addition, there are three distinctive cases that are deserving of mention: Working Holiday Makers (Australia and the United Kingdom), entertainers, and teachers and researchers.
a)
Skilled and highly skilled workers
188
This relatively heterogeneous category most often comprises individuals with university degrees, or extensive experience in a given eld. The term highly skilled is generally used in most of the countries studied. In France, highly skilled workers are recruited through ordinary procedures or as workers on secondment. German law refers to the category of workers under contracts for work or services, which is similar to the French concept. In general, in the eight countries studied, the category of highly skilled staff is not always precisely dened. It is divided into a number of sub-categories that may vary from one country to another. For example, the following classications may be considered as belonging to this category: highly skilled specialists,
Table III.1.
Inows of temporary skilled workers by main category in selected OECD countries, 1992-1996
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Australia Skilled temporary resident programme1 % of total temporary workers2 Canada3 Workers obliged to validate their job4 Professionals5 Reciprocal employment5, 6 Workers with signicant benets for Canada5 Total for the above four categories of workers % of total temporary workers France Workers on secondment7 Researchers7 Total for the above two categories of workers % of total temporary workers8 Germany Workers employed under a contract for services9 % of total temporary workers Netherlands10 % of total temporary workers United-Kingdom Long-term permits11 % of total temporary workers United States12 Professionals (visa H-1B) North American Free Trade Agreement workers (visa TN)13 Workers of distinguished abilities (visa O) Total for the above three categories of workers % of total temporary workers14
14.6 17.1 66.4 5.3 5.6 4.6 81.8 35.5 0.9 0.9 1.8 5.0 115.1 .. 1.9 26.4 12.7 42.2 110.2 12.5 0.5 123.2 70.1
14.9 20.3 52.0 6.3 5.3 4.6 68.1 37.0 0.9 1.0 1.9 5.6 63.3 25.2 1.8 25.7 12.5 42.7 92.8 16.6 3.1 112.5 61.7
14.2 18.0 43.4 7.4 4.4 5.4 60.6 35.0 0.6 1.4 2.0 6.5 48.4 23.1 2.0 29.4 13.4 44.6 105.9 19.8 5.0 130.7 62.0
14.3 18.4 42.2 7.8 5.0 5.0 59.9 43.7 0.8 1.3 2.2 7.3 56.2 22.1 1.5 27.8 15.5 43.7 117.6 23.9 6.0 147.5 66.8
15.4 20.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.8 1.2 2.0 6.7 47.3 17.3 .. .. 16.9 44.8 144.5 27.0 7.2 178.6 70.2
Note: The categories of temporary workers differ from country to country. Data and percentages are therefore not fully comparable. The gures for total temporary workers refer to the total work or residence permits issued in Canada, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States, to the sum of temporary programmes in Australia (excluding students), to the total provisional work permits issued plus seasonal workers in France and to guest workers, contract workers and seasonal workers in Germany. 1. Data refer to scal years (July to June of the given year) and include accompanying dependants. 2. As a per cent of temporary residents programmes (Skilled Employment, Social/Cultural and International Relations Programmes). 3. Data refer to the number of employment authorisations issued. Data may be overestimated because migrants can obtain several authorisations over the given year. 4. The list of jobs that can be validated excludes unskilled jobs, those restricted to Canadian citizens and those with a high rate of unemployment. 5. These workers are exempt from validation by an employment service of the Government. The authorisations are usually delivered for 9 months. 6. This category concerns professors and researchers admitted under bilateral agreements and some specialists. 7. Holders of a provisional work permit (APT). 8. As a per cent of total holders of a provisional work permit, students, trainees and seasonal workers. 9. Workers recruited under bilateral agreements usually for 2 years. 10. Figures include intra-company transferees and managers. Authorisations are usually granted for the duration of the contract with a maximum of three years. 11. Long-term permits (one year or more) are mainly approved for highly skilled and qualied workers. 12. Data refer to scal years (October to September of the given year). Data may be overestimated because they include multiple entries by the same person over the given year. 13. Figures include family members. 14. As a per cent of total temporary workers (excluding intracompany transferees 140 460 in 1996 and treaty traders/investors 138 570 in 1996 including dependants). Sources: Australia: Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (DIEA); Canada: Citizenship and Immigration Canada; France: Ofce des migrations Arbeit; Netherlands: Centraal Bureau Arbeidsvoorziening, Rijswijk (Z-H); internationales, Annuaire des migrations 1996; Germany: Bundesanstalt fur United Kingdom: Department of Employment; United States: United States Department of Justice, 1996 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
employment permit. Ultimately, the conditions required for the issue of these permits or visas are the most appropriate criteria for making compari-
sons between countries. Among the conditions generally required for the entry and residence of highly qualied staff, only ve will be examined.
189
The employment situation and national preference

Some countries require that the employment situation be taken into account and that preference be given to national workers before admitting categories of temporary migrants, while other countries do not. In Australia, Labor Market Testing (LMT) is the procedure used by employers (sponsors) to show that they have tried to recruit a worker on the Australian labour market. They do this by advertising in newspapers and employment agencies. Sponsors must provide information on who responded to the advertisement and why the applicants were not hired. These requirements do not apply to business people, but at the same time, their activities must not be in competition with those of Australian residents. In the United States, the employment of certain foreigners, particularly lower-skilled, must not have an adverse impact on the working conditions of United States workers, and employers must have notied the appropriate trade union. In the United Kingdom, employers must show that the post cannot be lled by a United Kingdom or EEA national by proving that the post has been advertised widely enough within the previous six months and that no satisfactory response had been received. This is also the case in Canada, where the validation procedure veries that the entry of a foreign worker would not be detrimental to the employment of resident Canadians (see Appendix). In France, although the employment situation theoretically constitutes grounds for refusal to admit workers on secondment, the authorities are required to give favourable consideration to applications by senior executives with a salary in excess of FF 21 000 per month, which most often amounts to a waiver of the condition. Furthermore, the employment situation is not taken into account for installers and specialised technicians admitted to install or commission equipment sold by a foreign rm. The priority given to national workers is also waived in the Netherlands for keyworkers in a multinational enterprise, and in Switzerland for highly skilled workers. Lastly, in Germany, workers under contracts for work or services benet from a special system. This is a traditional practice in Germany based on international agreements for the completion of one or more work or service contracts. The number of workers admitted is determined by quotas for each country. These agreements have mainly been
signed with central and eastern European countries6 and are a means of supporting the economic reforms under way in these countries. In 1995, the overall quota was approximately 56 000 workers, of whom one half were Polish. The labour market situation in Germany may not constitute grounds for refusal to admit this category of workers. Nevertheless, work permits are not granted in districts of the national employment ofce in which unemployment is significantly higher than the national average.
Work permits
In Australia, temporary workers must have a sponsor. It is the sponsor who must provide the necessary proof that the entry of the highly skilled worker will be benecial to Australias economic development. Sponsors must also assume nancial responsibility for foreign workers so as to limit the social and nancial costs borne by the community. Generally, the sponsors are also the employers. They are responsible for compliance with the workers conditions of entry as well as with the provisions of labour law. This condition is not required of business people holding a TBE visa (Temporary Business Entry). The length of stay allowed and the procedures for obtaining work permits vary in Australia depending on the category of skilled workers, but usually they are granted for two years, and may be renewed once, up to a maximum of four years. In general, for investors, senior managers and skilled technicians, this renewal may be denied on the grounds of the employment situation. Medical practitioners may stay only for two years. Since 1995, business people are eligible for a special visa (Temporary Business Entry) which initial duration (renewable) varies from three months to four years. In France, provisional work permits are issued for a nine-month period, and may be renewed once for a further two years on an exceptional basis. These permits are only valid for six months for installers and specialised technicians. In the United States, the length of stay permitted varies according to the category of visa, although in principle it is always for a limited time (ranges from one year to up to 10 years, in exceptional cases). In the Netherlands, the employment permit is valid for one year, and may be renewed. The worker who has held a valid residence permit for employment purposes for a continuous three-year period and who has not established his or her place of residence outside the Netherlands, will receive a new
190
residence permit with no employment restrictions. Employment permits for highly qualied employees are valid for the duration of the employment, with a maximum of three years. In Germany, work permits issued to individuals recruited under contracts for work or services are valid for a maximum of two, or, exceptionally, three years. Workers who install or carry out maintenance, repair work or tests, on equipment supplied by a foreign enterprise are not required to have work permits provided they do not remain in Germany for more than three months. In Switzerland, work permits are limited to a maximum of 18 months for short-term residence permits and generally one year for yearly permits for a specied period (up to four years under certain circumstances), renewable each year. At the end of a four-year period, the holder may request a renewable one-year permit. In the United Kingdom, work permits are normally only granted to individuals classied as highly qualied workers on the basis of their educational or professional qualications. Workers must have at least two years professional experience. The permit may be renewed up to a maximum of four years. Keyworkers with specialised skills may also be granted work permits provided their skills are not readily available in the United Kingdom and that the jobs of other people in the rm depend on them. These work permits are issued for a maximum period of 36 months. In Australia, France, Switzerland, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, work permits are limited to a single employer, and any change of employer must be authorised. In Australia, holders of a business visa can easily change employers. Moreover, geographical mobility must be authorised in France and Switzerland.
Accompanying family and family reunion

In Australia, Canada and the United States, family members may be authorised to accompany the visa holder. In addition, in Australia they are entitled to work. In the United Kingdom, family reunion is permitted if the conditions regarding resources and accommodations are met. This is also the case in the Netherlands. In France, however, temporary workers are not entitled to family reunion, but high-level staff may benet from the accompanying family procedure that allows individuals on secondment to be accompanied by their spouse and children provided they have adequate accommodation. However, accompanying family members are not entitled to work, unlike families having family reunion rights. In Switzerland family reunion is not possible for foreigners holding short-term residence permits. This is also the case in Germany for workers under contract for work or services.
Exemptions from the work permit requirement

Some categories of workers primarily highly skilled staff are exempt from the work permit requirement or may not be refused a permit on the grounds of the employment situation. This is the case for business people and sole representatives in the United Kingdom and for the sole representatives of foreign rms in France and executive managers in Switzerland. In the United States, temporary workers admitted under trade treaties are entitled to visa E, which allows them to remain in the country for an unlimited period of time. In Canada, some people entering for business purposes do not require work authorisation, provided they do not remain in Canada longer than nine months. Foreign workers who come to Canada to oversee the installation or maintenance of special equipment purchased or leased abroad are not exempt from the need to obtain the employment authorisation, but validation is not required.
The obligation to leave the country

On expiry of the work permit, foreign workers are required to leave the country (France, Germany, United States). In several countries, e.g. Australia and the United states, it is possible for workers to change their status and in some cases they can obtain permanent resident status. Exemptions are also provided for under Canadian law. In the Netherlands, after three years uninterrupted legal employment, the foreign worker is free on the Dutch labour market. After ve years of legal residence, permanent settlement is possible.
b)
Seasonal workers
In most of the countries studied, foreign seasonal workers are employed primarily in the sectors of agriculture, hotels and catering and construction, i.e. highly seasonal activities. The length of stay for seasonal work contracts is generally limited to between three and six months. The number of seasonal workers (see Table III.2) varies by country and has tended to decline over the past few years. Out
191
Table III.2.
Inows of seasonal workers in selected OECD countries, 1992-1996

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Australia Canada (Caribbean and Mexican Seasonal Agricultural Workers Programme) France2 Germany3 Netherlands4 Switzerland5 United Kingdom Working Holiday Makers6 Seasonal agricultural workers7 United States (Agricultural workers H-2A)
1.
(WHM1)
25 873 11 13 212 1 93 115 597 442 000 118
25 557 11 212 11 283 181 037 900 71 829 21 659 4 230 14 628
29 595 10 443 10 339 155 217 500 61 102 31 604 4 440 13 185
35 391 10 879 9 352 192 766 53 707 36 013 4 660 11 394
40 273 .. 8 766 220 894 45 259 33 045 5 540 9 635
24 100 3 560 16 390
Data refer to scal years (July to June of the given year). The Working Holiday Maker program is restricted to young people aged 18 to 25. Authorised length of stay is one year (not renewable). Employment for more than 3 months with the same employer is not permitted. 2. Duration of the contract cannot exceed 6 months in a period of 12 consecutive months. The contract is restricted to an occupation, a geographical zone and one employer. 3. Contracts of seasonal workers cannot exceed 3 months per year. 4. Admission conditions are very restrictive. The length of the activity cannot exceed 6 months (limited possibility for renewal). 5. End of August of each year. 6. Applicants are admitted for 2 years (no renewal). Employment is incidental to the holiday, i.e. person may not pursue a career in the United Kingdom. 7. Including readmissions. Such persons need to be students in full-time education, aged between 18-25 years inclusive (except if returning by specic invitation), and have a Home Ofce work card. They are admitted until 30 November of the years in question. Sources: Australia: Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (DIEA); Canada: Citizenship and Immigration Canada; France: Ofce des migrations Arbeit; Netherlands: Centraal Bureau Arbeidsvoorziening, Rijswijk (Z-H); internationales, Annuaire des migrations 1996; Germany: Bundesanstalt fur Switzerland: Ofce fed eral des etrangers; United Kingdom: Department of Employment; United States: United States Department of Justice, 1996 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
of the eight countries studied, Germany and Switzerland are the two which recruit, by far, the most seasonal workers. Seasonal workers are a major category of temporary workers in Switzerland, but only a small one in the United Kingdom, essentially because it is a youth mobility scheme and hotel and catering staff are included in the keyworker category. In the Netherlands, the decline in the number of seasonal workers is largely due to a sharp reduction in inows of agricultural workers. Australia apparently does not have a category of seasonal workers, although such workers do exist under a different heading, since young foreigners who come to the country under the Working Holiday Makers (WHM) programme may be employed in seasonal jobs. In the United States, temporary agricultural workers entered during 1942-64 under the bracero programmes. They are now required to have an H2-A visa. The H-2B visa is issued to temporary nonagricultural workers and is subject to two conditions: not only the workers stay, but the job itself must be temporary, and employers must present a certicate attesting to the fact that no national worker was qualied or available for the job (labor certication).
In Germany the employment of foreign seasonal workers is restricted to the economic sectors of agriculture and forestry, hotels and catering, the processing of fruits and vegetables and to sawmills. In France, nearly all seasonal workers are employed in agriculture (95 per cent). In Canada, seasonal agricultural workers are employed under programmes based on agreements with certain countries. Seasonal work is sometimes limited by quotas and work permits issued on certain conditions.
Quotas
Some countries set quotas limiting the number of seasonal workers recruited. This is the case in Australia for workers admitted under the WHM programme since scal year 1995/96. In the United States, the number of H2-B visas granted to seasonal (non-agricultural) temporary workers is limited to 66 000, but this numerical limitation has not yet been reached. There are also quotas in Switzerland, where, in addition, recruitment is limited to EEA nationals, mainly workers recruited under bilateral agreements with Italy and Spain (in addition, since 1991, restrictions have been placed on the entry of nationals of the former Yugoslavia). In principle, there are no quotas in France and Germany, but in France employers who recruit Moroccan or Tunisian
192
workers may not increase their numbers without prior authorisation.
Work permits
The duration of work permits for seasonal workers is limited to three months in Germany and to a maximum of three years in Canada and the United States, although in the United States work permits for temporary non-agricultural workers are valid for one year only. In the United Kingdom, work permits for keyworkers can also be granted for up to three years. Work permits are issued for shorter periods in France and Switzerland. In France, provisional work permits are granted for six months and may be extended to eight months for some occupations. They are valid for a minimum of four months for workers from Morocco and Tunisia. In Switzerland, work permits are issued to workers for a maximum of nine months, with a requirement that they leave Switzerland for three months of the year. In the Netherlands, work permits for seasonal work are issued for a maximum of 24 weeks. This permit is not renewable. In the United Kingdom, seasonal agricultural workers must obtain an authorisation from the Home Ofce although they are not issued work permits. The maximum length of stay is from the date of admission in the spring until 30 November of the year in question. Work permits are not required in Germany for individuals who are sent by an employer based abroad and who remain less than three months in the country for the following activities: to assemble and maintain plants or machines that have been delivered, are ready for use and serve commercial purposes; to accept plants, machines or other items that have been ordered or to be instructed in their use; to take part in a company training course in the context of export delivery or licence contracts; to set up, dismantle and look after exhibition stands owned by the foreign company or render comparable services which no business partner in Germany can provide.
50 years old if they are recruited through an anonymous contract, although this condition does not apply to individuals recruited by name. There is no age limit in Germany other than that the worker must be at least 18 years old. In the Netherlands an age limit exists (18-45 years) for all foreign workers with the exemption of seasonal workers. The admission of seasonal workers may also be conditional upon an international agreement, as in Germany, where agreements have been signed with Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia. In France, agreements have been signed with Morocco, Poland, Senegal, Tunisia and the former Yugoslavia. Switzerland has also entered into agreements with Italy and Spain. Finally, in the United Kingdom, seasonal workers are only admitted under one approved scheme. In the United States, it is necessary for receiving H-2A and H-2B visas to obtain a labor certication, delivered by the Department of Labor, attesting to the fact that no national worker was qualied or available for the job. Still other conditions may be required, such as the requirement that working conditions and pay be identical to those of nationals (this is the case in the eight countries studied), mandatory registration for social security (France, Germany) or a written employment contract and guaranteed accommodation (Germany, United States and the Netherlands). In the United States, temporary agricultural workers must be provided with free accommodation and transport and low-cost meals; they must be employed for at least threequarters of the duration of the contract.
The employment situation

In all countries, the employment situation may constitute grounds for refusal to admit seasonal workers. This means that they may be hired only if no other worker (either a national or permanent foreign resident) is available and willing to accept the position offered. This principle is enforced very restrictively in the Netherlands, since no work permits at all were issued for this category in 1995.
The limited scope of the work permit

The authorisation to engage in a seasonal activity is limited, unless otherwise provided for by bilateral agreements, to a single type of activity (France, Switzerland, United Kingdom) with a single employer (France, Switzerland, United Kingdom),
Special conditions
The admission of seasonal workers is sometimes subject to special conditions. For example, in France, foreign workers must be between 17 and
193
and is often restricted to a specic geographical area (France, Switzerland).
Family reunion
Seasonal workers are not entitled to family reunion in France, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland and in the United Kingdom. In the United States, families of holders of H-2A and H-2B visas may enter the country but do not have the right to work.
new worker. Some countries distinguish between several categories of trainees. Australia has two subclasses of visas for trainees. The rst (visa subclass 442) provides for the temporary entry of people who come for training in their current area of employment. The second (visa sub-class 457) is granted to highly skilled personnel (managers, specialists) participating in company exchange programmes or specialised training. In France, there are two main categories: trainees under general legislation, who come to France for vocational or language training, and trainees under bilateral agreements. In the United Kingdom, a distinction is made between trainees who are admitted for vocational training (they will normally be graduates and will be studying for a specic professional or specialist qualication) and work experience trainees (who should normally already have relevant experience or the appropriate academic or vocational qualications which will enable them to benet from the work experience undertaken; no acquisition of qualications is involved and employment is in a supernumerary capacity. In the Netherlands, a distinction is made between trainees with a job in their country of origin who come to the Netherlands in order to further their professional expertise and knowledge and trainees who come within the framework of their ongoing vocational training. In the United States, there are several types of visas, in particular J-1 for student trainees and H-3 for trainees in industry. The number of trainees is, in general, relatively limited (see Table III.3) and the length of stay is usually for 12 to
Obligation to leave the country on expiry of the contract

Seasonal workers must generally leave the country on expiry of their contract. However, Switzerland allows seasonal workers who have resided in the country for a total of 36 months over four consecutive years to request that their temporary residence permit be converted into an annual permit. This option is not subject to quota restrictions and allows for family reunion. In practice, however, only Italian nationals benet from this measure.
c)
Trainees
Trainees are individuals who come to work in an enterprise to improve their professional skills or to learn the language. This category is found in all the countries examined. However, in all these countries the traineeship must be temporary and may not be a rst step towards the permanent settlement of the
Table III.3.
Inows of foreign trainees in selected OECD countries, 1992-1996

