The EU and the Western Balkan response during the Migrant Crisis: is the European Green Deal inclusive for all?

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2106172/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

The EU and the Western Balkan response during the Migrant Crisis: is the European Green Deal inclusive for all?

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2106172/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background

The European Green Deal does not clearly consider the issue of migrant inclusion, nor are there specific data on the risk of migrants falling into poverty, energy poverty, social exclusion and other data that could help to create to create an effective policy that would be applied in this area. With the growing energy and economic crisis, certain decisions and measures are taken, but the position of migrants (who are mostly in the category of poorer citizens) is largely untacked. Main objective of this study is to assess current position of migrant population when it comes to risk from poverty (including energy poverty) and social exclusion in the 4 EU countries with the largest influx of migrants. The economic and energy crisis, as well as the labour shortage, create a need for research of this kind. The growing risk of energy poverty affects EU citizens, but it is reasonable to assume that the risk to the migrant population is greater and currently without a proper systematic response.

Results

An analysis was conducted across the four traditional destination countries, between EU citizens, national citizens and foreign-born citizens (2014 to 2020) and the results revealed that foreign-born citizens have a greater risk of poverty or social exclusion. In 2020, citizens of Sweden that were not born in the EU28 had more than 360% greater chance than national citizens of being at risk of poverty (including energy poverty) or social exclusion. In France, the foreign citizens were 340% more likely to be exposed to poverty than national citizens. The same statistics also show that the risk of poverty (including energy poverty) or social exclusion for foreign citizens in Germany are at the highest rate in 2020. The UK rates demonstrate an increased 10% (2014-2018) difference in the risk of poverty (including energy poverty) or social exclusion for foreign citizens. The statistics show that non-EU citizens de facto have a higher risk of poverty (including energy poverty) or social exclusion, which will greatly complicate the EU's response to the ongoing crisis, and greater problems can be expected with the growing number of refugees.

Recommendations

Bearing in mind the results of the research, the basic recommendations elaborated in the paper are as follows: a) up-to-date collection and innovation of data for the migrant population (including data on energy poverty), b) creation of conditions for more efficient employment of migrants, c) adoption of special measures to protect migrants from energy poverty, and d) strengthening of cooperation between the EU and to non-EU countries on the migrant route.

Green Deal

Western Balkans

migrant population

poverty

energy poverty

social exclusion

In December 2019, Europe stepped forward and offered a possible solution to stop the climate clock from ticking, the European Green Deal. The main goal of the Deal is for the EU to achieve climate neutrality as the first continent by 2050, which would lead to an improvement of quality of life in majority of aspects [1]. However, in the past decade a number of humanitarian crises that have affected the EU, such as the 2014 Migrant crisis, the Global pandemic, and the Ukraine war, have made the burden of combating climate change overwhelmingly heavy. All facets of society have been impacted by the global pandemic, and the crisis's effects are still to be determined. The Ukraine War brought, inter alia, new waves of migrants to the EU, which in turn sparked a second migrant crisis. All three crises are still going on, and it is difficult to say which one is receiving more attention. There is a proliferation of papers that elaborate on the benefits of the Deal, but researchers haven't focused as much on the (un) just transition of the general migrant population to the green industry. The current labour market in the EU will need to be transformed for the Deal to be successful. Although the Deal has been eagerly awaited, the link between migration, migrant and / or displaced persons was mentioned only once, pointing to the conclusion that the Green Deal was made mainly for EU citizens as main stakeholders and beneficiaries [2]. It appears that there is a gap between the Deal and one of its likely consequences: exclusion for (low-skilled) migrants.

The European Green Deal's primary goal is to transform climate and environmental challenges into opportunities for trade, development, and international cooperation whilst creating the EU's economy sustainable [3]. In the EU Green Deal document, it is emphasized that the transformation towards green and sustainable economies relies on the development of new knowledge and skills [4]. This process creates a lot of room for new jobs to emerge, but it also makes it necessary to think about how to acquire the skills, knowledge, and competencies that society will require in the future in a more systematic way. This paper focuses on understanding how this transition impacts the migrant population, and it examines how institutions and policy-makers have dealt with this problem.

As part of the European Green Deal, the European Commission has also disclosed the Just Transition Mechanism, a tool that guarantees workers in carbon-intensive sectors and communities that depend on those sectors benefit from the transition to cleaner and more sustainable economies [5]. The Just Transition Mechanism highlights the importance of engaging affected groups, (non) governmental organizations in addition to providing financial support [6]. The Green Deal envisages certain protection for particularly vulnerable groups, which are expected to be in a more difficult position during the transition, but even at this point the Green Deal does not mention migrants [7].

In the publication of International Labour Organization (ILO) “Extending social protection to migrant workers, refugees and their families, a guide for policymakers and practitioners 2021” an emphasizes is made on the importance of providing unemployment compensation and other forms of governmental assistance (social protection) for migrants [8]. The ILO This document directly mentions the migrant population, because it states that, to reduce poverty and inequality, it is necessary to extend the social protection to this group of citizens as well.

