Indicators of Immigrant Integration 2015 Settling In © OECD/European Union 2015 Chapter 3 Defining characteristics of immigrant populations Some of the factors that explain the discrepancies in outcomes between immigrants and the native-born spring directly from the migration process itself. The very fact of being born abroad may constitute an obstacle in that, for example, the immigrant may lack the native-born in-depth knowledge of the host society (how the labour market functions, networks, familiarity with public services, etc.). Understanding the constituent elements of the host country takes time, and integration outcomes tend to improve with duration of stay in the country of residence. More generally, structural differences – like the quality of the education system – between the home and host countries can also have an impact on integration. Mastering the language of the host country is especially important for success in the new country of residence. A person’s reason for migrating to another country can also play an important part in determining outcomes, particularly on the labour market. For example, labour migrants usually have a job waiting for them on arrival or land one shortly afterwards. The situation is very different when it comes to family and humanitarian migrants. Immigrants’ countries of birth, particularly if they are lower-income countries where education systems tend to perform less well, also play a role in integration outcomes. This chapter considers those immigrant-specific characteristics for which data are available through comparable sources internationally. They are: the composition of new immigration flows by category (Indicator 3.1); duration of stay, regions of origin, and citizenship (Indicator 3.2); immigrants’ language of origin and languages spoken at home (Indicator 3.3). Throughout the publication, reference will be made to the background information presented in this chapter so as to explain certain disparities with native populations that affect immigrants. For further discussion of issues raised in each section, see the section entitled “Data limitations” at the end of the chapter. 53 3. DEFINING CHARACTERISTICS OF IMMIGRANT POPULATIONS Key findings ● Some 4 million immigrants settled permanently in OECD countries in 2013, half of them in an EU country. These flows account for 0.4% of the OECD population and 0.5% of the EU’s. A quarter arrived as labour migrants from outside free mobility areas, while a third came for family reasons (in the European Union, this is the case for a quarter of immigrants). A further quarter of new arrivals were free mobility migrants. EU-wide, 43% of all new permanent migrants are EU citizens who have taken advantage of free mobility. ● In 2012-13, two-thirds of immigrants had been living in the host country for more than 10 years, primarily in the settlement countries and in the longstanding immigration destinations. ● In 2010-11, some 40% of immigrants living in an OECD or EU country had the nationality of their host country. ● One-third of the foreign-born population is from high-income countries. Most migrants come from the same continent or countries that lie close by. Accordingly, half the foreign-born in the European Union are Europeans, and 50% of immigrants to the United States are from Latin America. Likewise, nearly half the immigrants in the OECD countries of Asia and Oceania are Asians, while African immigrants are much more likely to head for Europe than non-European OECD countries. ● Two-thirds of immigrants spoke a foreign language in 2012. The share of immigrants who are foreign speakers and do not use the host-country language at home is larger in Canada and the United States than in several European countries with longstanding immigration, such as France and Germany. INDICATORS OF IMMIGRANT INTEGRATION 2015: SETTLING IN © OECD/EUROPEAN UNION 2015 55 3. DEFINING CHARACTERISTICS OF IMMIGRANT POPULATIONS 3.1. Composition of new immigration flows by category Background Indicator The legal category of immigration is of great importance in explaining immigrants’ outcomes, particularly in the labour market. Since 2003, the OECD has collected data by category of permit from most EU and OECD countries. These administrative data are standardised, allowing cross-country comparison. While they cover only new immigration flows since 2005, they offer insight into reasons why foreign migrants settle in a country. This section considers data on permanent immigration as a percentage of the total population. Coverage Permanent immigrants are foreign nationals of any age whose residence permit, issued on entry into the host country, grants them the right to stay permanently. They include foreigners who obtain a permanent residence permit immediately, those who have an initial temporary residence permit which is routinely renewed, and free mobility migrants (excluding those on short-term stays). To these may be added temporary immigrants who become permanent residents following a change in their