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Australia1 France2 Germany (Guest workers)3 Netherlands Switzerland4 United Kingdom5 United States (Industrial trainees H-3)
1.
4 888 985 5 057 1 200 1 609 3 407 3 352
3 984 905 5 771 1 300 972 3 467 3 126
4 395 590 5 529 1 300 907 3 791 3 075
4 268 438 5 478 1 100 855 4 405 2 787
4 830 520 4 341 .. 679 3 969 2 986
194
Data refer to scal years (July to June of the given year). The Occupational Trainee programme allows entry of people for occupational training which is compatible with their background. 2. Trainees who benet from a provisional work permit only valid for one year; can be exceptionally extended to 18 months. 3. Workers aged 18 to 40, recruited under bilateral agreements, for 12 to 18 months. 4. Workers recruited under bilateral agreements according to professional experience usually for one year; can be exceptionally extended to 18 months. 5. Training and Work Experience Scheme (TWES). Persons recruited for 12 months (Work experience) or up to 3 years (Training). These periods can be extended by another 12 months or up to 3 years respectively depending on the results obtained. Sources: Australia: Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (DIEA); France: Ofce des migrations internationales, Annuaire des migrations 1996; Germany: Bundesanstalt fur Arbeit; Netherlands: Centraal Bureau Arbeidsvoorziening, Rijswijk (Z-H); Switzerland: OFIAMT; United Kingdom: Department of Employment; United States: United States Department of Justice, 1996 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
18 months. In most cases, the recruitment is carried out within the framework of bilateral agreements and the professional occupation varies according to the country.
Germany. These trainees have completed a vocational training course and take up temporary employment to improve their job and foreign language skills. They must be between the ages of 18 and 40 and have a work contract. Trainees are only admitted to France as part of an exchange programme between a French and a foreign enterprise or under bilateral agreements. The latter provide for age limits between 18 and 30 or 35 depending on the agreements. There are similar age limits in the United Kingdom for work experience traineeships, but not for vocational traineeships. In France and Germany, trainees are gainfully employed and are subject to the same conditions as national workers, while in the United Kingdom trainees are unpaid and only receive an allowance to cover their personal needs. In the Netherlands, the rule that a vacant post must be advertised for ve weeks is waived for trainees, as is the requirement that employers pay a full months wages even if the job is for less than one month. In the United States, as in the United Kingdom, the traineeship should not be the same as one found in the applicants home country and the trainee should not simply be assigned to carry out the same tasks as ordinary workers. Trainees should not be productive and should master skills from which they will benet after leaving the United States.
Quotas
The number of trainees admitted is subject to quotas in Germany, France and Switzerland, but this is not the case in the United Kingdom or the United States (H-3 visas). The number of trainees admitted is normally determined through bilateral agreements.7
Work permits
Two approaches are taken as regards work permits. Some countries require trainees to have a work permit, while others waive this requirement. Nevertheless, for both approaches, exceptions may be made for various categories of trainees. Germany (when the traineeship lasts longer than three months), France,8 both for trainees under general legislation and trainees under bilateral agreements, and Switzerland, require trainees to have a work permit. However, the United Kingdom does not require a work permit for certain vocational traineeships (e.g. student nurses, post-graduate doctors and dentists). In Germany and Switzerland, these permits, when required, are valid for a maximum of eighteen months. However, in Germany, foreign specialists and managers temporarily working as part of their initial or advanced training who are recipients of government grants (government trainees) may be issued work permits valid for a maximum of up to two years. The maximum validity of work permits is normally one year with extensions permitted in Canada, two years in the United States, one year in France9 (although it may be extended up to eighteen months on an exceptional basis) and in the United Kingdom for work experience traineeships. In the Netherlands, the maximum validity of employment permits for vocational trainees is one year and for work experience trainees 24 weeks.
The employment situation

The extent to which the employment situation is taken into account varies across countries. It may not constitute grounds for refusal to admit trainees in Germany, the Netherlands and France unders international agreements. The same applies in Switzerland. In the United States, trainees are only accepted provided they are not depriving a United States resident of a training opportunity. Trainees may not change employers in France, Switzerland, the Netherlands or the United Kingdom.
Special conditions
In Germany, worker trainees are admitted under international agreements that provide for reciprocity, but most often (except for Switzerland) there is a one-way ow of foreign trainees into
Family reunion
Family reunion is not allowed in France and Switzerland. Trainees spouses and children under 18 may be authorised to enter the United Kingdom.
195
The obligation to leave the country

Trainees must leave the country at the end of their traineeship, and must sign a document to this effect on arrival in France. In the United Kingdom, they may not reapply for another traineeship programme or a new work permit until they have worked abroad for at least two years. This foreign residency requirement also applies to certain trainees in the US programme. In the Netherlands, the trainee must provide a document from his or her employer in his or her own country stating that the latter will re-employ the trainee at the end of the traineeship abroad. This period is one year in Switzerland.
Work permits
Foreign students who work must generally have a work permit. In Canada, the validity of the permit corresponds to the duration of the studies. In France, students are granted a provisional work permit valid for a period of six to nine months, which is renewable. In Germany, work permits are not required when foreign students are receiving training or have a holiday job lasting less than three months. For student trainees, this period is extended to six months per year, provided that the training is directly relevant to the students technical studies, that the Federal Labour Ofce has agreed and that the student is participating in an international exchange programme. In France, foreign students admitted to complete a training programme that lasts less than three months and is relevant to their studies may not be denied a work permit on the grounds of the employment situation. In the Netherlands, the employment situation does not constitute grounds for refusal in the case of seasonal work in June, July and August or work not exceeding 10 hours per week. However, in France and Germany, the employment situation may constitute grounds for refusal of work permits to students who are not trainees.
d)
Students
The principle is that foreign students should have only limited access to the labour market. Countries either prohibit student work or subject it to conditions such as the ban on working during the rst year of study (France, United States). In the United Kingdom, students may only take casual work and must receive authorisation to so. The same is true of a training course that is relevant to their studies. There are special rules in France and the United Kingdom for students studying medicine and pharmacy. In principle, Canada allows students to work, with the condition that the job is related to their studies. In this case the work permit is not necessary. Thus, the employment situation may not constitute grounds for refusal. Australia allows students to work full time during the holidays and 20 hours per week during the academic year. In the Netherlands, foreign students are allowed to do seasonal work during June, July and August or work for 10 hours per week during the whole year. The rule is the same in France where, as from the second year of study, students are allowed to work no more than 20 hours per week provided that the institution with which they are registered provides them with social security coverage specically designed for students. In the United States, students with F-1 visas may work on-campus for 20 hours per week and may work full time during the holidays. Work permits may be granted for practical training programmes or on an exceptional basis to students who encounter unforeseeable nancial difculties if there is no possibility of work on-campus.
Family reunion
In Canada, post-secondary and university students may be accompanied by their spouses and dependants. Spouses may work provided they can prove insufcient nancial resources. In addition, they must obtain a work permit (the employment situation does not enter into consideration) and they must not be students themselves. In France, the members of a students family may work regardless of the employment situation. In the United Kingdom, family reunion is authorised and the spouse may work if the student has been admitted for 12 months or more.
Obligation to leave the country on completing studies

In principle, students must leave the country on completion of their studies. However, Canada allows students to accept a job related to their studies after graduation for a non-renewable period of no more than one year provided they are granted a work permit, for which the employment situation may not be taken into account.
196
e)
Working Holiday Makers
f)
Entertainers and sportspersons
In Australia and the United Kingdom, there is a special category for young foreigners (in the United Kingdom, they must be Commonwealth citizens). These young people (Working Holiday Makers, WHMs) come for extended holidays during which they are allowed to work for a maximum of 2 years (United Kingdom) or one year (Australia). They must have the means to pay for their return journey and do not have recourse to public funds. A work permit is not required. In the United Kingdom scheme the intention to take employment must be incidental to the holiday. Australia denes this scheme more broadly, since WHMs are considered as one of the main categories of temporary workers. This scheme is based on a series of reciprocal agreements with Canada, Ireland, Japan, Korea, Malta, the Netherlands. Nationals of other countries are not automatically excluded, but are only accepted under certain conditions. The aim of this scheme is essentially cultural, i.e. to allow young foreigners between the age of 18 and 25 (up to 30 years under certain conditions) to discover Australia and at the same time to receive some nancial compensation. WHMs work in temporary or seasonal jobs in agriculture, trade or services. This special category is to some extent an exception to Australias general policy, which is aimed at limiting temporary immigration to highly skilled staff. Because of the schemes success (more than 35 000 visas were issued in 1994-95), Australia had to impose a quota of 42 000 in 1995-96 and of 50 000 the following year. During the previous scal year, to WHMs. Young people participating in this scheme are authorised to stay in Australia for a period of 12 months, not renewable. However, they may only work three months with the same employer and must have sufcient means to pay for their return journey and to support themselves. They are also only permitted to work a maximum of 6 months during the 12 months in Australia permitted by the visa. The United States has established summer schemes for students that allow them to work in the country on a temporary basis under a category J visa. There are also cultural exchange programmes that include traineeships or temporary jobs for which foreigners have, since 1990, been granted a Q visa, which is not subject to quotas.
There is a wide range of temporary jobs for these two categories of workers in highly specic elds that are subject to special regulations. In Canada, performing artists are exempted from work permits if they belong to a group of at least 15 people. This is also the case for sportspersons. In the Netherlands, no employment situation considerations are applied in the case of entertainers and musicians appearing for a short period. In France, however, performing artists and musicians are required to have a provisional work permit that is normally valid for only one year, and for which the employment situation may constitute grounds for refusal. For this category, as well for high-level sportspersons, the United Kingdom also requires a specic work permit. It may be denied on the grounds of the employment situation and is only valid for a limited period (twelve months or less depending on the individual case). The United States has introduced the P visas for eminent entertainers and high-level sportspersons (see Appendix). This visa is not subject to a quota. The length of stay is limited to the time necessary to complete the series of performances given by the entertainer. In some cases, the relevant trade unions must be consulted. Australia does not include entertainers and sportspersons in the category of temporary workers because of the short time they stay and the small number of individuals concerned.
g)
Teachers and researchers
In Australia, researchers and university teachers are allowed to stay four years and extensions are granted provided they remain with the institution that originally sponsored them. In France, the employment situation may not constitute grounds for refusal to admit foreign teachers and foreign language assistants. In the United Kingdom, foreign exchange teachers are not required to have a work permit, but may not stay for more than two years. However, researchers who have not been invited by a research institution must have a work permit, although the validation procedure is not required (see above). In the Netherlands, the employment situation does not constitute grounds for refusal in the case of university teachers if their length of stay will not exceed one year. In the case of trainee research assistants or trainee researchers at university institutions, an employment permit is issued for
197
three years. In the case of post graduate researchers a permit is issued for two years. In the United States, teachers and researchers may enter under a J visa, which allows them to come into the country on a temporary basis to participate in teaching, research or training programmes that have been arranged in advance. CONCLUSION The comparative analysis of the temporary employment of foreigners in several OECD countries has made it possible to point to a number of common features in the various legislative provisions in this eld. The most important of these is the generally favourable attitude of the countries studied towards temporary foreign labour. The admission of skilled or highly skilled temporary foreign workers makes it possible to introduce greater exibility into the labour market. The same is true of the employment of seasonal workers in sectors that are highly seasonal in nature (agriculture, hotels and catering, construction). However, the fact that these countries all have a favourable attitude towards temporary workers does not mean that their legislation is identical. Quite the reverse; this study has shown the great diversity of the conditions imposed on the employment of foreign temporary workers. The amount of time these workers are allowed to stay, for example, varies considerably depending on the category and country concerned. It generally ranges from three months to four years, and in some cases may be renewable. However, when workers are allowed to stay longer than several years, it is legitimate to ask whether the term temporary is really appropriate to describe the situation. Some workers are also entitled to change their status. In the countries where this is possible, temporary workers may be able to obtain permanent worker status, which means that temporary migration is a rst step towards permanent residence. This being the case, one may wonder whether this practice should be encouraged or would be better dropped. While some view it as a pre-selection of future candidates for permanent immigration, others think that the admission of temporary workers for increasingly longer stays makes it possible to circumvent the restrictive legislation regarding permanent immigration.
One may also ask whether the countries studied are not overly dependent on temporary foreign labour, both in terms of numbers, skill levels and the specic sectors involved. Is the labour recruited to meet the needs of seasonal activities or under bilateral agreements regarding workers on projects absolutely indispensable? Is the social protection of temporary workers adequately ensured? One may also question whether the provisions on labour standards and equal treatment with national workers are really enforced for some categories of temporary workers. Since it is not always easy to verify that this is the case, this type of migration may be directly detrimental to enterprises and employment at local level. Lastly, in all the countries studied, some movements of temporary workers are carried out through international agreements between developed and less developed countries. This kind of co-operation has become more widespread, especially in Europe in the framework of co-operation agreements between the countries of the European Economic Area and central and eastern European countries. The purpose of these ows of temporary labour is not so much to meet specic job needs as to transfer know-how and establish lasting ties between countries, regions or enterprises with a view to opening up and developing international economic relations. This synthesis report has provided a detailed analysis of the nature and magnitude of temporary foreign workers migration. The issues raised in this document concerning the status of these workers, the length of stay, the conditions of their employment and their distribution by sector, show that the analysis of this phenomenon goes beyond the simple notion of categorising immigration ows as either temporary or permanent. The immigration of temporary foreign workers is playing a growing role in the labour markets in some OECD countries. In addition, these types of movements are increasingly taking place within the framework of economic relations and co-operation between countries of emigration and immigration. For these reasons, this rst comparative study of temporary foreign workers should be extended to include additional OECD Member countries and further analysis should be carried out on this topic.
198
NOTES
1. This summary report was drafted by the Secretariat with the assistance of Mme Nicole Guimezanes, a Consultant to the OECD. 2. The First-Tier Application Procedure is a simplied procedure introduced in 1991 for certain specic activities allowing employers to complete only Part I of the work permit application. They simply give their reasons for recruiting a foreign worker, while in other cases employers must prove that it is necessary for them to recruit a foreign worker and complete Part II of the form (Second-Tier Application Procedure). 3. The maximum penalty is three years imprisonment and a ne of FF 20 000. 4. A ne of Gld 10 000 or six months imprisonment if the employer is a natural person, a ne of Gld 30 000 if a legal person. Moreover, if the employer has not applied for an employment permit, the authorities assume that the worker has been employed for at least six months, unless there is proof to the contrary. This means that the employer must pay the wages due for this period if they have not yet been paid. 5. On the grounds that a grandparent was born in the United Kingdom, Gibraltarians, the spouses and children under 18 of work permit holders or persons exempt from the permit requirement.
6. Germany has entered into agreements concerning workers under contracts for work or services with the following countries: Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, the Republic of Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, the Czech Republic, the Slovak Republic, Turkey and the former Yugoslavia. 7. In the course of this study, it has been possible to note a number of bilateral agreements entered into by some of the eight countries: thus, Germany has agreements with Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Poland, Romania, Russia, the Slovak Republic and Switzerland; France, with Canada, New Zealand, Poland, Switzerland and the United States; the Netherlands, with Austria, Finland, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland; the United Kingdom, with Finland, Malta, Switzerland and the United States; and Switzerland, with 23 countries. 8. Provisional work permit. 9. Under the various bilateral agreements, this period ranges from three to twelve months, and may not exceed eighteen months.
199
BIBLIOGRAPHY COUNCIL OF EUROPE (1996), Temporary migration for employment and training purposes, Report and Guidelines.
ROBIN, S. (1996), The Provision of Services and the Movement of Labour in the Countries of the European Union, OCDE/ GD(96)63.
WERNER, H. (1996), Temporary Migration of Foreign Workers, Institut f ur Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), N urnberg.
200
APPENDIX
202 Appendix Recruitment conditions and conditions for staying of the main categories of temporary foreign workers for selected OECD countries
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) CONDITIONS FOR STAYING Restrictions on activity1 Possibility for family reunication Possibility for changing status2 Quotas
AUSTRALIA 1. Skilled temporary residents
Nominated3 (generally by the employer)
Yes Labour Market Testing (LMT)4
No
2 years (renewable Yes once under certain conditions) 4 years (renewable) for the category Education between 3 months and 4 years for holders of a TBE visa5
Yes
Yes
2. Entries under International relations programme of which mainly: Working Holiday Makers (WHM)
Bilateral No agreements6 Age limit (generally between 18 and 25) Preliminary authorisation Yes
Yes (since 1995/1996 scal year)
Up to one year (not renewable)
Yes7
No
Yes
CANADA 1. Persons with an employment authorisation under the obligation of validation8 2. Persons exempt from the validation obligation9 3. Categories exempt from work authorisation10 4. Seasonal workers
No
3 years maximum (renewable)
Yes
Yes
No (with a few exceptions)
Bilateral agreements Medical exam No condition in principle Agreements with certain countries
No
No
9 months maximum (renewable)
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
3 years maximum (renewable) 3 years maximum (renewable)
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Appendix Recruitment conditions and conditions for staying of the main categories of temporary foreign workers for selected OECD countries (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) CONDITIONS FOR STAYING Restrictions on activity1 Possibility for family reunication Possibility for changing status2
Quotas
FRANCE 1. EU and EEA citizens
Holding a residence No permit when the stay is longer than 3 months
No
2. Seasonal workers
3. Workers on secondment
Recruitment procedure initiated by the employer12 Age limit (between 17 and 50) for an anonymous contract The worker must hold a temporary residence permit valid for the period of employment The salaried executive must work in a French company which carries out the process of obtaining the work permit
Yes
In the framework of certain bilateral agreements (Morocco and Tunisia for example)
Yes, except for the No salaried workers earning more than 21 000 FF per month
1 year without restriction 5 years for permanent residents (automatically renewable for 10 years)11 The activity must not exceed 6 months in any 12 consecutive month period (8 months for certain activities13) Minimum duration of 4 months for seasonal workers from distant countries (Morocco and Tunisia) 9 months (renewable once, and in exceptional cases twice)
No
Yes
Yes
Yes, the permit No is only valid for the requested occupation, in a pre-determined geographic zone for a single employer
No
Yes
No14
No
4. Trainees 4.1. Professional Must hold a No trainees residence permit under general and a temporary legislation work authorisation (APT) The stay must be within the framework of an exchange between companies 4.2. Trainees Age limit No under (between 18 bilateral and 30)15 agreements
No
1 year (in exceptional cases, extended to 18 months)
Yes, not authorised to change employer
No
No
Yes
1 year maximum (in exceptional cases, extended to 18 months)
Yes, not authorised to change employer
No
No
APPENDIX
203
204 Appendix Recruitment conditions and conditions for staying of the main categories of temporary foreign workers for selected OECD countries (cont.)
GERMANY 1. Workers employed Bilateral under a contract agreements16 for services (seconded by the employer in the country of origin) Holding a work permit17 2. Guest workers Bilateral (Gastarbeiter) agreements18 Age limit (between 18 and 40) 3. Seasonal workers Bilateral agreements19 The request must be made by the employer Minimum age:18 years
No
Yes (adjusted annually according to the labour market situation) by economic sector and by country Yes (by country)
2 years maximum (3 years in exceptional cases)
Yes
No
No
No
12 to 18 months
Yes
No
No
Yes
No, but placement is limited to certain sectors
3 months each year
Yes
No
No
Quotas
NETHERLANDS 1. Newly arriving The employer must immigrants with a ask for a permit rst employment permit20
2. Workers exempt from a work permit
3. Accompanying dependants
Being a national of the EU or of the EEA or Having obtained the status of refugee or Holding a permanent residence permit or Being employed under international treaties Holding a residence permit Holding a declaration24
Yes, except for No high-level personnel of multinational companies and for the temporary employment of artists and musicians, trainees, guest lecturers and researchers at university level, participants of Youth Exchange Programmes No No
1 year (renewable)
Yes
Yes, after 3 years of residence
Yes21
5 years (renewable)22 No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Linked to the duration of the residence permit
No
Not applicable
Yes
APPENDIX
205
SWITZERLAND 1. Seasonal workers
Bilateral agreements25 Request made by the employer
Yes
Yes, at local level (Canton)
2. Short-stay permits Proof of holders professional experience or diploma
Yes, except for highly skilled specialists
Yes, except for permits of less than 4 months
3. One-year permits for a specied period holders26 (highly skilled specialists) 4. Trainees
Proof No of professional experience or diploma Restricted to highly skilled persons Bilateral No agreements signed with 25 countries Proof of training or diploma Age limit (between 18 and 30)
Yes
Variable according Yes to sector of activity 9 months maximum per year Renewable under certain conditions 18 months maximum Yes (renewable after 1 year of absence from Switzerland, after 2 months absence for permits of less than 4 months) 4 years maximum Yes (with a few exceptions)
No
No
Yes (after 36 months of work for 4 consecutive years) No
Yes
Yes27
Yes28
1 year (extended 6 months in special cases)
Traineeship carried out in the learnt occupation
No
No
Quotas
UNITED KINGDOM 1. Persons who need A work permit for a work permit a specic person must be requested by the future employer29 Restricted to highly skilled persons according to their degrees, professional qualications and technical abilities (Keyworkers). Must have specialised skills, knowledge and experience not readily available in the EEA and jobs of others dependant on them Adequate command of English 2. Persons exempt Being a EEA or a from a work Commonwealth permit national (if one of the grandparents was born in the UK) or a Gibraltar national or Ministers of religion Employees of certain types of overseas organisation
Yes, the employer No must show that the post cannot be lled by a UK or EU national (SecondTier procedure) except for some specic activities, i.e. intracompany transferees
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 for identical work and on the condition that the new employer has received authorisation from the Department for Education and Employment30
Yes, if the holder of the permit has sufcient nancial resources and housing and if members of the family obtain an entry authorisation
After 4 years working in the UK, can apply for indenite residence authorisation which gives the right to work
No
No
12 months No (renewable) but 4 years for Commonwealth citizens with a UK-born grandparent
Yes
Yes, same as for work permit holders
APPENDIX
207
3. Working Holiday Makers
4. Seasonal agricultural workers
Being the spouse or a minor child of a person holding a permanent work permit or a person exempt from this permit Being a No Commonwealth national Age restriction (between 17 and 27 years) Unmarried31 Intention to take employment is incidental to holiday Sufcient nancial resources for return32 No need for a work permit Students in No full-time education Aged between 18-25 years Holders of a H.O. work card
No
2 years (no renewals)
No
Yes, providing spouse qualies in own right and any child is less than 5 years old
No
Yes33
Until 30 November of year in question
No
No
No
5. Trainees 5.1. Training for Sufcient level No professional of education34 and or specialist adequate qualications command of English 5.2. Work experience Sufcient level of education and adequate command of English Person must not be lling a genuine vacancy No
No
No
Restricted to the training period (up to 3 years) Extension depends on the results obtained 12 months Extension possible for up to 12 months
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Quotas
UNITED STATES 1. Highly qualied workers 1.1. E (Treaty traders E-1 and investors E-2)35
1.2. B-1 (Business visitors)
No labour No certication required36 Existence of a TCN or a BIT37 between the US and the country of origin (for E-1) Substantial amount of trade (E-1) or investment (E-2) Applicant must No maintain a foreign residence and have a foreign employer
No
Depends on the agreement with the country of origin Initial period: up to 1 year (renewable without limit)
Yes, related to a specic activity
Yes
Yes
No
1.3. J-1 (Exchange visitors including some students)
Must have No sufcient funds Sufcient knowledge of English Foreign residence required 1.4. L-1 Must have been No (Intracompany engaged in an 38 transferees) executive, managerial, specialised full-time position for a business entity during one year (of the past 3 years) 1.5. H-1B Prevailing wages No (Specialty required occupation) Minimum of Bachelor degree (4 years degree) + practice in the occupation
No
Up to 1 year (renewed 6 months by 6 months) Consistent with the purpose of visit Varies according to eld of activity
Yes, related to business activities
Yes
Yes
Yes, generally not Yes allowed to engage in employment unrelated to the programme Yes
Yes, in some cases, exchange visitors must return to country of origin for at least 2 years Yes
No
Initial admission for Yes, related to a up to 3 years specic activity Total of 5 years (6 in some exceptional cases)
Yes39
Initial admission for 3 years (can be renewed once)
Yes, related to a specic activity
Yes
Yes
APPENDIX
209
1.6. O Requires (Extraordinary consultation with ability) peers/management/ labour groups, as appropriate 1.7. P (Athletes International and recognition or entertainers) participation in reciprocal exchange programme 2. Seasonal workers 2.1. H-2A Temporary labour (Agricultural certication activities) required Employers must respect certain conditions on wages 2.2. H-2B (No Temporary labour agricultural certication required activities)
No
No
Up to 10 years Depends upon activity
Must continue to work in the eld of expertise
Yes
Yes
No
No
Corresponds to the duration of the exhibition Up to 10 years
Yes, specic activity
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Initial admission for 1 year Extensions up to 3 years increments of 12 months each
Yes, specic activity and location
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes40
3. H-3 (Industrial trainees)
Not considered primarily as productive employees but may receive remuneration Must justify why cannot be trained in his country A foreign residence must be maintained
No
No
Initial admission for 1 year Extensions up to 3 years if the foreigner has unbroken stay in the United States Generally 2 years maximum Consistent with the training programme
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
APPENDIX
Appendix: notes
1. In the United Kingdom, there is no limitation to geographical mobility of temporary workers. Therefore, comments on this column are only related to professional mobility. In the United States, limitations are seldom applicated. 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. Except for a stay of less than 3 months. Except business people. Holders of a TBE visa are allowed to come as often as they wish for a stay of 3 months (maximum) during the validity of their visa. Admission conditions are more restrictive for nationals of other countries. Holiday Makers are permitted to work a maximum of 3 months with any one employer, they are also only permitted to work a maximum of 6 months during their stay (1 year maximum). The procedure of validation allows to ensure that entrance into the labour force is benecial for the Canadian economy and not detrimental to employment opportunities for Canadians. The list of jobs that can be validated excludes unskilled jobs, those restricted to Canadian citizens and those with a high rate of unemployment. Includes the following categories: applicants for landing under family class, asylum seekers, Convention refugees, Minister permits holders, some foreign students, foreign workers entering to oversee the installation or maintenance of special machinery from abroad. Persons who take up specic duties: diplomats, military personnel, clergy members, performing artists and business people who are citizens of the United States or Mexico. When the duration of the employment is between 3 months and one year, the duration of the authorisation corresponds to that of the job. Exceptions also exist for students who obtain a residence permit, valid only as long as the students course of study or for one year if the course of study is longer than one year (renewable for one year at a time). The employer must apply at the relevant local employment ofce. The application must include the proposed work contract, information on housing, and additional information if the recruitment is for a specic person. The application is transmitted to the Departmental Directorate for Labour and Employment (Direction departementale du travail et de lemploi DDTE), which if approved, transmits it to Ofce des migrations internationales (OMI), which is then responsible for admitting the worker to France. Applications are approved based on the and employment situation. specic needs of each region (Departement) Intensive market-gardening, fruit growing, high-altitude wood cutting. Family members may accompany the permit holder in cases when it seems they will adapt rapidly to life in France. They are not allowed to carry out any professional activity. The maximum is 35 years for Canada, Poland and the United States. Agreements signed with Former Yugoslavia, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Lithuania, Russian Federation, the Czech Republic, the Slovak Republic, Bulgaria, Latvia, Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Republic of Macedonia and Turkey. Installers and workers who carry out maintenance, reparation or installation of machines furnished by a foreign company do not need a work permit if they stay in Germany less than 3 months. Signed with Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Russian Federation, the Slovak Republic and Switzerland. 36. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 19. Signed with Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia. Workers are placed in co-operation with labour administrations and partner countries. Self-employed are included as of 1 September 1995. After 3 years of uninterrupted work and 5 years residing in the Netherlands, a permanent residence permit is delivered which gives the right to work in the Netherlands without any professional or geographical restriction. When the duration of the employment is between 3 months and one year, the duration of the authorisation corresponds to that of the job. The following categories are included: children and spouses of permanent residence permit holders, persons who entered the Netherlands before their majority and who still had a temporary residence permit at the time of their majority. Declarations stipulate that the holder is free to carry out any profession (without any geographical or professional restrictions). Signed with Italy and Spain. Include in resident foreign population. A one-year permit (renewable) can be issued upon the expiration of a one-year permit for a specied period. 20 to 500 permits according to the country. When applications are made (ordinary permits for foreigners residing abroad, rst permissions for foreigners who have never worked in the United Kingdom), the following documents must be provided: evidence of the persons qualications and experience, and evidence of advertising to ll the vacancy and reasons no UK or EU nationals was recruited. A simplied procedure was introduced in 1991 for some categories of highly skilled workers. The employer has to complete only Part I of the permit application (First-tier procedure) and simply gives his reasons for recruiting an overseas national. A change of job within the same rm is also submitted for authorisation. Unless spouse applies and qualies in own right. Employment is incidental to holiday, i.e. persons may not pursue a career in the United Kingdom. 10 000 persons per year. Equivalent to UK degree level or National/Scottish Vocational Qualication level 4. Temporary migrants under trade and navigation treaties signed by the United States and their country of origin, in order to carry out business or manage an enterprise in which they have invested a large sum of money. Employees recruited by Treaty traders or investors must be employed in supervisory/executive positions or possess skills essential to the enterprise. Treaty of Commerce and Navigation (TCN); Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT). Foreign workers who temporarily enter the United States in order to continue in their position of responsibility (director, higher management or specialist) for the same company or subsidiary. Since 1992, when numerical limits were imposed, the number of applications has always been below the numerical limit (Exception: H-1B in scal year 1997). Since 1992, when numerical limits were imposed, the number of applications has always been below the numerical limit.
20. 21.
2.
3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
22. 23.
8.
9.
10.
11.
30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35.
12.
13. 14.
15. 16.
37. 38.
17.
39.
18.
40.
211
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Data on the ows and stocks of migrants and related issues, such as their performance in the labour market, are derived from a wide variety of sources and the nature of these sources varies across countries. This makes the application of standardised denitions difcult and hence particular attention needs to be paid to the 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. A more comprehensive set of data is available on diskette (International Migration Statistics, OECD, 1997). 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 discussed in the Foreword to this report, the Continuous Reporting System on Migration (SOPEMI) covers almost all of the Member countries of the OECD. The coverage of countries in the data and the ability to construct time-series is to a certain extent affected by the dates at which countries became members of the SOPEMI network. Recent participants to SOPEMI do not necessarily provide historical data in their reports and, in addition, further clarication is sometimes required before data can be published. SOPEMI has no authority to impose changes in data collection procedures. It has an observatory role which, by its very nature, has to use existing statistics. However, it does play an active role in suggesting what it considers to be essential improvements in data collection and makes every effort to present consistent and well documented statistics. A. SOURCES AND COMPARABILITY 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 d etre 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 difcult. Comparability is also problematic if data are based on residence or work permits. The data reect migration systems and the policies of national governments and so, once again, it can be difcult to generate harmonised data. Hence, although there has been some development and agreement in the denition and classication of migration for statistical purposes (see Box 1), these standards have proved difcult to implement. Aside from problems relating to international comparability, there are other difculties with migration statistics, most notably the problem of measuring illegal immigration. Estimation is difcult and the gures 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 ow 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 inow data and must be taken into account when analysing trends. In addition, regularisation programs may be followed by an additional wave of
213
Box 1.
Denitions of migration ows and immigrant populations developed by the United Nations
Migration ows The United Nations has endeavoured to encourage the standardisation of migration statistics through establishing data collection procedures and dening 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 denition, the criterion of residence allows an initial distinction between migrants and nonmigrants, i.e. tourists, short-term 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 dene long-term migrants as follows (these denitions apply equally to all population categories, whether nationals or not, foreign-born or not): long-term emigrants are residents or persons who have resided continuously in the country for more than one year 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 denition has not been widely adopted and is difcult 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 dening migration ows 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 difcult to classify due to changes in national boundaries. The United Nations recommends that the foreign-born be dened 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).
immigration depending on the extent to which the acquisition of legal status allows family reunion. The following provides a brief review of the sources of migration statistics (1); this is followed by a discussion of the techniques used for measuring migration ows (2), and of data issues relating to stocks of migrants and the immigrant population (3). 1. Sources of migration statistics
sus data are the most common means of measuring ows 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 registers can provide data on all migrant ows (inows and outows 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 outows can be less reliable. Also, there are differences in the type of migrants
214
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 ow and stock data on migration, especially in northern Europe. In other countries, data on residence permits and cen-
STATISTICAL ANNEX
counted which must be taken into account in international comparisons.
Permit data
Residence and work permit data commonly form the basis of ow statistics for countries which do not have population registers. The data are necessarily more limited in scope as they do not capture all ows and it can be difcult to use them to generate stock and outow 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 ows
intention to leave the country, however a period of (intended) absence is not typically specied. 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 benets to the individual, whereas there is less incentive to inform authorities of departure. In order to provide more accurate gures, some countries use additional information such as host-country estimates to generate emigration data. The rules governing entry into the register and who is dened as a migrant vary across countries. Notably, the minimum duration of stay for individuals to be dened as immigrants varies between three months and one year, implying that for some countries the data include short as well as longer term migration ows. 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 qualications, 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.
The inows and outows included in this annex are all based either on population registers or on permit data. The types of ow 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 residence and work permits

