1 Immigration statistics based on a standardised definition Georges Lemaitre Non member Econmies and International Migration Directorate for Employment, Labour and Social Affairs, UNECE / Eurostat work session on migration statistics Edinburgh 22 November 2006

2 Current state of affairs Poor comparability of national immigration flow statistics Little to no progress over the past decade –Lots of documentation of definitional differences available –No serious harmonisation attempts –Few efforts to produce statistics according to UN recommendations –Broad harmonisation not possible without changes to / in national data sources in some countries Way ahead => Eurostat proposed guideline on migration statistics

3 Outlier

4 In the interim Should one wait for the perfect system or make progress where it is possible? Need for data by migration category –International students –Intra-corporate transfers –Cross-border service providers –Not to mention family reunification, family formation, refugees Use of alternative data sources –Categorical approach to immigration flows –Permit data

5 Examples of international migration movements- should we add these up? Seasonal workers Cross-border service providers (« Bolkesteiners ») International students Asylum seekers Fiancés and adopted children Family reunification Intracorporate transfers Settlement immigrants Working holidaymakers Highly-skilled immigrants Trainees Persons on exchange programs

6 How do we distinguish between short- and long-term? By duration of residence (intended, actual, permit duration) –Ideal for demographic accounting and compatibility with other statistics –Objective criterion, easy to apply –Approximation to long-term residence But => –Comparability ensured only for actual-stay criterion –Does not recognise differences in legal and economic rights of different kinds of immigrants –Splits categories of migration

7 How do we distinguish between short- and long-term? (bis) Along categorical lines –Short-term: Seasonal workers, trainees, international students, service providers, exchange visitors, etc. –Long-term: Family reunification, family formation, settlement, refugees, long-term labour migrants Differentiated on the basis of –Permit renewability –Legal and economic rights, e.g. access to labour market and to social benefits, limitations on activities The issue is: Who is in for the long-term and who is supposed to be returning to the home country, as decided / determined by the receiving state.

8 The categorical approach to describing international migration movements Countries generally recognise the same kinds of categories. Approach ensures close connection to immigration policy. There is a strong association between entry category and labour market outcomes. But => Categories are not entirely uniform / consistent across countries. There are problems with permit data, require processing. Permits do not cover nationals, free movement, outflows.

9 Labour force outcomes by migration category months after arrival, Australia. LSIA Employed (%)Unemployed (%) Skilled relatives of Australian residents 795 Skilled independent745 Family reunification538 Business skills / employer nominated 710 Humanitarian1612 All categories607

10 Characteristics of category-based data Coverage –« Long-term » only –Inclusions / exclusions based on category, not on expected stay / actual stay / permit duration –Exclude unauthorised movements, regularisations –Include « status changes », from short- to long-term, where possible => thus combine inflows and status changes Difficulties –Free movement difficult to capture in a sensible way –Status changes are sometimes uncertain

11 An example – inflows in Japan (average duration=stock/inflow) Category Inflow Average duration Diplomat8710(>=3) Official12633(<=1) Professor Artist Religious activities Journalist Investor/Business manager Legal / Accounting services0-- Medical services1-- Researcher Instructor Engineer Specialist in humanities/international services Intra-company transferees Entertainer Category Inflow Average duration Skilled labour Cultural actvities College student Pre-college student Trainee Dependent Designated activities Spouse or child of japanese national Spouse or child of permanent resident Long-term resident Total all movements Total >=1 year Total >=3 years Total >=6 years

12 Recapitulation Objective was to produce immigration statistics –On a standardised definition –On foreign nationals (arrivals and status changes) –Long-term, according to a permit renewability criterion –By category of entry Progress on this front need not be a hostage to the ultimate objective of getting standardised statistics on all inflows, according to international definitions.

13 A comparison of results. Usually published statistics (OECD) Category-based statistics Percent difference relative to usually published statistics Japan Germany Finland Italy Austria United Kingdom Norway Denmark Sweden Switzerland Netherlands Portugal Canada United States Australia New Zealand France Total

14

15 Where do we go from here? Refine the renewability definition and the use of national data Develop series Extend coverage to more countries Extend coverage to short-term movements And => Wait, patiently, for statistics based on international recommendations.

16 For further details, see OECD Statistics Brief N° 9: –The Comparability of International Migration Statistics – Problems and Prospects at Thank you for your attention.