Immigration Countries: Germany in an International Comparison 2015 Annual Report
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Immigration Countries: Germany in an International Comparison 2015 Annual Report An initiative of: Stiftung Mercator, Volkswagen Foundation, Bertelsmann Stiftung, Freudenberg Foundation, Robert Bosch Stiftung, Stifterverband für die Deutsche Wissenschaft, The Vodafone Foundation Germany Foreword Rüdiger Frohn Dr. Wilhelm Krull The Expert Council of German Foundations on Integration and Migration (SVR) is entering a new operational phase with this sixth Annual Report. The solid foundations of the SVR are based on its successful work, the wide range of societal impulses which it sets on the basis of scientific expertise and the productive and collegial cooperation with the expert professors. These and other factors have prompted the supporting foundations to reaffirm their support for one of their most important common projects and to promise the Council members that they will continue to support the Expert Council’s work for a further three years. After the SVR pinpointed the achievements and existing deficits in the integration and migration policy in last year’s Annual Report, this year’s report looks beyond Germany’s own ‘backyard’ and examines the policies employed by other countries. The Council members are not seeking to engage in a contest, but are instead searching for inspiration and innovations which might prove helpful in Germany’s path towards becoming a modern country of immigration. The learning potential is at the forefront of this interesting reading material. The comparison also helps to ensure that Germany is on the right path and deepens the understanding of the specific nature of individual national contexts. One of the Annual Report’s primary and most important findings – and one which remains surprising – is that, com- pared to other countries, the ‘slumbering country of immigration’ Germany no longer needs to feel ashamed of its policy responses to issues relating to migration and integration: the country’s institutional framework now matches the standards of classic countries of immigration. Moreover, Germany is in many policy fields part of an international process of convergence, which is resulting in greater similarity between previously diverging policy approaches. This is nothing less than a pragmatic shift in the country’s integration and migration policy and – leaving aside some relapses – a long overdue de-ideologisation and a re-orientation towards people’s genuine needs and those of their immediate surroundings. Out of all the policy fields compared in a highly informative fashion in this Annual Report, one is particularly dear to us as representatives of the foundations: refugee policy. The international comparison shows that Europe’s (geograph- ical and political) position and the resultant challenges are singular in the world. The continent has taken a large step towards the establishment of collective European refugee protection with the EU’s common asylum and refugee policy. Yet our efforts are nowhere near enough. We should continue to strive to be the driving force behind, and the source of inspiration for, a coordinated and humane refugee policy. In Germany, we must make greater efforts to see refugees not as a ‘burden’ and a ‘liability’, but instead as a particularly vulnerable group of people and to make their stay in the country as pleasant as possible. In order to achieve this aim, we need to make efforts to convince people in all corners of the country of this and occasionally also engage in disputes and discussions with sections of the population. We sincerely hope that the key messages contained in this Annual Report contribute to an objective, constructive and forward-looking debate and have an extensive societal impact. We would like to thank all the authors who have together gone to great lengths to compile this report and above all Professor Dr. Christine Langenfeld for her outstand- ing leadership and her highly impressive engagement for the SVR. In the name of all supporting foundations, we would also like to pay a great compliment to the new Managing Director, Dr. Cornelia Schu, for the smooth transition and the continuity which has helped to ensure the sustained high quality of all work. Rüdiger Fohn, Former State Secretary Dr. Wilhelm Krull Chairman of the Board of Trustees Secretary General of the Volkswagen Foundation Essen, February 2015 Hanover, February 2015 Annual Report 2015 3 Preface This sixth Annual Report of the Expert Council of German The Annual Reports have focused until now on alter- Foundations on Integration and Migration (SVR) has a broad nating elements in the fields of migration and integration: focus and looks towards other European and non-Euro- the first Annual Report, which had the title “Immigra- pean countries from a German perspective. It adopts the tion Society 2010” (“Einwanderungsgesellschaft 2010”) approach of ‘learning from others’ to consider the entire employed a wide range of empirical sources to describe spectrum of challenges associated with issues relating to German integration and integration policy against a Euro- migration and integration. In so doing, it seeks to answer pean background. The report was accompanied by the above all the following questions: what are the main aims SVR Integration Barometer, a representative survey with informing the country’s migration and integration policies which the views of both the migrant and the non-migrant and how successful are its attempts to achieve these aims population on integration and integration policy were when compared to other countries of immigration? The assessed for the first time. The results of the Integration SVR thus takes a look at the situation in other countries, Barometer refuted the widely held view in the public a well-established practice in public discourse, in order arena that integration has failed. to evaluate and contextualise German integration and migration policy and asks: what can be learned under The integration-based Annual Report from 2010 was fol- which circumstances – and what cannot be learned? The lowed by an Annual Report which examined more migra- report thereby also examines the extent to which policies tion-related issues in 2011. The main focus of the report employed in one country with specific structural and soci- was on how German labour migration rules, which at the etal conditions can be transferred to another. time were relatively restrictive, might be reformed in a The comparison with states regarded as taking an way that was useful and consistent with European reg- exemplary approach to migration and integration pol- ulations. Large parts of the catalogue of reforms devel- icy issues, such as Canada, Sweden or the Netherlands, oped by the SVR at the time (e.g. the liberalisation of comes to a somewhat surprising conclusion: in contrast immigration rules for skilled migrants and enhancing the to the widely held view, Germany now belongs in many options of foreign graduates of German higher education policy areas to the group of countries which are widely institutions who wish to remain in the country) are now regarded as having progressive migration and integra- German policy. tion schemes. This is described in the ten chapters of the Annual Report, each of which focuses on a different ele- The 2012 Annual Report, which was entitled “Integration ment of migration (Section A) and integration (Section B) in the Federal System: the Federal government, Länder policy. Yet despite these positive findings, it would be a and the role of the municipalities” (“Integration im föder- great error to assume that Germany can no longer learn alen System: Bund, Länder und die Rolle der Kommu- anything in the fields of migration and integration. The nen”), examined once again an integration issue. The migration and integration policy challenges faced by Ger- report focused chiefly on the cooperation which exists many remain enormous. However, the Annual Report also between the different levels of state government – the shows that Germany cannot simply make use of ‘blue- Federal Government, the Länder and the municipalities prints’ developed in other countries when trying to deal – in the policy field of integration. The strengths and with these challenges. The country must instead find its weaknesses of Germany’s federal system were high- own path – which is agreed upon with other EU countries lighted and suggestions were made about how central and is embedded into an overarching European strategy difficulties might be remedied. One of the key issues – which it must decisively and courageous follow. This examined in the report was the integration policy options Annual Report offers a number of recommendations for of the municipalities, i.e. the room to manoeuvre that action for this purpose. the municipalities had in this field. The report clearly Annual Report 2015 5 Preface demonstrated that the basic conditions for integration general and Islam in particular in the secular world. On vary greatly from municipality to municipality – not least the other hand, the German political establishment must because of the respective economic and socio-demo- also endeavour to support the Muslim community in its graphic framework conditions. entire diversity throughout this process. Alongside efforts to improve the institutional situation for Muslims, all The fourth Annual Report, published in 2013, is in many types of xenophobia and hostility towards groups of ways a ‘European Annual Report’: it examined a migrant people – such as in the form of Islamophobia