Countries which do not have population registers use a variety of sources to generate ow data. Inows 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 ows measured obviously depends on the type of permit(s) used to generate the statistic. Inows 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 derived from population registers

Population registers can usually produce inow and outow data for both nationals and foreigners, however there are differences in the type of ows measured due to differences in the way migrants are dened in the registers. In this regard, a key condition used to dene immigrants is intention to reside for more than a specied length of time. In addition, foreigners who register may have to indicate possession of an appropriate residence and/or work permit. Emigrants are usually identied by a stated
215
Flows of nationals are not recorded in the data and some ows 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 inows 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 reect physical ows 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 inuenced 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.
inows 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 1990s, a number of European countries (e.g. Austria and the Nordic countries) granted temporary residence to those eeing conict 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
Estimation of net migration

From the preceding discussion on ow data it is evident that some countries have readily available means to calculate net migration (e.g. through population registers) whilst others face greater difculties 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, gures 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 gures in Labour Force Statistics. These are calculated as a residual from data on annual population change and natural increase.

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 difcult to determine whether they should be counted as migrants or not. In practice, asylum seekers are not generally counted in migrant
Time series of stocks are used in conjunction with ow 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 dened.
Denition of the immigrant population

In data, the immigrant population is usually dened in one of two ways. Some countries have traditionally focused on producing data that repre-
216
STATISTICAL ANNEX
sents 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 rst-generation migrants, and may consist of both foreign and national citizens. The size and composition of the foreign-born population is inuenced by the history of migration ows and mortality amongst the foreign-born. For example,
Box 2.
Migration systems
Historically, migration systems developed alongside the evolution of nation-states and the concomitant desire to enumerate and sometimes inuence 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 benets. 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 reunion. 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 reect purely economic considerations such as perceived labour shortages or a desire to encourage international business links. However, policy may also be inuenced 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 classication, 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, typied 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 reects 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 inows 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 inows 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. 217
where inows 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 rst-generations of migrants. The characteristics of the population of foreign nationals depend on a number of factors: the history of migration ows, 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 rst three of these groups represent the immigrant population, as dened 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.
readily acquire the nationality of the country, increases in the foreign population through immigration and births can eventually contribute to a signicant rise in the native population. In Germany and Switzerland (see OECD, 1995), on the other hand, where naturalisation is more difcult, 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 signicant 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 inuenced 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 reected in the gures. B. 1. STATISTICAL SERIES
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 gures 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).
Introduction to the Statistical Annex tables
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
218
The Tables are divided into two series. The serie A tables provides aggregate data on stock and ow statistics as well as administrative data on asylum seekers and naturalisations. The serie B tables presents data disaggregated by country of origin (as dened 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 denitions are presented at the end of the Statistical Annex.
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table 1.
Summary table on the sources of migration statistics

Foreign and foreign-born population Stocks of foreignborn population Stocks of foreign population Foreign and foreign-born labour force Inows of foreign workers Stocks of foreignborn workers Stocks of foreign workers
Inows of foreigners
Outows of foreigners
Asylum seekers
Naturalisation
Seasonal workers
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:
P F F P F F R F F
F F F F
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 F F A A A A A A A A A A F F
A R R R R R R A R
F F A P
F F
F C, S
Population register or register of foreigners. Residence or work permits (renewable). Acceptances for permanent settlement. Census. Labour Force Survey. Other administrative sources.
A number of general comments apply to the tables: a) In general tables include annual series from 1986. In the case of tables covering stocks of foreigners by nationality (Tables B.1.6 and B.2.2) only selected years of data have been shown (1985, 1990, 1995 and the latest available year). b) Up to 1994 (inclusive), European Union refers to the following 12 countries: Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom, members of the European Union at 31 December 1994. As of 1995 and 1996, European Union also includes the following three countries: Austria, Finland and Sweden. c) The series A tables are presented in alphabetical order by the name of the country in English. In the other tables, the nationalities or countries
are ranked by decreasing order of the stocks for the last year available. d) In the tables by country of origin (series B) only the main 15 countries are shown (10 in the case of stock data). 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 reected 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.
219
BIBLIOGRAPHY
OECD (1989), Trends in International Migration, Annual Report 1989, Paris. 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. UN (1991), 1989 Demographic Yearbook, New York.
220
2. TABLES OF THE STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table A.1.1. Inows of foreign population into selected OECD countries

Thousands
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Inow data based on population registers: Belgium Denmark Finland Germany Hungary Japan Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Sweden Switzerland Inow data based on residence and work permits: Australia (permanent migrants) Austria Canada (permanent migrants) France United Kingdom United States (permanent migrants)
39.3 17.6 .. 478.3 .. 157.5 7.4 52.8 16.8 34.0 66.8
40.1 15.2 .. 473.3 .. 180.3 7.2 60.9 23.8 37.1 71.5
38.2 13.8 .. 648.6 23.5 234.8 8.2 58.3 23.2 44.5 76.1
43.5 15.1 4.2 770.8 33.7 237.4 8.4 65.4 18.5 58.9 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
55.1 16.9 10.4 1 207.6 15.1 267.0 9.8 83.0 17.2 39.5 112.1
53.0 15.4 10.9 986.9 16.4 234.5 9.2 87.6 22.3 54.8 104.0
56.0 15.6 7.6 774.0 12.8 237.5 9.2 68.4 17.9 74.7 91.7
53.1 33.0 7.3 788.3 13.2 209.9 9.6 67.0 16.5 36.1 87.9
51.9 .. 7.5 708.0 9.4 225.4 .. 77.2 17.2 29.3 74.3
92.4 .. 99.2 38.3 .. 601.7
113.3 .. 152.1 39.0 .. 601.5
143.5 .. 161.9 44.0 .. 643.0
145.3 .. 192.0 53.2 .. 1 090.9
121.2 .. 214.2 102.4 .. 1 536.5
121.7 .. 230.8 109.9 .. 1 827.2
107.4 .. 252.8 116.6 203.9 974.0
76.3 280.5 255.8 99.2 190.3 904.3
69.8 276.9 223.9 91.5 193.6 804.4
87.4 308.6 212.2 77.0 206.3 720.5
99.1 224.2 226.1 74.0 216.4 915.9
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. Outows of foreign population from selected OECD countries

Thousands
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Belgium Denmark Finland Germany Japan Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Sweden Switzerland
Note:
31.8 4.3 .. 347.8 131.2 5.5 23.6 8.4 15.4 52.8
34.2 4.9 .. 334.2 151.3 5.0 20.9 8.6 11.6 53.8
32.3 5.3 .. 359.1 183.7 5.3 21.4 9.3 11.8 55.8
27.5 4.8 1.0 438.3 204.8 5.5 21.5 10.6 13.1 57.5
27.0 4.6 0.9 466.0 166.1 5.5 20.6 9.8 16.2 59.6
35.3 5.2 1.1 497.5 181.3 5.9 21.3 8.4 15.0 66.4
28.1 4.8 1.5 614.7 204.8 5.6 22.7 8.1 13.2 80.4
31.2 4.9 1.5 710.2 200.5 5.0 22.2 10.5 14.8 71.2
34.1 5.0 1.5 621.5 204.2 5.3 22.7 9.6 15.8 64.2
33.1 5.3 1.5 561.1 195.2 4.9 21.7 9.0 15.4 67.5
32.4 .. 3.0 559.1 .. .. 22.4 10.0 14.5 67.7
Data are from population registers. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table A.1.3.
Net migration of foreign population in selected OECD countries

Thousands
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Belgium Denmark Finland Germany Japan Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Sweden Switzerland
7.5 13.3 .. 130.5 26.3 1.9 29.2 8.4 18.6 14.0
5.9 10.4 .. 139.1 29.0 2.2 40.0 15.2 25.5 17.7
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 14.7 4.7 45.3 7.5 20.7 20.4
19.5 .. 4.5 148.9 .. .. 54.8 7.2 14.9 6.6
222
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.
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table A.1.4. Inows of asylum seekers into selected OECD countries

Thousands
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 19971
Australia Austria Belgium Canada Czech Republic Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Poland Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States
.. 11.4 6.0 35.0 .. 2.7 27.6 57.4 6.3 .. 11.0 0.1 13.5 8.6 .. 0.2 3.7 18.1 10.9 5.9 26.1
.. 15.8 4.5 45.0 .. 4.7 0.1 34.3 103.1 9.3 .. 1.4 0.0 7.5 6.6 .. 0.3 4.5 19.6 16.7 5.7 60.7
0.5 21.9 8.2 19.9 .. 4.6 0.2 61.4 121.3 6.5 .. 2.3 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 2.0 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
7.7 6.7 11.6 23.9 2.1 5.1 1.0 21.4 104.4 4.2 3.9 1.4 0.4 34.4 2.3 2.9 0.4 3.7 9.7 23.9 41.5 79.8
Note: For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. January to September 1997 for Italy, Luxembourg, Poland and Spain.
Table A.1.5.
Stocks of foreign-born population in selected OECD countries

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
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 .. .. 246.9 5.6 943.8 11.0 24 600 9.3
Note: Data are from censuses for Australia, Canada and the United States (1990), from the Current Population Survey for the United States from 1994 on and from population registers for the other countries. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
223
Table A.1.6. Stocks of foreign population in selected OECD countries

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
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
314.9 4.1 853.2 8.6 .. .. 128.3 2.5 17.3 0.4 .. .. 4 512.7 7.4 .. .. 77.0 2.2 450.2 0.8 867.2 0.7 41.6 0.1 97.3 26.3 568.0 3.9 109.3 2.6 .. .. 293.2 0.8 390.8 4.7 956.0 14.7 1 820 3.2 .. ..
326.2 4.3 862.5 8.7 .. .. 136.2 2.7 17.7 0.4 .. .. 4 240.5 6.9 .. .. 77.0 2.2 572.1 1.0 884.0 0.7 42.8 0.1 102.8 26.8 591.8 4.0 123.7 2.9 .. .. 334.9 0.9 401.0 4.8 978.7 14.9 1 839 3.2 .. ..
344.0 4.5 868.8 8.8 .. .. 142.0 2.8 18.7 0.4 .. .. 4 489.1 7.3 .. .. 82.0 2.4 645.4 1.1 941.0 0.8 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 1 946 3.4 .. ..
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 2 060 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 8.9 142.5 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 19.0 1 972 3.4 .. ..
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.
224
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table A.1.7.
Acquisition of nationality in selected OECD countries

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Countries where national / foreigner distinction is prevalent Austria % of foreign population 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 Countries where native-born/ foreign-born distinction is prevalent Australia Canada United States 81.2 58.8 242.1 119.1 87.5 233.8 127.9 104.3 270.1 118.5 118.6 308.1 125.2 116.2 240.3 122.1 150.6 314.7 112.2 217.3 407.4 114.8 227.7 445.9 111.6 .. 1 044.7 8.2 2.5 .. .. 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 8.5 2.5 .. .. 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 9.2 2.4 .. .. 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 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 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 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 2.1 16.2 2.2 24.6 2.7 7.3 3.3 1.0 1.4 109.8 .. 302.8 4.2 12.3 8.7 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 2.1
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.
225
Table A.2.1. Inows of foreign workers into selected OECD countries