status, such as students taking on employment after completing their studies. In the 22 OECD countries for which standardised data are available, 3.9 million immigrants obtained permanent residence rights in 2013, half of them in an EU country. Those inflows account for 0.4% of the OECD’s total population and 0.5% of the EU’s, with the most new migrants heading for the small European countries with the lowest unemployment rates – Switzerland and Norway (Figure 3.1). New inflows, as share of the resident population, have risen compared with their average share over the last ten years in Australia, the countries of northern Europe, the Netherlands, Germany and Austria. In contrast, permanent immigration to the countries of Southern Europe and Ireland is much lower than in the pre-crisis period. While flows still account for 0.9% of the population in Ireland, per capita, flows to Spain have declined by as much as half to 0.5%. In Canada and the United States, legal permanent migration flows have been stable, and they remain negligible in Mexico and the Asian destinations of Japan and Korea. Altogether, large countries tend to experience lower per capita flows than small ones. Between 2005 and 2013, labour migrants from outside free mobility areas and their families accounted for almost a quarter of new permanent immigration. In the OECD, one-third of new flows came in the form of family migration versus a quarter in the European Union, while freedom of movement accounted for a further quarter, compared to 43% in the European Union (Figure 3.2). The high numbers of permanent immigrants arriving in Switzerland and Norway in 2012-13 brought with them particularly large shares of free-mobility flows. In the settlement countries of Oceania, as well as Canada and the United Kingdom, labour migration (which included accompanying family members) accounted for half of permanent inflows. Family immigration is still the driving force behind immigration to the United States (accounting for two-thirds), Korea and, to a lesser extent, France and Sweden. Sweden has also the largest share of humanitarian migrants in its inflows, followed by North America and Finland. 56 INDICATORS OF IMMIGRANT INTEGRATION 2015: SETTLING IN © OECD/EUROPEAN UNION 2015 Figure 3.1. 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 Permanent inflows to OECD and EU countries, 2003-11 and 2012-13 1.0 0.8 0.6 Annual averages in percentage of the total population 0.4 0.2 0 2012-13 3. DEFINING CHARACTERISTICS OF IMMIGRANT POPULATIONS Mexico Japan Korea Figure 3.2. Portugal United States 100 OECD total (22) Permanent inflows to OECD and EU countries by category of immigrant, 2005-13 2003-11 Work Italy 80 France 60 Finland Accompanying family of workers Spain 40 United Kingdom 20 EU total (13) Belgium 0 Germany Netherlands Australia Total = 100 Austria Canada Belgium Family 1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933212157Austria Canada Ireland Notes and sources are to be foundDenmark at the end of the chapter. Sweden Finland Humanitarian Denmark France New Zealand Germany Australia Ireland Norway Italy Switzerland Other INDICATORS OF IMMIGRANT INTEGRATION 2015: SETTLING IN © OECD/EUROPEAN UNION 2015 Japan Korea Mexico Free movement Netherlands New Zealand Norway Portugal Spain 1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933212166 Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States EU total without free movement (13) EU total (13) OECD total (22) 57 3. DEFINING CHARACTERISTICS OF IMMIGRANT POPULATIONS 3.2. Duration of stay, regions of origin, and citizenship Background Definition The duration of stay indicator refers to the time that has elapsed between the year of arrival and the year of the survey. The composition by region of origin is subdivided into the five broad regions of Asia, Africa, Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, Canada-United States, and Oceania. Nationality relates to current nationality – data on nationality at birth are not available for most countries. Coverage Immigrants aged between 15 and 64 years old, excluding those whose country of origin is not reported. Across the OECD and the EU, around two-thirds of immigrants had resided in the host country for at least ten years in 2012-13. In the Baltic countries, and in other countries where borders have changed (countries once in the former USSR and former Yugoslavia), the long-settled proportions reach 90%. Three- quarters of immigrants are also long-time residents in Israel, the Netherlands, Germany, France, and the United States. Most countries in southern and northern Europe have experienced significant migration inflows in recent years. In the last ten years, much greater numbers have arrived than in previous periods. The proportion of recent arrivals is highest in Japan, where three-quarters of immigrants have arrived in the last five years. In some Scandinavian countries (Denmark, Norway and Finland), in Cyprus,1, 2 and in Chile, too, one-third of the immigrant population are recent arrivals.