The ILO has established the Decent Work Agenda in 1999, and the four pillars of a Decent work agenda are social protection, possibility to find employment and adequate legal protection of workers [9]. The ILO adopted a resolution and a set of conclusions at its 102nd session (2013) regarding sustainable development, decent work, green jobs, and development of regulatory documents for all of the aforementioned [10]. Despite the ILO's support for a just transition, none of the recent publications address migrants in the green industry through a Decent work agenda. This demonstrates the need for a more thorough and effective strategy for the migrant population is imperative. Due to the uneven nature of the transition, it is essential to address migrants as a significant component of economic prosperity, and a specific, more thorough employment and social protection strategy needs to be applied to them.

The causes of poor integration have been debated by academics, and as the main reasons are highlighted the education and cultural milieu of migrants, failures in the development of the integration system, and the resistance of citizens in accepting migrants on various grounds [11]. In 2010, Angela Merkel (the German chancellor at the time) said the concept of people from various cultural backgrounds coexisting amicably "side by side" did not work and that the burden of assimilating into German society, falls on (im)migrants, adding that the [multicultural] approach has failed [12]. After reviewing publications concerning migrant integration, the author noted that there is no consensus among academics regarding what constitutes successful integration. The traditional assimilation theory, in the author's opinion, is consistent with the reality of migrants in the EU today.

The traditional assimilation theory was first put forth by Warner and Srole (1945), who held that immigrants were expected to change almost entirely to assimilate with the dominant (mainstream) culture and society [13]. Numerous researchers criticized their approach, but Blanca Garcés-Mascareas & Rinus Penninx offer a succinct critique of this theory in their publication "Integration Processes and Policies in Europe?":

The definition of the “mainstream culture” suggests the existence of social circumstances that are homogeneous and interconnected.

Discrimination and employment market inequality can delay or even prevent (im)migrants’ integration.

The integration processes are diverse and can be influenced by a number of factors such as government integration policies, the public attitude concerning (im)migrants, various environmental factors etc. [14].

The EU's policy toward migrants can be explained using the critical analysis of the traditional assimilation theory which was mentioned. Although the identity of immigrant minorities may be obvious in a local setting, in the general population migrants are most often seen as a unified group of people (regardless of origin and other characteristics), and the only division that exists to some extent is based on gender and age. Secondly, systematic reviews of available literature suggest the existence of racial discrimination in the workplace in North America and Europe, where this phenomenon does not disappear even after the transition to the second or even third generation of migrants. The revised European Agenda for the Integration of Third-Country Nationals, which added the countries of origin as a third important actor in the process of immigrants' integration and thus introduced the three-way process, marked a significant shift in policy framing. The Agenda proposes that the countries of origin can support the integration process in three different ways: 1) by setting up the integration process before the migrants arrive; 2) by providing support to the migrants while they are in the EU, such as through support from the Embassies; and 3) by helping the migrants prepare for their temporary or permanent return by using the experience and knowledge they have gained [15]. Despite the optimism that seemed to accompany this change in integration policies, the outcomes are too marginal.

The author analyzed different types of reports such as studies, monographs, articles, and announcements concerning the EU and Western Balkan response to the Migrant Crisis. The author primarily relied on the secondary analysis of data, which implied the use of existing data sets and their interpretation (desk research of secondary literature). The European statistics (Eurostat) Database was used to generate a statistical overview of the "Persons at risk of poverty or social exclusion by group of citizenship (population aged 18 and over, male and female) " from 2014–2020. The Migrant Integration Policy Index (MIPEX) reports were used to measure the success of migrant integration policies (labour market mobility and antidiscrimination) in the EU and the Western Balkan countries.

The research was limited to the EU countries with the highest number of migrants (Germany, France, Sweden, and the United Kingdom) during the period of 2014 to 2020. This timeframe was selected because the global pandemic of 2019–2020, which has led to lockdowns, produced a significant impact on the increased influx of migrants to the EU. Refugees and migrants from the Middle East, West and South Asia, and Africa who were en route to Western and Northern Europe used the Western Balkans as a transit region during this period, and the region remains as one of the most important migrant routes towards Europe. Since there are no separate data on energy poverty in the migrant population, for the purposes of the research it was assumed that migrants who are in the category of poor will also be in the category of energy poor at the same time.

Risk from poverty, energy poverty and social exclusion

According to the OECD elaborate report from 2015, statistical analysis of unemployment rates shows that in most countries in the EU, unemployment rates are higher among the foreign-born than among the native born, whether men or women [16]. This report argues that among the members of the EU, foreign-born immigrants who have attained a tertiary education face high level of unemployment. Furthermore, it is concluded that unemployment and inactivity in the labour market can result in social exclusion if they persist over time [17]. According to the available data on EUROSTAT from 2020, for those residing in the most "favourable" European destinations for migrants were as follows:

16% of national citizens,
42% of citizens of other EU Member States,
and 49% of non-EU citizens were at risk of poverty or social exclusion.