Thousands
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
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
12.6 .. 18.0 2.2 .. .. 9.9 1.4 37.2 .. .. .. 8.4 .. 29.4 7.9 8.0 2.8 18.7 56.6 85.4
22.7 .. 15.3 2.4 .. .. 10.7 1.5 48.1 .. .. .. 10.5 .. 33.6 8.1 9.4 2.9 20.4 57.5 97.3
34.8 .. 17.4 2.8 .. 3.1 12.7 1.9 60.4 .. .. .. 12.6 .. 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 .. 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 19.8 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 85.0 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 52.8 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 17.4 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 23.5 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 36.6 27.1 15.5 15.6 4.4 35.5 85.3 220.7
20.0 15.4 16.3 2.2 .. 2.7 11.5 4.8 262.5 14.5 3.8 129.2 18.3 .. 24.5 16.9 16.8 4.0 37.7 117.5 254.4
Note: For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Including accompanying dependents.
Table A.2.2. Inows of seasonal workers into selected OECD countries

Thousands
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Australia Austria Canada France Germany Italy Netherlands Norway Switzerland United Kingdom United States
.. .. .. 81.7 .. .. .. 142.8 .. ..
.. .. .. 76.6 .. .. .. 150.8 .. ..
.. .. .. 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
Note: For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
226
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table A.2.3.
Stocks of foreign and foreign-born labour force in selected OECD countries

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Stocks of foreign labour force Austria1 % of total labour force Belgium % of total employment 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
155.0 5.3 179.2 6.2 60.1 2.1 1 555.7 6.5 1 833.7 6.8 .. .. 33.0 2.5 .. .. .. .. 58.7 35.6 169 3.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. 215 4.9 566.9 16.4 815 3.4
157.7 5.4 176.6 6.1 62.7 2.1 1 524.9 6.3 1 865.5 6.9 .. .. 33.0 2.5 .. .. .. .. 63.7 37.6 176 3.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 215 4.9 587.7 16.6 815 3.3
160.9 5.4 179.4 6.1 65.1 2.2 1 557.0 6.4 1 910.6 7.0 .. .. 35.0 2.7 .. .. .. .. 69.4 39.9 176 2.9 49.5 2.3 45.5 1.0 58.2 0.4 220 4.9 607.8 16.7 871 3.4
178.0 5.9 196.4 6.5 66.9 2.3 1 593.8 6.6 1 940.6 7.0 .. .. 33.0 2.6 .. .. .. .. 76.2 42.4 192 3.1 47.7 2.3 48.7 1.0 69.1 0.5 237 5.2 631.8 17.0 914 3.5
229.5 7.4 .. .. 68.8 2.4 1 549.5 6.2 2 025.1 7.1 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
277.2 8.7 .. .. 71.2 2.4 1 506.0 6.0 2 179.1 7.5 33.4 .. 39.3 2.9 285.3 1.3 .. .. 92.6 47.5 214 3.2 46.3 2.3 54.9 1.1 171.0 1.1 241 5.3 702.5 17.8 828 3.0
295.9 9.1 .. .. 74.0 2.6 1 517.8 6.0 2 360.1 8.0 15.7 0.4 40.4 3.0 296.8 1.4 85.5 0.1 98.2 49.2 229 3.4 46.6 2.3 59.2 1.3 139.4 0.9 233 5.3 716.7 18.3 902 3.6
304.6 9.3 .. .. 77.7 2.7 1 541.5 6.1 2 575.9 8.9 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
316.5 9.7 .. .. 80.3 2.9 1 593.9 6.3 2 559.6 8.9 20.1 0.5 34.5 2.5 307.1 1.5 105.6 0.2 106.3 51.0 216 3.2 50.3 2.5 77.6 1.6 121.8 0.8 213 5.0 740.3 18.9 847 3.4
325.2 9.9 .. .. 83.8 3.0 1 573.3 6.2 2 569.2 9.0 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
328.0 10.0 .. .. .. .. 1 604.7 6.3 2 559.3 9.1 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 1.8 161.9 1.0 218 5.1 709.1 17.9 878 3.4
1 900.5 25.4 .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. 11 564.6 9.4
2 182.3 25.7 2 681 18.5 .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. ..
2 194.9 25.3 .. .. .. ..
2 164.1 24.8 .. .. .. ..
2 138.8 23.9 .. .. .. ..
2 238.8 24.6 .. .. .. ..
Note: For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. 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.
227
Table B.1.1.
AUSTRALIA, inows of permanent settlers and temporary residents by country or region of birth
Thousands
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
A. Permanent settlers1 New Zealand United Kingdom China Former Yugoslavia Hong Kong (China) South Africa Vietnam Philippines India Chinese Taipei Fiji United States Sri Lanka Former USSR Malaysia Other countries Total 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
13.6 20.2 2.7 2.6 3.4 4.7 6.6 6.4 2.5 0.8 1.6 1.8 2.8 0.2 3.9 39.5 113.3 28.6 11.1 3.4 23.1 0.9 24.5 0.8 0.6 1.1 0.1 94.3
20.9 24.6 3.3 3.3 5.6 3.8 6.0 10.4 3.0 1.1 3.0 2.0 2.9 0.4 6.3 46.9 143.5 38.2 13.8 3.4 32.2 0.9 29.2 0.9 0.6 1.4 0.1 120.9
23.5 23.9 3.8 2.9 7.3 3.0 8.0 9.2 3.1 2.1 2.7 2.1 2.9 1.0 7.7 42.1 145.3 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 3.1 2.0 8.1 2.4 11.2 6.1 3.0 3.1 2.6 1.9 2.2 1.7 6.4 32.8 121.2 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 3.3 1.9 13.5 2.1 13.2 6.4 5.1 3.5 2.4 1.9 3.3 0.9 5.7 30.3 121.7 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 3.4 2.5 12.9 1.3 9.6 5.9 5.6 3.2 2.1 1.7 2.8 2.0 3.1 29.5 107.4 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 3.0 4.2 6.5 1.0 5.7 3.7 3.6 1.4 1.6 1.3 1.6 2.7 1.6 22.3 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 2.7 4.3 3.3 1.7 5.4 4.2 2.6 0.8 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 21.2 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 3.7 6.7 4.1 2.8 5.1 4.1 3.9 0.8 1.5 1.8 2.0 2.3 1.1 26.4 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 11.2 7.7 4.4 3.2 3.6 3.2 3.7 1.6 1.7 1.6 2.0 1.22 1.1 29.4 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 9.6 7.8 5.3 3.9 3.2 3.0 2.8 2.7 2.2 1.7 1.5 1.4 1.42 1.1 24.7 85.8 52.5 18.9 2.8 38.5 1.2 27.5 0.9 2.7 1.6 0.5 147.13
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. Exclude the Baltic States. 3. Including 17 049 holders of a Temporary Business Entry (TBE) visa (Long stay).
Table B.1.1.
BELGIUM, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Netherlands France Morocco Germany United States United Kingdom Italy Turkey Former Yugoslavia Portugal Spain Poland Japan Zaire China Other countries Total of which: EU
.. .. 2.0 .. .. .. 2.5 1.4 0.3 1.3 0.7 .. .. .. .. 30.0 38.2 19.8
.. .. 2.3 .. .. .. 2.7 1.8 0.5 1.7 0.8 .. .. .. .. 33.7 43.5 22.5
.. .. 2.6 .. .. .. 2.6 2.4 1.6 1.7 0.8 .. .. 1.8 .. 36.9 50.5 24.6
6.2 5.8 3.4 2.7 2.9 3.2 2.6 2.9 1.0 1.9 0.8 0.5 0.7 1.9 0.6 17.1 54.1 24.8
6.6 5.9 3.3 2.8 3.1 3.1 2.6 2.7 1.5 3.2 1.1 0.6 0.7 2.7 0.6 14.6 55.1 27.1
6.7 6.0 3.4 3.0 2.7 2.9 2.8 2.5 0.8 2.1 1.0 0.7 1.0 2.3 0.6 14.6 53.0 26.4
4.3 6.2 4.8 3.1 2.9 2.8 1.9 3.6 0.7 1.2 1.0 0.8 1.1 2.2 0.5 19.1 56.0 27.0
6.5 6.2 3.6 3.1 3.0 2.8 2.6 2.5 2.5 1.7 1.0 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.6 14.3 53.1 26.6
7.8 6.6 4.0 3.2 3.0 2.8 2.7 2.5 2.5 1.8 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.6 10.8 51.9 28.7
228
Note: Data are from population registers. Asylum seekers awaiting a decision are excluded from 1995. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.1.1.
CANADA, inows of permanent settlers by region or country of birth

Thousands
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Asia and the Pacic Hong Kong (China) India China Chinese Taipei Philippines Pakistan Sri Lanka Iran 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
35.3 5.9 6.9 1.9 0.7 4.1 .. 1.8 .. 6.8 7.2 22.7 5.1 .. 5.2 12.4 12.3 2.3 9.9 28.9 7.3 3.2 18.5 99.2
57.9 16.2 9.7 2.6 1.5 7.3 .. 4.2 .. 5.8 10.6 37.6 8.5 .. 7.0 22.0 19.8 3.4 16.4 36.9 8.0 3.5 25.4 152.1
70.0 23.3 10.4 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 19.1 3.7 6.7 2.7 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
112.7 31.7 16.2 13.3 7.7 15.1 4.0 8.9 3.7 3.9 8.1 41.2 6.2 6.3 2.3 26.5 32.8 1.9 30.9 25.6 5.2 0.7 19.7 212.2
124.1 29.9 21.2 17.5 13.2 12.9 7.7 6.1 5.8 2.5 7.4 39.7 5.6 5.1 .. 29.0 36.1 .. 36.1 24.2 5.8 .. 18.4 226.1
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.
DENMARK, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Former Yugoslavia Somalia Iceland Germany Iraq Norway United Kingdom Turkey Sweden United States Netherlands Thailand France Poland Italy Other countries Total of which: EU2
0.6 .. 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.7 .. 1.1 0.5 0.6 0.2 .. 0.2 0.5 0.2 9.0 15.1 2.3
0.7 .. 0.4 0.7 0.5 0.7 .. 1.8 0.7 0.6 0.2 .. 0.3 0.5 0.2 10.2 17.5 2.6
0.5 .. 0.4 0.7 1.3 0.6 .. 1.1 0.6 0.6 0.3 .. 0.3 0.5 0.2 9.8 16.9 2.7
0.3 .. 0.5 0.9 1.0 0.7 .. 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.4 .. 0.2 0.4 0.2 8.9 15.4 3.0
0.2 1.3 0.7 1.1 0.7 0.8 1.1 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 6.1 15.6 3.7
16.61 1.5 1.2 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 5.7 33.0 4.4
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 16 077 ex-Yugoslavs who have been recognised as refugees after 3 years of legal residence in Denmark as war refugees (temporay status). 2. Including Finland and Sweden in 1995.
229
Table B.1.1. FINLAND, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Former USSR Estonia Sweden Iraq Bosnia Herzegovina Somalia United States United Kingdom Iran Germany Turkey China Thailand Former Yugoslavia Vietnam Other countries Total
2.9 2.1 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 2.4 10.4
2.2 2.0 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.9 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 1.7 0.2 1.9 10.9
1.9 1.4 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 1.7 7.6
2.0 1.0 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.7 7.3
2.0 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.6 7.5
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. FRANCE, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Algeria Morocco Turkey United States Tunisia Former Yugoslavia Japan Zaire Sri Lanka Haiti China Poland Vietnam Brazil Russian Federation Other countries Total1 of which: EU Total2
5.3 8.2 4.3 .. 2.4 0.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 17.7 38.3 .. ..
5.3 8.6 4.6 .. 2.6 0.5 .. .. .. .. .. 1.1 .. .. .. 16.3 39.0 .. ..
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 .. .. 50.7 102.4 11.3 ..
12.9 18.2 9.2 .. 4.3 1.1 1.5 .. .. .. .. 2.5 3.1 .. .. 57.1 109.9 11.7 ..
12.3 16.4 9.2 .. 4.0 1.2 1.3 .. .. .. .. 1.2 1.3 .. .. 69.8 116.6 25.9 ..
13.1 13.8 6.8 .. 3.5 4.0 1.2 2.2 .. 3.2 .. 1.1 1.3 .. .. 48.9 99.2 14.4 ..
9.7 8.1 4.7 2.4 2.3 1.3 1.1 1.3 .. 1.9 1.3 0.8 0.8 .. .. 33.7 69.3 10.8 91.5
8.4 6.6 3.6 2.4 1.9 1.6 1.0 0.9 0.8 1.4 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.9 .. 24.8 56.7 7.9 77.0
7.8 6.6 3.4 2.7 2.2 1.3 1.1 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 24.3 55.6 7.1 74.0
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).
230
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.1.1.
GERMANY, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Poland Turkey Italy Former Yugoslavia Portugal Russian Federation1 Greece Romania Hungary United States Croatia2 Bosnia Herzegovina3 Spain Bulgaria Morocco Other countries Total of which: EU4
207.8 78.4 41.8 55.7 3.6 .. 33.0 11.2 .. .. .. .. 3.9 .. 4.5 208.7 648.6 140.1
260.3 85.7 40.2 61.5 5.3 .. 29.5 14.2 .. .. .. .. 4.4 .. 4.7 265.0 770.8 142.0
200.9 83.6 36.9 65.2 7.0 .. 26.5 78.2 15.9 .. .. .. 4.4 .. 5.5 318.3 842.4 139.6
128.4 81.9 35.4 221.0 10.7 .. 28.3 61.4 24.9 .. .. .. 5.1 .. 6.0 317.4 920.5 147.4
131.7 80.6 30.1 341.3 10.1 24.6 23.6 109.8 27.9 21.3 38.6 .. 5.4 31.4 6.4 324.6 1 207.6 140.8
75.2 67.8 31.7 141.6 12.9 29.4 18.3 81.6 24.2 17.6 26.0 107.0 5.8 27.2 5.1 315.3 986.9 136.7
78.6 63.9 38.7 63.2 26.5 33.4 18.9 31.4 19.3 15.8 16.7 68.3 6.0 10.4 3.8 279.0 774.0 155.8
87.2 73.6 48.0 54.1 30.5 33.0 20.3 24.8 18.8 16.0 14.9 55.2 7.2 8.0 3.6 293.2 788.3 177.2
77.4 73.2 45.8 42.9 32.0 31.9 18.8 17.1 16.6 16.3 12.3 11.1 7.8 6.3 4.1 294.2 708.0 172.5
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. HUNGARY, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Romania China Ukraine Former Yugoslavia1 Germany Russian Federation Slovak Republic Poland Greece Israel Vietnam Libya Norway Croatia United Kingdom Other countries Total of which: EU2
17.8 0.7 0.4 0.6 0.3 0.2 1.2 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.9 23.5 0.8
26.6 0.1 0.6 0.4 0.7 0.3 0.2 1.3 0.2 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.2 33.7 1.3
29.6 0.7 1.1 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.8 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.8 37.2 1.3
10.9 2.1 1.3 3.6 0.4 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.2 2.5 23.0 1.4
6.5 0.4 1.1 3.2 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 2.1 15.1 1.0
6.1 0.5 1.2 5.0 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 1.8 16.4 1.0
4.3 0.5 1.4 2.3 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 2.1 12.8 1.3
4.7 1.2 1.2 1.4 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 2.2 13.2 1.3
2.9 1.4 1.1 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.6 9.4 1.0
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. Excluding Croatia. 2. European Union 15 for all years.
231
Table B.1.1. JAPAN, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
China Philippines United States Brazil Korea Thailand United Kingdom Canada Chinese Taipei Germany1 Peru Other countries Total
71.4 48.1 28.5 3.1 13.5 5.9 6.4 2.5 6.8 4.2 0.6 43.8 234.8
53.1 48.0 28.6 5.3 21.0 6.1 6.9 3.1 6.5 3.7 4.3 50.8 237.4
29.9 48.8 30.8 11.6 23.1 7.0 7.5 3.8 7.3 4.3 2.8 46.9 223.8
35.6 63.8 29.8 17.3 26.6 8.3 6.1 4.2 7.6 4.1 1.1 53.9 258.4
52.4 57.5 29.3 19.2 26.0 7.7 6.7 4.2 6.0 4.2 0.9 52.9 267.0
45.2 48.2 27.4 14.6 21.3 6.5 5.9 3.8 5.2 4.2 1.0 51.3 234.5
38.9 58.8 27.6 11.8 21.3 6.8 6.6 4.1 4.7 4.0 1.0 51.9 237.5
38.8 30.3 27.0 11.9 18.8 6.5 6.4 4.1 4.7 3.7 1.7 55.9 209.9
45.6 30.3 27.9 22.4 17.1 6.6 6.4 4.5 4.4 4.1 2.4 53.7 225.4
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.
LUXEMBOURG, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
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
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.
NETHERLANDS, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Turkey Germany United Kingdom Morocco Former Yugoslavia United States Suriname Belgium France Poland China Japan Italy Other countries Total of which: EU1
8.4 4.3 4.4 6.6 .. 2.0 3.7 2.3 1.4 .. .. .. 0.8 18.9 52.8 ..
9.6 4.1 4.5 7.0 .. 2.0 4.3 2.4 1.5 .. .. .. 0.9 24.6 60.9 ..
10.4 4.4 4.0 8.2 .. 2.0 2.9 2.3 1.6 0.7 .. .. 0.9 20.9 58.3 15.6
11.0 4.6 4.2 8.4 .. 2.3 4.4 2.2 1.6 1.1 .. .. 1.0 24.6 65.4 15.7
12.6 5.6 5.4 9.4 .. 2.5 6.8 2.4 1.8 1.3 .. .. 1.1 32.3 81.3 18.6
12.4 6.8 6.0 8.9 .. 2.6 6.7 2.4 1.7 1.4 .. .. 1.0 34.4 84.3 20.8
9.1 7.1 6.5 7.2 4.9 2.9 6.9 2.2 1.8 1.4 .. .. 1.0 32.0 83.0 22.3
7.8 7.4 5.0 5.9 8.9 2.6 7.8 2.0 1.5 1.3 1.1 1.0 1.0 34.2 87.6 19.7
4.3 6.1 3.5 3.2 8.4 2.2 2.9 1.7 1.4 0.8 1.0 1.1 0.9 30.8 68.4 16.0
4.8 4.7 3.7 3.1 7.3 2.2 1.7 1.3 .. .. .. .. .. 38.2 67.0 14.8
6.4 5.7 4.3 4.3 3.4 3.1 2.8 1.9 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 38.4 77.2 19.2
232
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.1.1. NORWAY, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Sweden Denmark Bosnia Herzegovina1 United Kingdom United States Germany Pakistan Somalia Sri Lanka Turkey Iran China Philippines Poland Former Yugoslavia Other countries Total of which: EU2
2.0 3.2 .. 1.5 1.0 0.4 1.0 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.7 .. 0.5 0.5 0.8 8.8 23.2 6.0
1.1 2.2 .. 0.9 0.9 0.3 0.9 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.9 .. 0.5 0.7 1.0 7.1 18.5 4.1
1.1 1.8 .. 0.7 0.9 0.3 0.6 0.3 0.6 0.5 0.7 .. 0.4 0.5 0.8 6.5 15.7 3.4
1.1 1.8 .. 0.8 1.0 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.7 .. 0.3 0.4 1.0 6.5 16.1 3.6
1.3 1.7 .. 1.1 0.9 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.5 .. 0.3 0.3 2.5 6.5 17.2 3.9
1.6 1.7 6.2 1.1 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.4 .. 0.3 0.3 1.7 5.9 22.3 4.0
1.9 1.9 3.2 0.8 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.3 .. 0.3 0.3 0.8 5.9 17.9 3.9
2.1 1.6 1.7 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 .. 0.2 0.2 0.6 6.2 16.5 6.6
2.9 1.6 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 6.6 17.2 7.7
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 12 for all years.
Table B.1.1. SWEDEN, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Finland Iraq Norway Denmark Bosnia Herzegovina1 United States Turkey United Kingdom Former Yugoslavia Iran Poland Somalia Ethiopia Lebanon Chile Other countries Total of which: EU2
5.4 1.3 3.2 2.3 .. 0.8 1.2 0.9 1.1 8.1 1.5 .. 1.5 0.6 2.9 13.7 44.5 10.6
4.5 1.4 8.7 4.5 .. 0.8 1.5 0.7 1.7 7.0 1.7 .. 1.8 1.8 5.9 16.9 58.9 11.6
4.1 2.0 7.3 3.1 .. 0.9 1.6 0.9 2.2 4.5 2.0 .. 1.8 2.0 1.6 19.2 53.2 10.2
3.0 2.5 2.6 1.7 .. 0.9 1.5 0.7 2.0 3.8 1.6 .. 1.8 1.6 0.6 19.6 43.9 7.2
2.7 3.8 1.9 1.3 .. 0.9 1.1 0.7 1.8 3.6 1.5 .. 0.8 1.3 0.4 17.7 39.5 6.2
2.4 4.6 1.5 1.2 20.7 0.7 0.8 0.7 3.3 1.9 1.0 .. 0.5 0.5 0.4 14.7 54.8 5.8
2.8 3.5 1.6 1.8 25.7 0.8 1.1 0.6 15.8 1.5 1.0 2.8 0.4 0.4 0.3 14.6 74.8 7.0
2.8 2.3 1.7 1.8 4.6 1.1 1.1 0.8 2.5 1.1 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 14.0 36.1 ..
2.6 2.1 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 13.5 29.3 ..
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 Yougoslavia before 1993. 2. EU 15 for all years.
233
Table B.1.1. SWITZERLAND, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Former Yugoslavia Germany Portugal Italy France Turkey United States United Kingdom Spain Netherlands Austria Canada Other countries Total of which: EU
13.5 8.1 8.4 8.4 4.6 3.6 2.3 2.3 5.1 1.7 1.8 0.6 15.7 76.1 ..
15.9 8.4 9.5 7.9 4.9 4.0 2.4 2.3 4.8 1.6 1.9 0.6 16.2 80.4 ..
21.9 9.8 13.8 8.8 5.4 6.0 2.5 2.5 5.6 1.9 2.1 0.7 20.4 101.4 ..
27.0 9.9 14.1 8.3 4.9 6.7 3.0 2.5 4.6 1.7 2.1 0.7 24.2 109.8 ..
33.6 9.6 13.3 8.3 5.1 5.3 2.6 2.5 3.9 1.8 2.0 0.7 23.4 112.1 ..
34.2 8.6 10.0 7.3 4.5 4.8 2.4 2.5 3.1 1.4 1.6 0.6 22.8 104.0 ..
25.3 8.7 8.6 6.9 5.0 3.8 2.6 2.4 2.3 1.5 1.5 0.7 22.3 91.7 37.8
22.3 8.6 7.6 6.7 5.0 3.8 2.9 2.6 2.7 1.5 1.3 0.9 22.0 87.9 39.3
14.1 8.7 5.5 5.4 5.0 3.4 2.9 2.4 2.0 1.4 1.3 0.8 21.6 74.3 35.7
Note: Data are from the register of foreigners. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.1.1.
UNITED KINGDOM, inows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
United States Australia India South Africa New Zealand Japan Pakistan Canada Philippines Poland Russian Federation Bangladesh 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 .. 3.2 3.0 2.3 72.7 190.3
38.2 27.2 9.9 5.6 12.1 10.4 6.6 6.7 5.2 3.5 3.5 3.2 3.3 2.7 55.4 193.6
39.4 26.6 11.6 11.1 12.0 10.1 7.2 6.7 6.5 3.5 4.2 2.8 3.5 3.2 58.1 206.3
43.2 25.1 13.0 12.9 11.0 10.8 7.8 7.4 6.8 3.6 3.6 3.3 3.3 3.2 61.5 216.4
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.
234
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.1.1.
UNITED STATES, inows of permanent settlers by region or country of birth

Thousands
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
North and Central America Mexico Dominican Republic Cuba Jamaica Haiti El Salvador Canada Other North or Central American countries Asia Philippines India Vietnam China Korea Other Asian countries Europe Former USSR Poland Other European countries South America Colombia Other South American countries Africa Oceania Total
207.7 66.5 26.2 33.1 19.6 12.7 10.9 11.0 27.7 268.2 52.6 26.2 30.0 25.1 35.8 98.6 62.5 2.6 8.5 51.4 41.9 11.4 30.5 17.5 3.9 601.7
216.6 72.4 24.9 28.9 23.1 14.8 10.7 11.9 29.9 257.7 50.1 27.8 24.2 25.8 35.8 93.9 61.2 2.4 7.5 51.3 44.4 11.7 32.7 17.7 4.0 601.5
250.0 95.0 27.2 17.6 21.0 34.8 12.0 11.8 30.6 264.5 50.7 26.3 25.8 28.7 34.7 98.3 64.8 2.9 9.5 52.3 41.0 10.3 30.7 18.9 3.8 643.0
607.4 405.2 26.7 10.0 24.5 13.7 57.9 12.2 57.2 312.1 57.0 31.2 37.7 32.3 34.2 119.7 82.9 11.1 15.1 56.7 58.9 15.2 43.7 25.2 4.4 1 090.9
957.6 679.1 42.2 10.6 25.0 20.3 80.2 16.8 83.3 338.6 63.8 30.7 48.8 31.8 32.3 131.3 112.4 25.5 20.5 66.3 85.8 24.2 61.6 35.9 6.2 1 536.5
1 211.0 946.2 41.4 10.3 23.8 47.5 47.4 13.5 80.9 358.5 63.6 45.1 55.3 33.0 26.5 135.0 135.2 57.0 19.2 59.1 79.9 19.7 60.2 36.2 6.2 1 827.2
384.0 213.8 42.0 11.8 18.9 11.0 26.2 15.2 45.2 357.0 61.0 36.8 77.7 38.9 19.4 123.2 145.4 43.6 25.5 76.3 55.3 13.2 42.1 27.1 5.2 974.0
301.4 126.6 45.4 13.7 17.2 10.1 26.8 17.2 44.4 358.0 63.5 40.1 59.6 65.6 18.0 111.3 158.3 58.6 27.8 71.8 53.9 12.8 41.1 27.8 4.9 904.3
272.2 111.4 51.2 14.7 14.3 13.3 17.6 16.1 33.5 292.6 53.5 34.9 41.3 54.0 16.0 92.8 160.9 63.4 28.0 69.4 47.4 10.8 36.5 26.7 4.6 804.4
231.5 89.9 38.5 17.9 16.4 14.0 11.7 12.9 30.1 267.9 51.0 34.7 41.8 35.5 16.0 88.9 128.2 54.5 13.8 59.9 45.7 10.8 34.8 42.5 4.7 720.5
340.5 163.6 39.6 26.5 19.1 18.4 17.9 15.8 39.7 307.8 55.9 44.9 42.1 41.7 18.2 105.1 147.6 62.8 15.8 69.0 61.8 14.3 47.5 52.9 5.3 915.9
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.
Table B.1.2.
BELGIUM, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
France Netherlands United States United Kingdom Germany Italy Spain Portugal Japan Morocco Zaire Turkey China Poland Former Yugoslavia Other countries Total of which: EU
.. .. .. .. .. 3.0 1.5 0.4 .. 1.1 .. 1.1 .. .. 0.3 24.9 32.3 16.8
.. .. .. .. .. 2.5 1.2 0.4 .. 0.7 .. 0.7 .. .. 0.2 21.8 27.5 15.6
.. .. .. .. .. 2.5 1.2 0.5 .. 0.7 0.8 0.6 .. .. 0.1 20.5 27.0 15.5
4.4 3.4 3.1 2.4 2.2 3.6 2.0 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.7 0.2 0.3 0.3 9.1 35.3 20.7
3.3 3.4 3.0 2.3 2.1 2.0 1.0 0.6 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.8 6.9 28.1 15.7
3.4 3.5 3.0 2.4 2.2 2.0 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.3 9.3 31.2 16.6
4.0 3.9 2.9 2.0 2.3 0.7 1.2 0.6 0.9 0.6 1.1 0.8 0.3 0.2 0.3 12.3 34.1 19.1
4.2 3.9 2.9 2.7 2.3 2.1 1.5 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.2 8.5 33.1 20.0
4.3 4.1 2.7 2.6 2.3 1.9 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.3 .. 8.8 32.4 19.7
Note: Data are from population registers. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
235
Table B.1.2.
DENMARK, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
United Kingdom Norway Sweden Germany United States Iceland Turkey France Finland Netherlands Italy Iran Poland Pakistan Former Yugoslavia Other countries Total of which: EU1
.. 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.7 4.6 1.4
.. 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.9 5.2 1.6
.. 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.9 4.8 1.4
.. 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.0 4.9 1.4
0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.4 5.0 1.7
0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.6 5.3 2.2
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 in 1995.
Table B.1.2.
FINLAND, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Former USSR Sweden Estonia United States United Kingdom Germany China Somalia Other countries Total
0.2 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.6 1.5
0.2 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.6 1.5
0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.5 1.5
0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 1.5
0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.2 3.0
Note: Data are from population registers. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
236
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.1.2. GERMANY, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Poland Turkey Italy Former Yugoslavia Bosnia Herzegovina1 Portugal Greece Croatia2 Hungary Romania United States Russian Federation3 Spain Bulgaria Morocco Other countries Total of which: EU4
99.3 39.9 37.2 26.1 .. 1.9 12.8 .. .. 3.4 .. .. 6.0 .. 1.3 131.3 359.1 96.9
142.5 37.7 38.5 36.0 .. 2.8 14.6 .. .. 3.5 .. .. 6.4 .. 1.3 155.0 438.3 104.9
157.7 35.1 34.1 38.3 .. 2.9 14.3 .. 8.7 15.8 .. .. 6.1 .. 1.5 151.5 466.0 100.9
115.3 36.1 36.4 53.0 .. 4.1 15.4 .. 14.9 30.2 .. .. 6.2 .. 2.0 183.9 497.5 114.6
109.5 40.3 32.7 99.4 .. 4.9 16.2 28.5 21.2 51.9 16.2 6.2 6.5 10.8 2.3 168.1 614.7 111.8
101.8 45.5 31.0 73.5 10.3 6.3 17.5 25.0 25.1 101.9 16.9 7.8 7.2 34.9 2.8 202.8 710.2 116.4
65.8 46.4 32.1 62.1 16.5 14.3 19.2 28.5 22.0 44.0 17.2 12.3 7.6 17.8 3.3 212.4 621.5 133.4
70.7 43.2 33.5 40.4 15.7 20.5 19.3 22.0 18.8 25.2 16.0 13.5 7.2 10.3 2.7 202.1 561.1 139.6
71.7 43.5 36.8 34.3 27.2 25.4 20.1 17.3 17.0 16.6 16.0 12.6 8.2 7.0 2.5 203.1 559.1 153.9
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. European Union 15 for all years.
Table B.1.2.
JAPAN, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Philippines Brazil United States China Korea Thailand United Kingdom Chinese Taipei Germany1 Canada Peru Other countries Total
44.3 2.6 28.6 42.1 15.8 5.0 6.6 7.9 3.2 2.4 0.2 25.0 183.7
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 204.8
42.5 7.3 28.3 14.9 21.0 6.2 7.3 7.1 4.3 3.1 1.4 22.7 166.1
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 181.3
59.1 23.2 27.3 19.5 21.7 7.4 6.2 6.9 4.0 3.6 3.2 22.7 204.8
44.5 32.2 26.2 26.0 21.4 6.5 2.4 5.8 4.2 3.4 2.7 25.2 200.5
52.1 33.1 25.9 24.8 21.5 5.8 6.2 5.6 4.2 3.4 2.8 18.8 204.2
45.2 29.3 26.0 24.0 22.0 5.9 5.7 5.3 3.7 3.6 2.7 21.8 195.2
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
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Portugal France Belgium Germany Italy Netherlands United States Spain Other countries Total
1.1 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.1 1.3 5.3
1.0 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.1 1.4 5.5
1.2 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.1 1.4 5.5
1.3 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.1 1.3 5.9
1.4 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 1.3 5.6
1.2 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 1.2 5.0
1.2 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.1 1.2 5.3
1.2 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 1.0 4.9
Note: Data are from the Central Population Register. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
237
Table B.1.2. NETHERLANDS, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Germany United Kingdom United States Turkey Belgium Japan Morocco France Italy Former Yugoslavia Suriname Poland China Other countries Total of which: EU1
2.3 2.8 1.9 5.2 1.0 .. 1.7 0.7 0.6 .. 0.4 .. .. 7.0 23.6 ..
2.4 2.5 1.6 3.8 1.2 .. 1.3 0.7 0.5 .. 0.3 .. .. 6.6 20.9 ..
2.3 2.5 1.7 3.5 1.2 .. 1.5 0.7 0.5 .. 0.5 .. .. 7.0 21.4 9.1
2.5 2.5 1.5 3.0 1.2 .. 1.3 0.8 0.5 .. 0.5 .. .. 7.7 21.5 9.7
2.3 2.4 1.7 2.3 1.2 .. 1.0 0.8 0.5 .. 0.5 .. .. 7.9 20.6 8.9
2.7 2.4 1.7 1.7 1.3 .. 1.1 0.9 0.5 .. 0.6 .. .. 8.4 21.3 9.6
2.9 2.4 1.9 1.8 1.3 .. 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.7 .. .. 9.1 22.7 10.0
3.0 2.6 1.9 1.7 1.1 0.9 1.1 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.6 1.2 0.1 6.6 22.2 10.5
3.2 2.8 1.8 1.6 1.3 0.9 1.2 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.2 7.5 22.7 10.4
2.9 2.9 1.5 1.6 0.9 .. 1.1 .. .. .. 0.4 .. .. 10.4 21.7 10.0
3.5 2.5 1.9 1.5 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 7.4 22.4 10.7
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.
NORWAY, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Denmark Sweden United States United Kingdom Bosnia Herzegovina1 Germany Pakistan Former Yugoslavia Chile Sri Lanka Iran Other countries Total of which: EU2
2.6 1.6 0.8 1.0 .. 0.2 0.1 0.2 2.7 9.3 4.7
2.6 1.7 1.0 1.5 .. 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 2.9 10.6 5.4
2.0 1.1 0.8 1.5 .. 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 3.1 9.8 4.5
1.7 0.7 0.9 1.1 .. 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 2.8 8.4 3.6
1.4 0.7 0.7 0.9 .. 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.2 2.9 8.1 3.0
1.4 0.7 1.0 1.1 0.3 0.4 1.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 3.8 10.5 3.5
1.6 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.1 3.5 9.6 3.3
1.7 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 3.2 9.0 5.0
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 12 for all years.
238
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.1.2. SWEDEN, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Finland Norway Denmark United States United Kingdom Chile Former Yugoslavia1 Greece Poland Iran Turkey Other countries Total of which: EU2
5.2 1.6 1.0 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.3 11.8 7.5
5.4 2.0 1.8 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 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 0.1 .. 0.2 0.1 2.8 15.0 7.9
3.1 3.4 1.8 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 3.2 13.2 6.2
2.8 2.9 1.6 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.1 4.5 14.8 6.0
2.6 2.4 1.6 0.8 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.7 0.2 5.2 15.8 6.1
2.7 2.2 1.6 0.8 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 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 ..
Note: Data are from population registers. For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Excluding Bosnia-Herzegovina from 1993 on. 2. European Union 15 for all years.
Table B.1.2. SWITZERLAND, outows of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Italy Former Yugoslavia Portugal Spain Germany France Turkey Austria Other countries Total of which: EU
12.2 4.7 3.9 6.1 6.1 3.4 2.6 1.4 15.4 55.8 ..
11.6 5.2 4.2 6.6 6.2 3.6 2.5 1.5 16.1 57.5 ..
11.7 5.9 4.7 7.2 6.2 3.8 2.6 1.5 16.0 59.6 ..
11.5 6.4 6.3 7.9 7.2 3.9 2.7 1.7 18.9 66.4 ..
15.3 7.5 10.1 11.6 7.1 4.0 2.9 1.8 20.2 80.4 ..
11.7 7.0 8.7 8.1 7.3 3.8 3.0 1.6 20.0 71.2 ..
9.9 8.0 7.5 6.1 6.2 3.5 3.0 1.3 18.9 64.2 ..
10.3 8.7 7.4 6.1 6.6 3.8 2.7 1.4 20.5 67.5 42.3
10.8 9.0 7.9 6.3 6.2 3.7 2.5 1.2 20.1 67.7 42.6
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.
BELGIUM, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Netherlands Morocco France Turkey Germany Italy Portugal Poland United States United Kingdom China Zaire Spain Japan Former Yugoslavia Other countries Total of which: UE
.. 0.9 .. 0.3 .. 0.5 0.9 .. .. .. .. .. 0.8 .. 5.2 6.0 3.0
.. 1.6 .. 1.1 .. 0.2 1.3 .. .. .. .. .. 0.4 .. 0.3 12.0 16.1 6.9
.. 1.9 .. 1.8 .. 0.2 1.2 .. .. .. .. 0.9 0.4 .. 1.4 16.4 23.4 9.1
2.8 2.5 1.4 2.2 0.5 1.0 1.1 0.2 0.2 0.8 0.3 0.9 1.3 0.7 7.9 18.8 4.1
3.3 2.8 2.6 2.2 0.8 0.6 2.6 0.4 0.1 0.8 0.4 2.2 0.1 0.7 7.7 26.9 11.3
3.2 2.7 2.5 1.9 0.9 0.8 1.2 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.3 1.7 0.2 0.5 5.3 21.8 9.8
0.4 4.2 2.2 2.8 0.8 1.1 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.2 1.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 6.7 21.9 8.0
2.6 2.7 2.0 1.9 0.9 0.4 0.7 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.4 2.3 5.8 20.0 6.5
3.8 3.2 2.3 2.0 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 .. 4.6 19.5 9.0
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.
239
Table B.1.3.
DENMARK, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Former Yugoslavia Iceland Germany Turkey Norway Sweden Netherlands United Kingdom United States Poland Pakistan France Iran Italy Finland Other countries Total of which: EU2
0.5 0.1 0.3 1.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 .. 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.1 6.4 10.5 0.9
0.6 0.4 1.6 0.3 0.4 0.1 .. 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.7 7.4 12.3 1.0
0.5 0.1 0.4 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.1 .. 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.1 8.1 12.1 1.3
0.2 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.3 .. 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.1 7.1 10.5 1.6
0.2 0.4 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 6.2 10.5 2.0
16.61 1.0 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 6.4 27.7 2.3
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. Including 16 077 former Yugoslavs who have been recognised as refugees after 3 years of legal residence in Denmark as war refugees (temporay status). 2. Including Finland and Sweden in 1995.
Table B.1.3.
FINLAND, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Former USSR Iraq Bosnia Herzegovina Estonia Sweden Somalia Iran Turkey Thailand Former Yugoslavia Vietnam Germany United Kingdom China United States Other countries Total
2.8 .. .. 2.1 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 .. .. 0.1 0.2 0.1 2.5 8.9
2.0 .. .. 1.9 0.1 0.9 0.1 0.1 .. 1.7 0.2 0.1 0.2 2.0 9.4
1.7 .. .. 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 .. 0.1 0.2 1.6 6.1
1.7 .. .. 0.8 0.3 0.3 .. 0.1 0.1 .. .. 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.2 5.8
1.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.7 4.5
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.
240
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.1.3.
GERMANY, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Turkey Russian Federation1 Italy Former Yugoslavia Portugal Poland Morocco Romania United States Hungary Spain Bulgaria Greece Croatia2 Bosnia Herzegovina3 Other countries Total of which: EU4
38.5 .. 4.6 29.6 1.7 108.5 3.2 7.8 .. .. 2.1 .. 20.2 .. .. 77.4 289.5 43.2
48.0 .. 1.7 25.5 2.5 117.8 3.4 10.7 .. .. 2.0 .. 14.9 .. .. 110.0 332.5 37.1
48.5 .. 2.8 26.9 4.1 43.1 4.0 62.4 .. 7.2 1.7 .. 12.2 .. .. 166.8 376.4 38.7
45.8 .. 1.0 168.0 6.6 13.1 4.0 31.2 .. 10.0 1.1 .. 12.9 .. .. 133.5 423.0 32.8
40.3 18.4 2.7 241.9 5.2 22.2 4.2 58.0 5.1 6.8 1.1 20.6 7.4 10.1 .. 156.5 592.9 29.0
22.3 21.7 0.7 68.1 6.6 26.6 2.3 20.2 0.7 0.8 1.3 7.6 0.7 1.0 96.7 112.5 276.6 20.3
17.6 21.1 6.6 1.0 12.2 12.9 0.5 12.6 1.3 2.7 1.6 7.5 0.3 11.8 51.8 66.6 152.5 22.4
30.4 19.5 14.5 13.8 10.0 16.5 0.9 0.3 2.3 0.9 7.1 39.4 91.1 227.2 37.7
29.7 19.3 9.0 8.6 6.6 5.7 1.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.7 1.2 5.0 16.1 91.2 148.9 18.6
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. JAPAN, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
China United States United Kingdom Thailand Canada Germany1 Chinese Taipei Peru Korea Philippines Brazil Other countries Total
29.3 0.1 0.2 0.9 0.1 1.0 1.1 0.4 2.3 3.8 0.5 18.8 51.1
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 32.6
15.0 2.5 0.2 0.8 0.7 0.2 1.4 2.1 6.3 4.3 24.2 57.7
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 77.1
32.9 2.0 0.5 0.3 0.6 0.2 0.9 2.3 4.3 1.6 4.0 30.2 62.2
19.2 1.2 3.5 0.4 0.6 1.7 0.1 3.7 17.6 26.1 34.0
14.1 1.7 0.4 1.0 0.7 0.2 0.9 1.8 0.2 6.7 21.3 33.1 33.3
14.8 1.0 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.6 1.0 3.2 14.9 17.4 34.1 14.7
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 relate to western Germany.
241
Table B.1.3.
LUXEMBOURG, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Portugal France Belgium Germany Italy Netherlands United States Spain Other countries Total
1.9 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 .. 0.6 2.9
1.9 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.1 .. 0.5 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 .. 1.6 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
Table B.1.3. NETHERLANDS, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Turkey Morocco Former Yugoslavia Suriname Germany United Kingdom United States China Poland France Belgium Italy Japan Other countries Total of which: EU1
3.2 4.9 .. 3.3 2.0 1.6 0.1 .. .. 0.7 1.3 0.2 .. 11.9 29.2 ..
5.8 5.7 .. 4.0 1.7 2.0 0.4 .. .. 0.8 1.2 0.4 .. 18.0 40.0 ..
6.9 6.7 .. 2.4 2.1 1.5 0.3 .. .. 0.9 1.1 0.4 .. 14.6 36.9 6.4
8.0 7.1 .. 3.9 2.1 1.7 0.8 .. .. 0.8 1.0 0.5 .. 18.0 43.9 6.0
10.3 8.4 .. 6.3 3.3 2.9 0.8 .. .. 1.0 1.2 0.6 .. 25.7 60.7 9.7
10.7 7.8 .. 6.1 4.1 3.5 0.9 .. .. 0.8 1.0 0.5 .. 27.5 63.0 11.1
7.3 6.1 4.6 6.2 4.2 4.1 1.0 .. .. 1.0 0.9 0.5 .. 24.4 60.3 12.2
6.0 4.8 8.6 7.2 4.4 2.4 0.7 1.0 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.6 0.1 27.7 65.4 9.2
2.7 2.0 8.1 2.4 3.0 0.7 0.4 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.2 23.5 45.7 5.6
3.2 2.0 .. 1.3 1.8 0.7 0.7 .. .. .. 0.5 .. .. 35.2 45.3 4.8
4.9 3.2 3.0 2.4 2.2 1.9 1.2 1.1 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.2 31.2 54.8 8.6
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
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Bosnia Sweden Former Yugoslavia Pakistan Germany Iran Sri Lanka United Kingdom United States Denmark Other countries Total of which: EU2
Herzegovina1
.. 0.4 0.6 0.9 0.2 1.7 0.6 0.5 0.2 0.6 8.2 13.9 1.3
.. 0.6 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.1 0.4 6.4 8.0 1.3
.. 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.8 0.2 4.9 5.9 1.0
.. 0.4 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 5.3 7.7 0.1
.. 0.6 1.9 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.3 4.9 9.1 0.9
6.2 0.9 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 3.2 11.8 0.5
3.1 1.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 3.3 8.3 0.6
1.4 1.0 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 4.0 7.5 1.6
242
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.
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.1.3.
SWEDEN, net migration of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Turkey Iran Former Yugoslavia1 Poland United Kingdom United States Chile Denmark Finland Norway Other countries Total of which: EU2
1.1 8.0 0.9 1.4 0.5 0.3 2.8 1.3 0.2 1.6 14.6 32.7 3.1
1.4 6.8 1.5 1.6 0.4 0.4 5.7 2.7 0.9 6.7 19.5 45.8 3.2
1.5 4.3 2.0 .. 0.6 0.5 1.4 0.7 1.3 3.4 23.9 37.0 1.0
1.4 3.6 1.8 .. 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.5 1.5 1.5 24.2 28.9 0.7
1.0 3.4 1.6 1.4 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.4 1.5 20.3 26.3 0.0
0.7 1.4 2.7 0.8 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.4 1.4 36.2 40.0 0.2
0.9 0.8 15.1 0.8 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.8 41.9 59.0 0.9
1.0 0.9 2.3 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.5 15.4 20.7 ..
0.9 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.5 12.4 14.9 ..
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. Excluding Bosnia-Herzegovina from 1993 on. 2. 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
Former Yugoslavia Germany France Turkey Austria Portugal Spain Italy Other countries Total of which: EU
8.8 2.0 1.2 1.0 0.4 4.5 1.0 3.8 7.2 20.3 ..
10.7 2.2 1.3 1.5 0.4 5.3 1.8 3.7 7.0 22.9 ..
16.0 3.6 1.6 3.4 0.6 9.0 1.6 2.8 12.0 41.8 ..
20.6 2.7 1.0 4.0 0.4 7.8 3.3 3.1 13.3 43.3 ..
26.1 2.5 1.1 2.4 0.2 3.2 7.7 7.1 10.9 31.7 ..
27.2 1.4 0.8 1.8 1.3 4.9 4.4 9.7 32.8 ..
17.3 2.5 1.5 0.8 0.2 1.1 3.7 3.0 10.7 27.5 ..
13.6 2.0 1.2 1.1 0.2 3.4 3.6 9.4 20.4 3.0
5.1 2.4 1.3 0.8 0.1 2.3 4.3 5.4 8.9 6.6 7.0
Table B.1.4.
FRANCE, inows of asylum seekers by nationality

Thousands
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Romania China Turkey Zaire Former Yugoslavia Algeria Former USSR Cambodia Vietnam Laos Haiti Sri Lanka Other countries Total
3.3 0.8 11.8 5.8 0.4 0.1 0.3 1.1 3.3 1.1 0.8 2.5 23.6 54.8
2.4 2.4 9.7 4.3 0.9 0.2 0.4 0.9 2.3 1.2 0.6 3.4 18.7 47.4
2.2 2.1 1.8 3.1 2.4 0.6 0.4 0.7 1.1 0.6 0.6 4.0 9.5 28.9
2.7 0.4 1.3 2.2 2.5 1.1 0.2 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.3 2.8 11.4 27.6
4.0 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.9 2.4 0.1 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.4 1.7 10.1 26.0
4.0 1.6 1.7 1.2 1.4 1.8 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 1.1 6.0 20.4
4.0 1.4 1.2 1.1 0.9 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 .. 6.3 17.4
Note: For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
243
Table B.1.4.
GERMANY, inows of asylum seekers by nationality

Thousands
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Turkey Former Yugoslavia Iraq Afghanistan Sri Lanka Iran Armenia Bosnia Herzegovina Romania Vietnam Bulgaria Lebanon Poland Other countries Total
20.0 19.4 .. 3.7 .. 5.8 .. .. 3.1 1.0 0.4 6.2 26.1 35.6 121.3
22.1 22.1 .. 7.3 4.4 7.3 .. .. 35.3 9.4 8.3 16.2 9.2 51.4 193.1
23.9 74.9 .. 7.3 5.6 8.6 .. .. 40.5 8.1 12.1 .. .. 75.1 256.1
28.3 122.7 .. 6.4 .. 3.8 .. 6.2 103.8 12.3 31.5 5.6 4.2 113.4 438.2
19.1 74.1 1.2 5.5 3.3 2.7 .. 21.2 73.7 11.0 22.5 .. 1.7 86.6 322.6
19.1 30.4 2.1 5.6 4.8 3.4 2.1 7.3 9.6 3.4 3.4 .. .. 35.9 127.2
25.5 26.2 6.9 7.5 6.0 3.9 3.4 4.9 3.5 2.6 1.2 .. .. 36.2 127.9
23.8 18.1 10.8 5.7 5.0 4.8 3.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. 44.7 116.4
Table B.1.4. NETHERLANDS, inows of asylum seekers by nationality

Thousands
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Iraq Afghanistan Former Yugoslavia Former USSR Iran Sri Lanka Somalia Turkey Sudan Liberia Romania Other countries Total
0.4 0.6 0.6 0.2 1.7 3.0 1.7 0.8 .. 0.2 2.2 9.8 21.2
0.7 0.3 2.7 1.0 1.7 1.8 1.7 0.9 .. 0.3 1.7 8.7 21.6
0.8 0.4 5.6 0.6 1.3 1.0 4.2 0.7 0.1 0.3 1.0 4.3 20.3
3.2 1.5 10.2 1.6 2.6 1.9 4.3 0.6 0.2 0.7 1.1 7.5 35.4
2.9 2.5 13.4 4.5 6.1 1.8 5.4 0.6 0.3 0.4 2.8 11.9 52.6
2.4 1.9 6.1 1.9 2.7 1.3 4.0 0.7 0.6 0.3 0.4 6.9 29.3
4.4 3.0 2.0 1.7 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.1 5.2 22.9
Table B.1.4.
SWEDEN, inows of asylum seekers by nationality

Thousands
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Iraq Former Yugoslavia Somalia Iran Russian Federation Turkey Afghanistan Peru Ethiopia Romania Cuba Other countries Total
2.0 2.3 2.4 4.3 .. 1.0 .. .. 2.0 2.7 .. 12.7 29.4
2.2 13.2 1.4 0.3 .. 0.4 .. 0.5 0.5 0.5 .. 8.4 27.4
3.2 69.4 2.7 0.8 .. 0.4 .. 0.8 0.2 0.5 .. 6.1 84.0
2.3 29.0 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.2 3.5 37.6
1.7 10.6 0.9 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 1.2 2.5 18.6
1.8 2.4 0.9 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.1 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
244
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.1.4.
SWITZERLAND, inows of asylum seekers by nationality

Thousands
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Former Yugoslavia Sri Lanka Turkey Somalia Other countries Total
.. 0.6 4.1 .. 3.9 8.5
.. 0.9 5.8 .. 4.2 10.9
0.8 1.5 9.7 .. 4.7 16.7
1.4 4.8 9.4 .. 8.9 24.4
5.6 4.8 7.3 .. 18.2 35.8
14.2 7.3 4.3 .. 15.8 41.6
.. .. .. .. .. 18.0
12.1 1.7 1.1 2.3 7.5 24.7
7.5 1.5 1.1 .. 6.1 16.1
9.0 1.0 1.3 .. 5.7 17.0
7.5 2.0 1.3 0.7 6.5 18.0
Table B.1.4.
UNITED KINGDOM, inows of asylum seekers by nationality

Thousands
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Nigeria India Somalia Pakistan Turkey Former USSR Sri Lanka Kenya Former Yugoslavia Colombia Iraq Algeria Ghana Zaire Sierra Leone Other countries Total (excluding dependents) Total (including dependents)
0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.8 4.0 5.7
0.6 1.9 0.3 2.4 1.8 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 3.5 11.6 16.8
0.1 1.5 2.3 1.5 1.6 0.1 3.3 0.1 0.2 1.0 1.3 2.6 10.7 26.2 38.2
0.3 2.1 2.0 3.2 2.1 0.2 3.8 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.9 2.4 7.0 0.1 20.1 44.8 73.4
0.6 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.9 0.3 2.1 0.1 5.6 0.3 0.7 0.2 1.6 0.9 0.3 5.4 24.6 32.3
1.7 1.3 1.5 1.1 1.5 0.4 2.0 0.6 1.8 0.4 0.5 0.3 1.8 0.6 1.1 5.9 22.4 28.0
4.3 2.0 1.8 1.8 2.0 0.6 2.4 1.1 1.4 0.4 0.6 1.0 2.0 0.8 1.8 8.7 32.8 42.2
5.8 3.3 3.5 2.9 1.8 0.8 2.1 1.4 1.6 0.5 0.9 1.9 1.9 0.9 0.9 13.8 44.0 55.0
2.5 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.3 9.6 27.9 37.0
Table B.1.4. 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 Cuba Other countries Total
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 2.4 20.9 104.0
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 2.7 35.2 144.2
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 3.2 36.5 146.5
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 1.3 19.6 154.5
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 0.8 11.7 128.2
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.
245
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 Yugoslavia Vietnam Greece China1 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. Excluding Chinese Taipei.
Table B.1.5. CANADA, stock of foreign-born population by country of birth, census results of 1986, 1991 and 1996
Thousands
1986 1991 1996
United Kingdom Italy United States Hong Kong (China) India China Poland Philippines Germany Portugal Vietnam Netherlands Former Yugoslavia Jamaica 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 1 178.9 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 1 456.8 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 1 810.6 4 971.1 17.4
246
STATISTICAL ANNEX
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
Table B.1.5.
NETHERLANDS, stock of foreign-born population by country of birth

Thousands
1990 1993 1994 1995
Suriname Indonesia Turkey Morocco Germany Former Yugoslavia Belgium United Kingdom United States Spain Somalia China Italy France Iran Other countries Total % of total population
162.9 186.1 149.5 122.9 128.7 15.2 42.2 38.3 14.7 17.3 3.6 11.8 14.3 13.7 6.3 289.7 1 217.1 8.1
182.9 183.7 166.0 139.4 129.4 29.7 44.0 44.8 17.0 17.5 11.9 15.2 15.6 15.3 10.8 352.1 1 375.4 9.0
180.9 180.4 166.0 139.8 131.2 37.2 43.2 43.3 17.1 17.5 14.9 15.2 15.4 15.4 12.7 357.3 1 387.4 9.0
181.0 177.7 167.5 140.7 130.1 43.8 43.3 42.3 17.4 17.4 17.2 16.1 15.5 15.4 14.9 366.9 1 407.1 9.1
247
Table B.1.5.
NORWAY, stock of foreign-born population by country of birth

Thousands
1986 1993 1994 1995 1996
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
17.9 19.9 15.5 14.5 8.2 .. 5.4 7.8 0.8 2.1 1.6 3.2 4.1 3.0 1.6 43.2 148.9 3.6
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
Note: For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Included in former Yugoslavia in 1986.
Table B.1.5.
SWEDEN, stock of foreign-born population by country of birth

Thousands
1993 1994 1995 1996
Finland Former Yugoslavia Iran Bosnia Herzegovina1 Norway Denmark Poland Germany Turkey Iraq Chile Lebanon Hungary United States Ethiopia Other countries Total % of total population
209.5 70.5 48.1 .. 47.1 41.1 38.5 36.6 28.5 20.2 27.7 21.2 15.0 13.8 13.2 238.1 869.1 9.9
207.8 112.3 48.7 .. 45.9 40.9 39.0 36.5 29.2 23.4 27.2 21.6 14.8 13.7 13.4 247.6 922.1 10.5
205.7 119.5 49.0 .. 53.9 40.5 39.4 36.5 29.8 26.4 27.0 .. 14.7 13.8 13.4 266.5 936.0 10.5
203.4 72.8 49.2 46.8 43.8 39.8 39.5 36.5 30.2 29.0 26.9 21.6 14.7 13.8 13.4 262.4 943.8 11.0
Note: For details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Included in former Yugoslavia until 1995.
248
STATISTICAL ANNEX
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
Table B.1.6. BELGIUM, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985 1990 1995 1996 1996
Italy Morocco France Netherlands Turkey Spain Germany United Kingdom Portugal Greece Other countries Total of which: EU
252.9 123.6 92.3 59.6 74.2 51.2 24.3 20.8 9.5 19.3 118.8 846.5 538.1
241.2 141.7 94.3 65.3 84.9 52.2 27.8 23.3 16.5 20.9 136.3 904.5 551.2
210.7 140.3 100.1 77.2 81.7 48.3 31.8 26.0 23.9 19.9 149.9 909.8 554.5
208.2 138.3 101.7 80.6 78.5 47.9 32.7 26.2 24.9 19.5 153.4 911.9 559.6
92.8 64.4 52.2 35.6 38.7 23.0 15.9 12.0 12.2 9.1 76.0 431.9 262.0
249
Table B.1.6.
CZECH REPUBLIC, stock of foreign residents by nationality

Thousands
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Slovak Ukraine Poland Vietnam United States Russia Germany China Bulgaria Austria Other countries Total
Republic1
.. .. 12.7 2.6 1.5 .. 1.5 1.4 2.9 .. 18.6 41.2
.. 6.0 21.2 7.8 2.6 1.2 2.9 2.6 4.0 1.6 27.7 77.7
16.7 14.2 20.0 9.6 3.5 3.6 4.2 2.9 3.8 1.9 23.2 103.7
39.7 28.2 23.1 14.2 4.4 4.4 5.6 4.2 4.3 2.2 28.4 158.6
50.3 46.3 24.5 17.6 10.1 6.7 5.9 4.8 4.3 2.2 25.9 198.6
Note: 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.
Table B.1.6.
DENMARK, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1995
1996 1996
Turkey Former Yugoslavia United Kingdom Norway Germany Somalia Sweden Iraq Iran Pakistan Other countries Total of which: EU1
20.4 7.9 9.7 9.8 8.2 .. 8.1 0.7 4.7 6.6 40.8 117.0 37.3
29.7 10.0 10.2 10.2 8.4 0.6 8.2 2.8 9.0 6.2 65.3 160.6 38.2
35.7 28.1 12.1 11.1 10.6 6.9 9.1 7.1 7.4 6.6 88.1 222.7 46.5
36.8 32.2 12.5 11.5 11.4 9.7 9.4 8.1 7.0 6.7 92.3 237.7 48.9
18.1 15.6 4.5 6.6 5.2 4.4 5.4 3.5 3.0 3.6 47.5 117.3 ..
250
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.1.6.
FINLAND, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1995
1996 1996
Former USSR1 Estonia1, 2 Sweden Somalia Former Yugoslavia Vietnam Iraq Germany United States United Kingdom Other countries Total of which: EU
1.6 .. 4.9 .. .. .. .. 1.6 1.3 1.1 6.6 17.0 ..
4.2 .. 6.1 .. .. .. .. 1.6 1.5 1.3 12.1 26.6 ..
15.9 8.4 7.0 4.0 2.4 2.1 1.3 1.7 1.8 1.9 22.1 68.6 13.7
17.0 9.0 7.3 4.6 2.6 2.1 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 23.8 73.8 14.1
10.3 5.3 3.3 2.0 1.1 1.1 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.5 9.8 35.8 ..
Note: 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.
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 Other countries Total of which: EU
758.9 710.7 260.0 462.9 497.5 139.7 50.9 70.3 4.5 93.7 393.3 3 442.4 1 869.9
767.3 805.1 441.3 340.3 327.2 190.8 122.3 62.5 37.9 64.8 554.8 3 714.2 1 594.8
649.7 614.2 572.7 252.8 216.0 206.3 197.7 52.5 47.4 47.1 740.2 3 596.6 1 311.9
304.2 253.9 250.7 108.0 103.7 84.8 87.5 24.5 22.6 28.9 345.3 1 614.3 613.9
Note: For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
251
Table B.1.6.
GERMANY, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women4
1985 1990 1995 1996 1996
Turkey Former Yugoslavia1 Italy Greece Bosnia Herzegovina2 Poland Croatia2 Austria Spain Portugal Other countries Total of which: EU3
1 401.9 591.0 531.3 280.6 .. 104.8 .. 172.5 152.8 77.0 1 067.0 4 378.9 1 539.0
1 694.6 662.7 552.4 320.2 .. 242.0 .. 183.2 135.5 85.5 1 466.4 5 342.5 1 632.6
2 014.3 797.7 586.1 359.5 316.0 276.7 185.1 184.5 132.3 125.1 2 196.6 7 173.9 1 811.7
2 049.1 754.3 599.4 362.5 340.5 283.4 201.9 184.9 132.5 130.8 2 274.7 7 314.0 1 839.9
654.1 241.0 187.2 136.2 121.6 107.9 83.5 78.0 55.9 45.3 822.3 2 533.0 694.6
Note: For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. From 1993 on, Serbia and Montenegro. 2. Included in former Yugoslavia until 1992. 3. European Union 15 for all years (except Swedish citizens before 1991). 4. Women aged 16 years and over.
Table B.1.6. HUNGARY, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1994 1995 1996 1996
Romania Former Yugoslavia Ukraine Germany China Poland Russian Federation Slovak Republic Greece Vietnam Other countries Total of which: EU
68.3 14.5 11.1 7.4 3.5 4.6 3.7 3.4 1.4 1.3 18.8 137.9 11.8
65.7 15.5 11.5 7.8 4.3 4.5 3.7 3.5 1.6 1.3 20.4 139.9 13.0
61.6 14.9 12.0 8.3 6.7 4.3 4.1 3.7 1.8 1.6 23.5 142.5 14.7
28.1 6.3 7.1 5.3 2.3 1.8 2.5 2.6 0.7 0.7 8.7 66.1 7.6
252
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.1.6.
ITALY, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1985 1990 1995 19961
Morocco Albania Philippines United States Former Yugoslavia2 Tunisia Germany Senegal Romania China Other countries Total of which: EU
2.6 .. 7.6 51.1 13.9 4.4 37.2 0.3 .. 1.6 304.3 423.0 ..
78.0 .. 34.3 58.1 29.8 41.2 41.6 25.1 7.5 18.7 446.8 781.1 148.6
94.2 34.7 43.4 60.6 56.1 40.5 39.4 24.0 24.5 21.5 552.6 991.4 164.0
119.5 64.0 57.1 54.7 48.3 44.8 36.5 31.9 31.7 29.1 578.2 1 095.6 152.1
Note: For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Data include permits delivered following the 1995-1996 regularisation programme. 2. Excluding the data for Croatia, Republic of Macedonia and Bosnia Herzegovina.
Table B.1.6.
JAPAN, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1985 1990 1995 1996
Korea China1 Brazil Philippines United States Peru Thailand United Kingdom Vietnam Indonesia Iran Other countries Total
683.3 74.9 2.0 12.3 29.0 0.5 2.6 6.8 4.1 1.7 .. 33.4 850.6
687.9 150.3 56.4 49.1 38.4 10.3 6.7 10.2 6.2 3.6 .. 56.2 1 075.3
666.4 223.0 176.4 74.3 43.2 36.3 16.0 12.5 9.1 7.0 8.6 89.6 1 362.4
657.2 234.3 201.8 84.5 44.2 37.1 18.2 13.3 10.2 8.7 8.4 97.2 1 415.1
Note: 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 1996 1996
China of which: Chinese with Korean descents United States Chinese Taipei Japan Philippines Vietnam Indonesia Bangladesh Canada Sri Lanka Other countries Total of which: EU
8.4 24.8 3.0 0.2 0.4 4.8 41.6 3.1
0.1 14.0 23.6 5.3 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.1 5.1 49.5 3.0
19.2 7.4 22.2 23.3 9.4 9.0 5.7 3.4 2.7 3.0 1.7 10.6 110.0 3.6
26.7 9.3 26.4 23.3 12.4 10.8 10.3 9.6 6.3 3.7 2.9 16.3 148.7 4.4
11.3 3.4 12.2 10.7 7.6 4.3 3.6 1.9 0.0 1.8 1.0 5.3 59.7 1.6
253
Table B.1.6. LUXEMBOURG, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1985 1990 1995 1996
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
53.1 19.8 15.7 12.4 9.9 .. 31.9 142.8
Table B.1.6. NETHERLANDS, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985 1990 1995 1996 1996
Morocco Turkey Germany United Kingdom1 Former Yugoslavia Belgium Italy Spain United States Portugal Other countries Total of which: EU2
116.4 156.4 41.0 38.5 11.7 22.8 17.8 19.0 10.5 7.5 110.9 552.5 166.4
156.9 203.5 44.3 39.0 13.5 23.6 16.9 17.2 11.4 8.3 157.8 692.4 173.9
149.8 154.3 53.9 41.1 33.5 24.1 17.4 16.7 12.8 9.1 212.7 725.4 191.1
138.7 127.0 53.5 39.3 32.8 24.0 17.3 16.6 12.6 8.8 209.3 679.9 188.3
63.8 60.4 26.3 15.9 15.7 12.6 5.7 7.6 6.2 4.0 100.6 318.8 86.4
Note: 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.
Table B.1.6.
NORWAY, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1995
1996 1996
Denmark Sweden Bosnia Herzegovina1 United Kingdom United States Pakistan Former Yugoslavia Germany Vietnam Sri Lanka Other countries Total of which: EU2
15.7 10.0 .. 12.5 10.0 8.4 1.7 3.7 5.3 1.0 33.2 101.5 52.9
17.2 11.7 .. 11.8 9.5 11.4 4.2 4.3 6.9 5.2 61.0 143.3 55.9
17.9 15.4 11.2 11.1 9.0 9.7 6.4 4.8 5.9 5.1 64.3 160.8 61.6
18.1 17.3 11.5 10.9 8.7 8.6 6.0 5.1 4.6 4.4 62.3 157.5 64.1
9.1 8.1 5.9 4.5 4.6 4.5 2.7 2.7 2.3 2.3 33.4 79.9 33.0
254
Note: For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Included in former Yugoslavia until 1992. 2. European Union 15 for all years.
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.1.6. PORTUGAL, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1988 1990 1995 19961 1996
Cape Verde Brazil Angola Guinea-Bissau United Kingdom Spain United States Germany France Mozambique Other countries Total of which: EU
27.1 9.3 4.4 3.1 7.1 7.1 6.1 4.1 2.8 2.8 20.7 94.7 25.3
28.8 11.4 5.3 4.0 8.5 7.5 6.9 4.8 3.2 3.2 24.1 107.8 28.8
38.7 19.9 15.8 12.3 11.5 8.9 8.5 7.4 4.7 4.4 36.2 168.3 41.5
39.6 20.0 16.3 12.6 12.0 9.3 8.5 7.9 5.1 4.4 21.2 172.9 43.7
15.6 9.2 6.5 3.3 5.5 4.5 3.7 3.4 2.4 1.9 15.9 71.9
Note: For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Data include 21 800 permits delivered following the 1996 regularisation programme.
Table B.1.6.
SPAIN, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
1985 1990 1995 19961
Morocco United Kingdom Germany Portugal France Italy Argentina Peru Dominican Republic United States Other countries Total of which: EU
5.8 39.1 28.5 23.3 17.8 10.3 9.7 1.7 1.2 12.2 92.2 242.0 143.5
11.4 55.5 31.2 22.8 19.7 10.8 12.1 2.6 1.5 11.0 100.2 278.8 164.6
74.9 65.3 41.9 37.0 30.8 19.8 18.4 15.1 14.5 14.9 167.3 499.8 235.6
77.2 68.4 45.9 38.3 33.1 21.4 18.2 18.0 17.8 15.7 185.0 539.0 251.9
Note: For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Data include 21 300 permits delivered following the 1996 regularisation programme.
255
Table B.1.6.
SWEDEN, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1995
1996 1996
Finland Former Yugoslavia Norway Iran Denmark Iraq Turkey Poland Germany Chile Other countries Total
Note:
138.6 38.4 26.4 8.3 25.1 3.5 21.5 15.5 12.0 9.2 90.1 388.6
119.7 41.1 38.2 39.0 28.6 7.7 25.5 15.7 13.0 19.9 135.3 483.7
104.9 38.4 32.3 29.3 26.5 21.3 20.3 16.0 13.4 13.0 216.4 531.8
103.1 36.6 31.7 27.2 26.0 22.8 18.9 15.9 13.9 12.4 218.1 526.6
57.1 17.8 16.5 13.4 11.1 10.0 9.7 10.8 6.6 5.9 107.2 266.1
For details on denitions and sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
Table B.1.6.
SWITZERLAND, stock of foreign population by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985
1990
1995
1996 1996
Italy Former Yugoslavia Portugal Spain Germany Turkey France Austria United Kingdom Netherlands Other countries Total of which: EU
392.5 69.5 30.9 108.4 81.0 50.9 47.1 29.2 15.4 10.8 104.0 939.7 702.7
378.7 140.7 85.6 116.1 83.4 64.2 50.0 28.8 16.7 11.9 124.1 1 100.3 760.2
358.9 294.2 134.8 101.4 90.9 78.6 53.6 28.1 18.4 13.6 157.9 1 330.6 824.9
350.3 305.0 137.1 97.7 92.7 79.4 54.2 28.1 18.3 13.9 160.9 1 337.6 817.2
150.4 142.8 65.7 44.2 42.4 36.6 25.8 12.3 7.9 6.7 80.8 615.6 367.6
Table B.1.6.
UNITED KINGDOM, stock of foreign population by country or region of nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985 1990 1995 1997 1997
Ireland India United States Italy Pakistan Bangladesh Australia Germany Turkey France Other countries Total of which: EU
569 138 86 83 49 41 28 36 .. 27 674 1 731 796
478 156 102 75 56 38 44 41 12 38 683 1 723 731
443 114 110 80 81 53 47 51 29 60 992 2 060 902
446 110 104 77 68 63 62 59 56 54 967 2 066 810
242 64 57 33 40 32 37 37 25 35 504 1 106 442
256
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 Other countries Total
3 328.3 420.5 393.9 361.0 341.9 337.5 322.3 311.5 296.4 293.2 5 363.8 11 770.3
Table B.1.7.
1987
AUSTRALIA, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
United Kingdom China New Zealand Vietnam Philippines Former Yugoslavia India Fiji United States Sri Lanka South Africa Ireland Cambodia Italy Lebanon Other countries Total
23 2 3 7 1 3 1 1 1 1 2 26
732 197 406 445 913 133 058 .. .. 547 481 685 356 .. 388 236
26 2 3 6 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 26
574 371 973 668 723 871 231 .. .. 347 030 025 277 .. 476 652
42 2 6 9 5 3 1 2 3 1 1 3 34
883 911 995 815 024 999 547 .. .. 113 211 650 798 .. 115 079
39 3 7 8 9 4 1 2 3 1 1 4 39
495 342 538 256 504 726 933 .. .. 516 029 921 686 .. 090 821
36 1 6 6 9 3 1 2 2 2 4 3 36
488 743 562 723 275 679 960 .. .. 576 569 520 584 .. 405 426
41 5 8 9 6 3 2 2 2 2 1 2 37
963 018 502 697 763 487 130 .. .. 003 006 459 259 .. 585 286
39 4 9 12 6 2 2 2 1 1 2 33
876 872 772 406 633 972 645 .. .. 104 781 980 577 .. 976 491
36 5 7 10 6 3 2 2 1 1 1 1
401 242 786 713 600 043 836 018 634 691 595 805 .. 988 2 122 27 712
36 5 9 7 5 3 3 2 1 1 1 1
134 971 033 772 408 534 107 204 912 730 324 882 .. 1 079 1 392 32 275
35 4 11 7 4 5 2 1 2 1 1 1
431 250 724 741 021 188 638 815 272 644 262 688 .. 1 469 1 105 29 389
27 16 9 5 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 28
294 173 982 083 815 207 563 721 701 620 578 278 149 101 076 925
76 577 81 218 119 140 127 857 118 510 125 158 122 085 112 186 114 757 111 637 108 266
Table B.1.7.
AUSTRIA, acquisition of nationality by country or region of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Turkey Former Yugoslavia Central and Eastern Europe Germany Other countries 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
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.
257
Table B.1.7. BELGIUM, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Morocco Turkey Italy Algeria France Zaire Tunisia Spain Netherlands Greece Poland China India Lebanon Former Yugoslavia Other countries 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.
1988
CANADA, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

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
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 87 478
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
845 270 988 982 297 257 609 925 214 744 677 604 521 122 .. 50 575 118 630
9 6 5 4 4 11 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 3
13 7 6 4 4 9 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3
347 155 776 706 946 131 164 992 329 623 014 122 266 093 271 48 266 116 201
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 61 841 150 570
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
217 320
227 720
258
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.1.7.
DENMARK, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Turkey Iran Former Yugoslavia Iraq Poland Pakistan Morocco Vietnam Norway Sweden Germany United Kingdom Other countries Total
437 23 117 14 166 394 181 650 175 189 240 118 1 040 3 744
195 21 133 9 120 611 109 583 158 143 175 121 880 3 258
107 73 130 20 152 433 114 501 188 131 167 106 906 3 028
376 989 128 181 317 551 202 568 165 163 231 133 1 480 5 484
502 1 083 78 236 278 265 167 209 174 177 158 109 1 668 5 104
560 710 138 241 219 192 168 169 164 188 134 85 2 069 5 037
915 491 806 166 151 203 136 125 163 154 140 94 2 192 5 736
797 531 413 177 175 145 122 137 143 149 118 82 2 271 5 260
917 829 629 339 237 220 201 200 151 135 126 98 3 201 7 283
Table B.1.7.
FINLAND, acquisition of nationality by country or region of former nationality

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Europe of which: Former USSR Nordic countries Asia Africa North America South America Oceania Stateless and unknown Total
817 .. 350 150 68 58 22 14 44 1 173
686 .. 331 152 63 44 43 9 66 1 063
1 000 .. 404 201 80 107 37 14 65 1 504
539 85 240 130 70 46 41 4 69 899
736 142 306 200 101 57 45 10 87 1 236
506 232 162 140 104 7 48 4 66 875
450 158 114 214 67 5 39 1 63 839
342 48 94 152 56 11 32 58 651
335 149 104 144 81 1 27 2 78 668
365 198 111 328 120 5 30 1 132 981
Table B.1.7.
FRANCE, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 19941 19951 19961
Morocco Algeria Tunisia Portugal Turkey Cambodia Vietnam Lebanon Former Yugoslavia Laos Italy Haiti Poland Cameroon Spain Other countries 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
741 355 076 876 914 827 326 287 405 468 869 626 446 618 868 664
10 6 4 7 1 1 2 1 1 1 1
289 631 375 126 124 729 139 390 367 343 475 714 1 230 625 2 317 15 781
12 7 4 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
292 410 991 575 296 701 888 508 400 305 117 678 873 707 1 528 14 977
13 7 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1
131 909 370 233 515 847 775 568 652 187 936 744 755 729 1 385 14 271
22 10 9 6 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 20
676 868 248 908 197 319 660 445 278 991 370 351 047 271 514 939
12 9 4 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1
249 499 182 775 143 445 950 689 499 496 022 962 892 809 780 16 492
15 13 5 4 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1
452 218 109 644 447 950 773 390 722 647 255 202 164 973 924 21 108
46 351 74 000
49 330 82 000
54 366 88 500
59 655 95 500
59 246 95 300
60 007 95 500
93 082 126 337
61 884 92 410
79 978 109 823
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.
259
Table B.1.7.
1986
GERMANY, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Kazakhstan1 Russian Federation1 Turkey Former USSR Romania Poland Former Yugoslavia Italy Austria Other countries Total naturalisations of which: Naturalisations by discretionary decision 1 12 7 2 10
.. .. 492 945 386 251 721 597 794 460
1 1 11 9 2 10
.. .. 184 111 557 439 364 551 755 849
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
36 646 37 810 40 783 68 526 101 377 141 630 179 904 199 443 259 170 313 606 302 830 14 030 14 029 16 660 17 742 20 237 27 295 37 042 44 950 26 295 31 888 37 604
Note: 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. 1. Including in former USSR before 1994.
Table B.1.7. HUNGARY, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Romania Former Yugoslavia Former USSR Other countries 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
Table B.1.7.
ITALY, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

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

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Korea China Other countries Total
4 595 990 182 5 767
4 759 1 066 264 6 089
5 216 1 349 229 6 794
5 665 1 818 305 7 788
7 244 1 794 325 9 363
7 697 2 244 511 10 452
8 244 2 478 424 11 146
10 327 3 184 593 14 104
9 898 3 976 621 14 495
Table B.1.7.
LUXEMBOURG, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Italy France Belgium Germany Netherlands Other countries 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
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

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Turkey Morocco Suriname Former Yugoslavia United Kingdom Egypt Germany1 Portugal Belgium Italy Greece Spain France Stateless Other countries Total
1 480 1 480 1 270 290 1 850 .. 1 860 200 530 910 170 450 310 680 7 280 18 760
1 400 1 440 1 340 260 2 210 .. 2 010 190 600 1 270 130 600 330 380 7 100 19 260
820 1 190 830 110 860 .. 270 70 110 90 40 50 30 400 4 240 9 110
3 280 6 830 3 570 520 1 880 .. 670 220 250 150 90 100 100 510 10 560 28 730
1 950 3 030 1 640 240 620 20 190 120 100 50 40 40 30 270 4 450 12 790
6 110 7 300 4 010 520 900 30 380 140 140 90 60 60 50 360 8 960 29 110
11 7 5 1
520 990 120 060 670 30 380 110 160 90 80 60 70 210 8 690
18 7 4 2
000 750 990 090 490 350 330 130 120 100 90 50 60 180 8 340
23 8 5 1
870 110 390 880 460 540 310 140 110 140 80 90 70 170 8 090
060 480 990 700 820 810 500 190 170 200 150 120 110 610 15 530 71 440
33 13 3 1
700 600 450 240 170 080 780 300 290 280 250 160 160 820 24 420 82 700
30 15 4 2 1 1
36 240
43 070
49 450
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.
261
Table B.1.7.
NORWAY, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Pakistan Vietnam Iran Turkey Former Yugoslavia Chile Morocco Philippines India Poland United Kingdom Colombia Korea Sweden Denmark Other countries Total
428 457 10 281 109 105 111 203 141 105 65 131 233 75 144 766 3 364
582 940 23 280 160 127 124 219 131 332 100 211 149 117 200 927 4 622
899 1 039 15 304 111 106 128 294 149 264 96 199 138 72 156 787 4 757
778 1 082 39 474 140 82 280 235 166 234 93 270 95 103 108 876 5 055
1 054 931 72 238 201 81 299 298 220 215 107 221 107 108 108 872 5 132
664 746 317 393 274 117 275 213 242 265 106 217 105 153 119 1 332 5 538
616 710 1 287 752 659 310 257 243 251 275 136 204 135 150 187 2 606 8 778
997 727 1 419 793 754 923 248 343 346 374 110 143 121 130 102 4 248 11 778
1 530 1 446 1 154 836 554 531 318 315 313 267 162 144 122 112 91 4 342 12 237
Table B.1.7.
SPAIN, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Argentina Peru Dominican Republic Morocco Colombia Philippines Portugal Chile Uruguay Cuba Guinea-Bissau Venezuela India China Iran Other countries Total
586 143 .. 4 939 .. 190 519 325 .. 271 .. 149 .. .. .. 1 963 9 085
806 209 .. 3 091 .. 236 584 487 .. 285 .. 220 .. .. .. 2 219 8 137
732 154 .. 2 122 .. 192 404 342 .. 144 .. 136 .. .. .. 1 692 5 918
1 096 242 156 1 675 260 318 496 440 266 163 .. 237 .. .. .. 1 684 7 033
639 136 105 427 174 188 234 249 147 119 .. 139 .. .. .. 1 195 3 752
944 212 146 597 247 283 447 344 187 146 .. 183 .. .. .. 1 544 5 280
1 532 246 298 986 433 380 424 725 268 .. .. 373 .. .. .. 2 747 8 412
1 690 468 393 897 383 340 503 335 246 172 118 211 129 106 107 1 704 7 802
1 314 658 499 785 364 281 372 317 217 169 118 130 111 74 87 1 260 6 756
1 387 1 150 833 687 457 455 452 425 260 250 183 133 128 109 78 1 446 8 433
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
Former Yugoslavia Turkey Finland Chile Poland Norway Denmark Germany Greece United Kingdom Spain Other countries Total
1 197 1 173 4 294 633 2 260 512 542 209 478 161 75 6 432 17 966
1 318 832 4 611 667 1 397 671 574 188 669 135 73 6 417 17 552
1 152 832 3 532 663 1 205 480 397 130 457 102 62 7 758 16 770
832 358 208 323 309 539 407 169 783 143 74 14 518 27 663
2 1 4 1 1
969 569 805 305 294 445 418 141 377 138 49 15 816 29 326
3 1 3 1 1
10 4 3 1 1
940 201 070 762 164 291 283 155 464 101 34 20 194
352 742 974 446 998 450 345 137 244 107 38 19 251 35 084
6 2 2 1
3 550 2 836 2 125 946 895 363 318 128 140 96 33 20 563 31 993
2 416 2 030 2 009 707 636 276 272 154 113 90 23 16 826 25 552
42 659
262
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.1.7.
SWITZERLAND, acquisition of nationality by country of former nationality

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Italy Former Yugoslavia Turkey France Germany Former CSFR Spain United Kingdom Hungary Portugal Austria Netherlands Other countries Total
2 558 556 189 979 1 799 462 613 247 270 135 676 226 2 646 11 356
2 479 528 238 1 025 1 404 344 560 183 277 160 579 149 2 416 10 342
1 995 552 211 684 1 144 352 401 141 202 170 431 153 2 222 8 658
1 802 607 333 677 971 362 408 135 186 146 478 111 2 541 8 757
1 930 936 614 809 1 099 338 353 307 223 101 465 90 3 943 11 208
2 778 1 454 820 862 890 415 319 347 207 89 413 76 4 258 12 928
3 258 1 821 966 935 657 370 305 263 243 119 256 57 4 507 13 757
4 376 2 491 1 205 871 706 385 432 278 297 175 261 52 5 266 16 795
5 2 1 1
167 783 432 045 675 465 453 299 278 262 248 55 6 213 19 375
Table B.1.7.
UNITED KINGDOM, acquisition of nationality by country or region of former nationality

1993 1994 1995 1996
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 Other countries Total Acquisitions of nationality in Hong Kong (China)
7 500 5 500 2 100 100 3 300 5 000 4 800 2 100 1 900 800 1 900 1 500 19 600 45 800 41 800
7 900 5 200 2 000 100 3 100 5 000 4 500 2 000 1 800 700 2 200 5 000 14 200 44 000 5 900
7 900 4 700 1 600 200 2 900 4 200 4 100 1 800 1 600 700 2 000 1 700 15 900 40 500 25 700
9 100 4 600 1 600 100 2 900 4 400 4 300 1 900 .. 2 400 2 100 1 500 17 100 43 100 5 500
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 Other countries 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
263
Table B.2.1.
AUSTRALIA, foreign-born labour force by place of birth, selected years

Thousands
of which: Women
1986 1991 1996 1996
Europe United Kingdom and Ireland Former Yugoslavia Italy Germany Greece Netherlands Others Asia Vietnam Philippines China1 Malaysia India Others New Zealand America North Africa and the Middle East2 Lebanon Others Other and not stated Total % of total labour force
1 319.2 670.2 106.6 153.0 69.9 86.4 62.9 170.2 267.5 .. .. .. .. .. 267.5 138.1 55.4 93.6 23.6 70.0 26.7 1 900.5 25.4
1 342.4 703.6 109.7 139.5 70.4 81.2 55.8 182.2 342.7 60.6 44.2 59.3 43.4 40.0 95.2 187.8 76.1 94.4 37.0 57.4 138.9 2 182.3 25.7
1 220.8 660.1 110.2 95.5 59.8 59.7 45.0 190.5 428.2 82.9 55.9 55.5 50.8 48.8 134.3 208.6 96.7 103.7 35.3 68.4 180.8 2 238.8 24.6
473.4 266.8 38.5 30.8 24.2 21.6 17.2 74.3 187.7 29.5 33.5 22.1 24.6 20.7 57.3 86.7 42.5 31.8 8.5 23.3 77.9 900.0 23.1
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, foreign-born 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
264
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.2.1. UNITED STATES, foreign-born labour force by place of birth, census results of 1990
Thousands Mexico Philippines Cuba Germany Canada United Kingdom Korea China El Salvador India 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 5 486.3 11 564.6 9.4
Table B.2.2.
AUSTRIA, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1988 19901 1995 1997 1997
Former Yugoslavia Turkey Bosnia Herzegovina2 Croatia3 Poland Hungary Romania Slovenia Czech Republic Slovak Republic Other countries Total Total including foreign unemployed4
83.1 34.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 33.6 150.9 160.9
110.5 50.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 56.5 217.6 236.0
108.0 55.7 22.8 16.0 10.8 9.6 9.3 5.8 3.6 2.9 25.2 269.7 325.2
84.9 50.1 30.7 21.3 9.5 8.9 8.3 6.1 4.0 4.0 19.7 247.3 ..
35.4 12.4 11.0 7.4 2.6 1.9 2.6 1.5 1.2 1.2 5.7 82.8 ..
Note: 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. From 1994 on, data on employed foreigners are stock of workers registered with Social Security ofces (including EEA nationals).
Table B.2.2. DENMARK, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985 1990 1995 1995
Turkey United Kingdom Former Yugoslavia Norway Germany Sweden Pakistan Iceland Finland Other countries Total of which: EU
10.1 5.9 4.2 5.7 4.8 4.7 2.5 1.4 1.1 16.1 56.5 14.8
12.8 6.2 4.9 5.8 5.1 4.6 2.2 1.3 1.0 25.0 68.8 16.7
13.5 7.2 6.3 6.0 5.9 5.0 2.4 2.3 1.0 34.2 83.8 26.5
5.3 2.1 2.5 3.4 2.4 2.8 0.9 1.1 0.7 14.0 35.2 10.5
265
Table B.2.2. FRANCE, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985 1990 1995 1997 1997
Portugal Algeria Morocco Spain Tunisia Turkey Italy Former Yugoslavia Poland Other countries Total of which: EU1
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
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
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
342.5 246.1 205.0 90.7 85.0 65.8 65.5 23.2 13.8 432.2 1 569.8 594.8
150.2 81.8 54.8 30.3 22.7 15.5 17.8 9.1 6.4 171.6 560.2 236.0
Note: Data 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.
Table B.2.2. GERMANY, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985 1990 1995 1996 1996
Turkey Former Yugoslavia Italy Greece Portugal Spain Other countries Total
589.0 324.9 232.8 115.4 38.3 73.7 449.3 1 823.4
680.2 339.0 199.8 117.8 45.5 66.3 576.5 2 025.1
752.0 468.9 245.1 139.4 58.1 56.4 849.4 2 569.2
759.1 454.5 246.4 137.0 59.0 54.3 849.0 2 559.3
234.0 173.7 70.1 53.2 21.2 20.3 300.1 872.7
Note: Data are for 30 September of each year. 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 1996
Romania China Poland Former USSR Former Yugoslavia Slovak Republic Vietnam Other countries Total
26.2 .. .. 3.0 .. .. .. 2.5 31.7
9.8 2.6 1.4 1.4 0.9 0.7 0.2 4.0 21.0
8.5 2.2 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.4 0.1 5.0 18.8
266
STATISTICAL ANNEX
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 Other countries Total
46.4 24.6 21.3 14.8 12.5 12.3 7.4 9.0 10.1 6.0 121.0 285.3
47.9 27.7 19.5 18.2 17.7 13.6 11.5 10.0 9.7 7.6 148.6 332.2
5.2 19.0 1.4 2.5 4.0 0.3 3.7 3.2 0.4 2.0 69.5 111.2
Table B.2.2. JAPAN, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
1992 1995 1996
China1 Philippines United States Korea United Kingdom Canada Australia India France Germany Other countries 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
26.6 18.1 17.7 6.7 6.1 4.5 2.6 2.1 1.5 1.4 11.0 98.3
Note: 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 1996
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
36.0 27.8 20.9 13.6 7.6 1.5 1.0 9.4 117.8 111.2 42.2
Note: Data are for 1 October of each year. For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
267
Table B.2.2.
NETHERLANDS, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985 1990 1995 1996 1996
Turkey Morocco Belgium United Kingdom Germany Spain Other countries Total of which: EU
35 25 21 15 16 8 45 166 65
41 27 24 18 18 8 61 197 88
39 32 22 22 15 7 84 221 98
33 32 23 20 17 8 85 218 99
6 7 9 7 6 2 36 73 37
Table B.2.2. NORWAY, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
1988 1990 1995 1996
Denmark Sweden United Kingdom United States Germany Finland Pakistan Sri Lanka Netherlands Chile Other countries Total
9.2 6.2 5.1 3.1 1.9 1.8 2.6 1.5 1.2 1.0 15.9 49.5
8.6 5.5 4.6 2.8 1.9 1.5 2.2 1.9 1.2 1.3 14.7 46.3
9.0 7.8 5.2 3.1 2.2 1.9 1.9 2.0 1.4 1.3 16.8 52.6
9.1 8.7 5.3 3.1 2.4 2.0 1.8 1.7 1.5 1.3 17.9 54.8
Note: Data are for the 2nd quarter (except for 1995 and 1996: 4th quarter). For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex.
268
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.2.2.
PORTUGAL, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
1991 19951 19962
Cape Verde Brazil Angola Guinea-Bissau United Kingdom Spain Germany United States France Mozambique Venezuela Other countries Total
16.9 5.4 1.7 2.3 4.2 3.9 3.0 2.7 2.1 1.6 1.0 10.1 54.9
21.8 9.6 7.9 7.0 5.4 4.7 4.1 3.0 2.8 1.8 0.7 15.5 84.3
2.2 9.7 8.2 7.2 5.6 4.9 4.4 3.1 3.0 1.9 0.7 15.9 86.8
Note: 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. 2. Figures include workers beneting from the 1996 regularisation procedure.
Table B.2.2. SPAIN, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1988 1990 1995 19961 19961
Morocco Peru Dominican Republic Philippines China Argentina Colombia Senegal Poland Algeria Cuba Other countries Total of which: EU
5.0 0.6 0.5 3.3 1.3 3.5 0.8 .. .. .. .. 43.4 58.2 31.4
8.8 0.9 0.7 4.1 1.7 6.3 1.2 .. .. 0.2 .. 61.5 85.4 34.8
51.6 11.4 9.7 7.1 6.2 7.5 3.1 3.4 2.6 2.7 1.4 32.2 139.0 ..
59.2 14.2 12.5 8.1 8.0 7.7 3.6 3.4 3.2 3.1 2.0 36.7 161.9 ..
9.7 9.1 10.6 5.3 2.5 2.7 2.4 0.2 1.0 0.2 0.7 12.4 56.8 ..
Note: Data 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. 1. Provisional data (including work permits delivered following the 1996 regularisation programme).
269
Table B.2.2. SWEDEN, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985 1990 1995 1996 1996
Finland Former Yugoslavia Norway Denmark Iran Poland Turkey Other countries Total
85 22 14 15 .. .. .. 79 216
72 21 20 17 .. 8 11 97 246
56 15 19 13 15 9 7 86 220
57 23 19 13 10 7 7 82 218
33 9 9 5 4 5 2 33 100
Table B.2.2. SWITZERLAND, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985 1990 1995 1996 1996
A. Resident workers1 Italy Former Yugoslavia Portugal Spain Germany Turkey France Austria United Kingdom Netherlands Other countries Total of which: EU B. Seasonal workers2 Portugal Former Yugoslavia Italy Spain Germany France Austria Turkey Other countries Total
228.7 47.2 20.9 68.7 46.8 26.0 27.2 19.7 7.6 5.6 498.4 549.3 .. 26.2 29.7 17.8 21.9 1.9 2.0 1.9 0.2 1.2 102.8
234.3 84.4 55.2 75.1 53.6 33.2 31.5 20.9 9.2 7.0 604.4 669.8 476.1 40.5 44.5 13.5 14.6 2.4 2.5 2.5 1.3 121.7
214.3 134.6 80.5 63.5 56.3 35.6 32.3 19.4 9.9 8.1 654.5 728.7 499.2 23.8 12.2 6.1 4.1 2.3 2.0 1.6 1.7 53.7
202.5 136.2 79.3 59.8 56.7 34.3 31.3 18.8 9.8 8.1 636.8 709.1 479.8 20.2 10.1 4.9 3.2 2.0 1.8 1.3 1.7 45.3
66.6 48.1 33.3 23.2 20.7 12.1 12.3 6.6 2.9 3.2 229.1 257.9 174.5 5.0 1.7 0.4 0.4 1.0 0.7 0.8 0.8 10.9
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.
270
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table B.2.2. UNITED KINGDOM, stock of foreign labour by nationality

Thousands
of which: Women
1985 1990 1995 1997 1997
Ireland India Australia and New Zealand United States Italy Caribbean and Guyana France Germany Spain Pakistan and Bangladesh Portugal Other countries Total of which: EU
269 66 23 37 56 77 17 18 14 27 204 808 382
268 84 39 50 48 48 24 22 16 27 11 245 882 419
216 60 53 49 43 17 34 27 17 201 18 345 899 441
216 56 56 53 42 37 33 32 24 201 14 366 949 416
106 25 29 24 11 23 20 21 13 158 430 202
Note: For more details on sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Annex. 1. Pakistan only.
271
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
Types of migrant recorded in the data Other comments Source
Flow data based on Population Registers Austria
Criteria for registering foreigners: holding a residence permit. Data refer to July of the given year through June of the next year. Criteria for registering foreigners: holding a residence permit and wishing to stay in the country for at least 3 months.
Outows include administrative corrections.
The register of foreigners allows to follow the number of permits granted to non-EU citizens for employment, studies or reasons of family reunication. Until 1994, some asylum seekers were included in the population register. Since 1995 then they have been recorded in a separate register. Excluded from inows are asylum seekers, and all those with temporary residence permits (this includes some war refugees).
Central register of foreigners, Ministry of the Interior.
Belgium
Population register, Institut national de la statistique.
Denmark
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.
Central population register, Danmarks Statistik.
Finland
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. 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. Criteria for registering foreigners: holding a residence permit and wishing to stay in the country for at least 6 months.
Inows of those of Finnish origin are included. Includes asylum seekers living in private households. Excludes inows of ethnic Germans. The gures represent Germany as a whole from 1991. Data for 1996 are preliminary.
Central population register, Finnish Central Statistical Ofce. Population register, Statistisches Bundesamt.
Germany
Hungary
Register of long-term residence permits, Ministry of the Interior. Register of foreigners, Ministry of Justice, Immigration Ofce. Central population register, Service central de la statistique et des etudes economiques. Population registers, Central Bureau of Statistics.
Japan
Excluding temporary visitors and re-entries.
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Inows include some asylum seekers (except those staying in reception centres).
Norway
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.
From 1987 includes asylum seekers waiting decisions on their application for refugee status. Asylum seekers and temporary workers are not included in inows. Inows do not include conversions from seasonal permits to non-seasonal permits.
Central population register, Statistics Norway. Population register, Statistics Sweden. Register of foreigners, Federal Foreign Ofce.
Sweden
Switzerland
Inow data based on residence and work permits Australia A. Permanent migrants: issues of permanent residence permits (including accompanying dependents). 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.
272
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).
Department of Immigration and Population Research.
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.)
Types of migrant recorded in the data Other comments Source
Inow data based on residence and work permits Canada Issues of permanent residence permits. Data include those already present Statistics Canada. in Canada, and also those granted residence in a programme eliminating a backlog of applications. Entries from the EU are not counted, Ofce des migrations except permanent workers (including entries internationales. 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 Home Ofce. or returning on limited leave or who previously settled. Students and au pair girls are excluded. The gures include those persons 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). US Department of Justice.
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.
United Kingdom Passengers, excluding EEA nationals, admitted to the United Kingdom.
United States
Issues of permanent residence permits.
273
Notes related to tables A.1.4. and B.1.4. Inows of asylum seekers

Comments Australia Austria Belgium Canada Czech Republic Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Poland Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States Excluding accompanying dependents. Excluding de facto refugees from Bosnia Herzegovina. Excluding accompanying dependents. Excluding accompanying dependents. Excluding accompanying dependents. Breakdown by country excludes accompanying dependents. Source 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 fran cais de protection des refugi es et des apatrides. Bundesministerium des Innern. Ministry of the Interior. 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.
Excluding accompanying dependents. Fiscal years US Department of Justice. (October to September of the years indicated). From 1993 on, gures include applications reopened during year.
Notes related to Tables A.1.5. and 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. 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.
Netherlands Norway Sweden United States
Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS). Statistics Norway. Statistics Sweden. Decennial censuses, US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Population Survey (1994-1996), Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
274
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Notes related to Tables A.1.6. and 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.
Population Register, Osterreichisches Statistisches Zentralamt.
Belgium
Coverage: Stock of foreign citizens recorded in population register. Until 1994, asylum Population register, seekers were included in the population register. Since 1995 then they have been Institut national de la statistique. recorded in a separate register. Reference date: 31 December. Other comments: There are two breaks in the series between 1984-1985 and 1991-1992, 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.
Register of foreigners, Ministry of the Interior.
Czech Republic
Denmark
Central population register, Danmarks Statistik.
Finland
Central population register, Finnish Central Statistical Ofce.
France
Coverage: Foreigners with permanent residence in France. Comprises of permanent Census (25 per cent sample), workers, trainees, students and their dependent families. Seasonal and frontier workers Institut national de la statistique are not included. et des etudes economiques. Reference dates: 4 March 1982, 6 March 1990. Coverage: Stock of foreign citizens recorded in population register. Includes asylum seekers living in private households. Excludes foreign 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. 1987-1989 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. 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 1996 are provisional.
Central population register, Statistisches Bundesamt.
Germany
Hungary Ireland
Register of foreigners, Ministry of the Interior. Labour Force Survey, Central Statistical Ofce (CSO). Ministry of the Interior.
Italy
Japan
Register of foreigners, Ministry of Justice, Ofce of Immigration. Ministry of Justice. Population register, Service central de la statistique et des etudes economiques.
Korea Luxembourg
Netherlands
Population register, Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS).
275
Notes related to Tables A.1.6. and B.1.6. Foreign population (cont.)

Comments Source
Norway
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.
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.
276
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Notes related to Tables A.1.7. and B.1.7. Acquisition of nationality

Comments Source
Australia Austria Belgium
Signicant numbers of foreigners were naturalised as a result of changes to the law on nationality in June 1984 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).
Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs. Osterreichisches Statistisches Zentralamt. Institut national de statistique and Ministry of Justice.
Canada Denmark Finland France
Statistics Canada. Danmarks Statistik. Central Statistical Ofce. Ministere ` de lEmploi et de la Solidarite.
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.
277
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 1995/1996. Including accompanying dependents. Period of reference: scal years (July to June of the given year).
Department of Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs.
Department of Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs.
Austria
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.
Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs.
Belgium
Ministere ` de lEmploi et du Travail.
Canada
Citizenship and Immigration Canada. Danmarks Statistik.
Denmark France
Residence permits issued for employment. Nordic and EU citizens are not included. A. 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. B. 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.
Ofce des migrations internationales.
Ofce des migrations internationales. Bundesanstalt fur Arbeit.
Germany
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 including renewals). 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.
Hungary Ireland Italy Luxembourg
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.
Spain
Switzerland
Ofce fed eral des etrangers.
United Kingdom
Grants of work permits. Most long-term permits are delivered to highly qualied workers. Department of Employment. 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.
278
STATISTICAL ANNEX
Notes related to Tables A.2.1. Inows of foreign workers (cont.)

Types of workers recorded in the data Source
United States
A. Permanent settlers 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.
US Department of Justice.
US Department of Justice.
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 with a H-2A visa (non-immigrants).
Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs.
Austria Canada France Germany Italy Netherlands Norway Switzerland United Kingdom United States
Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs. Citizenship and Immigration Canada Ofce des migrations internationales. Bundesanstalt fur Arbeit. Ministry of Labour. CBS. Statistics Norway. Ofce fed eral des etrangers. Department of Employment. US Department of Justice.
279
Notes related to Tables A.2.3., B.2.1. and B.2.2. Foreign and foreign-born labour
Comments Source
Foreign labour 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. Number of work permits. Excluding unemployed and self employed. 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. Foreigners whose activity is restricted according to the Immigration Act (revised in 1990). Permanent resident, spouse or child of Japanese national, spouse or child 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 1992-1993 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 1996 are provisional (including grants of permits following the regularisation programme). Reference date: 31 December. Annual average from the Labour Force Survey. 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). Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs.
Belgium Denmark France Germany
Ministere ` de lEmploi et du Travail. Danmarks Statistik. Institut national de la statistique et des etudes economiques. Bundesanstalt fur Arbeit.
Hungary Ireland Italy Japan
Ministry of Labour. Central Statistical Ofce. ISTAT. Ministry of Justice, Service of Immigration.
Luxembourg
Inspection gen erale de la Securit e sociale. Central Bureau of Statistics.
Netherlands
Norway Portugal
Statistics Norway. Ministry of the Interior.
Spain
Ministry of Labour and Social Security.
Sweden Switzerland
Statistics Sweden. Ofce fed eral des etrangers.
United Kingdom Estimates are from the Labour Force Survey. The unemployed are not included. Foreign-born labour Australia Canada United States 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 aged 15 and over. Foreign-born citizens with American parents are not included in the immigrant population (foreign-born).
Employment Department.
Labour Force Survey (ABS). 1991 Census. 1990 Census (US Department of Commerce).
280
LIST OF SOPEMI CORRESPONDENTS

Mr. A. RIZVI Mrs G. BIFFL Mr. M. POULAIN Mrs D. BOBEVA Mrs E. RUDDICK Mr. C. LANGLOIS Mr. Soo-Bong UH Mrs J. MARESOVA Ms K. STEEN Mr. S. LARMO Mr. A. LEBON Mrs B. FROHLICH Mr. N. PETROPOULOS Mrs J. JUHASZ Mr. J.J. SEXTON Mrs C. COLLICELLI Mr. F. AROSIO Ms. N. YAMAMOTO Mr. T. SHIOGUSHI Mr. P. JAEGER Mr. J.A. BUSTAMANTE Mr. P. MUUS Mr. M. HOLTER Mr. M. OKOLSKI Mr. J. ROSARIO Mr. D. GEORGHIU Mrs M. LUBYOVA Mr. A. IZQUIERDO ESCRIBANO Mrs B. ORNBRANT Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, Canberra, Australia Austrian Economic Institute, Vienna, Austria Centre detudes de gestion demographique pour les administrations publiques, Universite catholique de Louvain, Belgium Black Sea Trade and Development Bank, Thessalonika, Greece (Bulgarian Correspondent) Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Ottawa Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Ottawa Korea Labour Institute, Seoul University of Prague, Czech Republic Directorate General for Employment, Placement and Vocational Training, Copenhagen, Denmark Ministry of Labour, Helsinki, Finland Ministere ` de lEmploi et de la Solidarite, Paris, France Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, Berlin, Germany Pedagogical Institute of Greece, Athens, Greece Hungarian Central Statistical Ofce, Budapest, Hungary The Economic and Social Research Institute, Dublin, Ireland CENSIS, Rome, Italy CENSIS, Rome, Italy Ministry of Labour, Tokyo, Japan Ministry of Justice, Tokyo, Japan Commissaire du gouvernement aux etrangers, 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 Ministere ` des Affaires etrang eres, ` Secretariat dEtat aux Communautes portugaises, Lisbon, Portugal National Commission for Statistics, Bucarest, Romania Slovak Academy of Sciences, Institute of Forecasting, Bratislava, Slovak Republic Faculte des Sciences politiques et de sociologie, La Coruna, Spain Ministry of the Interior, Stockholm, Sweden
281
Mr. B. CLERC Mr. A. GOKDERE Mr. J. SALT Mr. R. KRAMER
Ofce fed eral de lindustrie, des arts et metiers et du travail, Berne, Switzerland University of Ankara, Turkey University College London, Department of Geography, London, United Kingdom US Department of Labor, Bureau for International Labor Affairs, Washington, United States
282
OECD PUBLICATIONS, 2, rue Andre-Pascal, 75775 PARIS CEDEX 16 PRINTED IN FRANCE (81 98 08 1 P) ISBN 92-64-16116-3 No. 50207 1998

OECD 1998 Trends in International Migration

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

OECD 1998 Trends in International Migration

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

SOPEMI

TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

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

File: ENG:[207.TXT]FORE.;2 NGUYEN

Seq: 1 Page: Free: 5400D Next: 0D VJ: R

TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

82 83 92 106 108 109 110 122 140 157 174

II.31. II.32. II.33. II.34. II.35. II.36. II.37. II.38.

163 165 167 170 173 175 180 182

TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

Cross national tables

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

Foreign or foreign-born labour force: stocks and ows

Tables by country of origin

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

Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249

261 261 261 262 262 262 263 263 263

Foreign or foreign-born labour force: stocks and ows

Notes related to the tables of the Statistical Annex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

MAIN TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

Decline of legal immigration ows

TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

MAIN TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

1992 United Kingdom 1996

1986 1991 United States 1996

1986 1994 1996 Sweden

Per 1 000 inhabitants 10 20

Per 100 foreigners/immigrants 20 10 0

Per 1 000 inhabitants 10 20 1986 1992 1996 Japan

1986 1992 1996 France3

1988 1990 1996 10 20 20 10 0 10 20 Hungary4

TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

Predominance of family immigration

Diversication in regions of origin and the continuation of traditional ows

Family reunification Refugees

Family members accompanying workers 0 United Kingdom2 92 96 Switzerland 90 96 91 97 90 96 91 96 90 96 20 40 60

United States7 92 96 Sweden6 90 96 0 20 40 60 80 100

MAIN TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

MAIN TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

United States (254.4) Germany United Kingdom Canada

Asylum claims continue to decline for the OECD area as a whole

Sources: United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees and OECD.

TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

The components of total population growth

Temporary labour migration and the migration of highly-qualied workers

MAIN TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

Natural increase rate

Net migration rate

European Union (15 members)

Source: Labour Force Statistics, OECD, 1997.

MAIN TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

New Zealand 10 Luxembourg Canada

Sweden 5 Germany Italy 0 Czech Rep.

Australia United States

Poland 1 2 3 Natural increase (per 1 000)

Mexico -10 0 5 10 15 20 Natural increase (per 1 000) 25