The high percentage of non-EU citizens from 2019, who are at risk of poverty or social exclusion led the author to conduct a comparable analysis with an extended timeframe; from 2014 (as the beginning of a high influx of migrants) to 2020 (the beginning of the world pandemic) to determine whether the influx of (im)migrants has affected the risk of poverty or social exclusion rate.

The goal of this analysis is determining the current position of the migrant population in the EU labour market. The author selected the EU countries that are perceived as favourable destinations by migrants, and extracted data from the EUROSTAT Database regarding the "Persons at risk of poverty or social exclusion by group of citizenship (population aged 18 and over, male and female) " from 2014–2020. The data was divided into three separate categories; EU28 countries (2013–2020) except reporting countries, reporting countries, and non EU28 countries (2013–2020) except reporting countries. In the Charts 1, 2 and 3 below, the author combined the statistical data and presented a visual presentation of the results.

The results of the research in the group of reporting countries (Chart 1) show that the greatest risk of poverty or social exclusion in the observed period was in United Kingdom, with an increase in risk. Then comes Germany, with a gradual decline in risk. The lowest risks were recorded in France and Sweden, with relatively stable values.

The risks of poverty, energy poverty and social exclusion are much higher when it comes to foreign nationals (Chart 2). Foreign nationals are most at risk of poverty, energy poverty and social exclusion in Sweden and France, and significantly less in Germany and Great Britain, with noticeable fluctuations in values.

The greatest risks are recorded for citizens from non-EU countries (Chart 3). The highest values of the risk of poverty, energy poverty and social exclusion in selected countries were recorded in the case of non-EU citizens. The values change similarly to the previous group, but the absolute values are higher.

Migrant Integration Policy Index

The most unified approach in the assessment of successful migrant integration policies was conducted by the Migrant Integration Policy Index 2020 (MIPEX). This platform is used in measuring policy-level concerning the integration of migrants (MIPEX 2020). An overall score was set to all countries based on their success in implementing the corresponding laws and policies based on several areas pertaining to labour market participation, levels of education, access to healthcare and overall health, access to institutes of nationality and permanent residence, exposure to discrimination, etc. [18] For the purposes of this research the Labour market mobility and Antidiscrimination policies are compared within the EU countries and in the Western Balkan countries. The scores are rated as follows: 1–20 unfavourable (immigration without integration), 21–40 slightly unfavourable (equality on paper), 41–59 halfway favourable (equality on paper), 60–79 slightly favourable (temporary integration), 80–100 favourable (comprehensive integration).

In the 56 MIPEX countries permanent residents have decent social protection, the possibility to get a job or to be educated to perform certain occupations. However, full equality of rights and opportunity in the labour market is still not achieved, in public sector in particular. As with many areas of integration, reforms of the labour market are not significant in 33 of 56 countries. Labour market regulation is without significant change during the last five years.

According the MIPEX reports Serbia’s is considered a regional leader, with working policies more improved than in Albania, Croatia and North Macedonia, and the Labour market mobility is scored as halfway favourable (57/100). The report suggests that, among permanent residents no discrimination regarding access to the labour market, including self-employment, however, but citizens coming from other countries do not have specially organized support to help them find and keep employment [19]. Values of Migrant integration Policy Index in 9 selected countries (on the Balkan migrant route and in the EU countries that are the desired destination of most migrants) are shown on the Chart 4.

Slovenia ranks as slightly unfavourable (26/100), where non-EU workers are not in a favourable position in terms of employment in accordance with their qualifications, nor can they use the mechanisms available to Slovenian citizens, which enable improvement in terms of job security and the reduction of inequality. According the MIPEX report France was delaying and discourages the labour market mobility of non-EU immigrants, while Sweden is ranked with the highest score. Non-EU citizens in Sweden have the same opportunities for employment and social protection as Swedish citizens.

Values of the Anti-discrimination score in the same group pf countries is presented on the Chart 5.

The MIPEX reports reveal that the Anti-discriminatory mechanisms are sufficiently developed in most countries within the Western Balkans and the EU countries. However, the Antidiscrimination scores in Albania reveal that people are more often discriminated on the base of nationality, rather than religion. According to the MIPEX reports Germany’s anti-discrimination policies require improvements as well, especially those with the objective to improve public awareness, acceptance and equal opportunities.

This research paper is one of the first studies that examines the position of the migrant population in detail within the framework of the Green Deal, in a specific geographical region that is consisted of five (5) countries of Western Balkan migration route (Serbia, North Macedonia, Albania, Croatia and Slovenia) and four (4) EU traditional destination countries (Sweden, Germany, France and the UK). Existing research based on this topic are limited to theoretical studies, while studies of this kind for the countries of the Western Balkans do not exist. Therefore, this study has potential to advance current scientific discoveries about the observed issue and to open space for further similar research, because the issue of energy poverty is becoming one of the most important problems faced by the EU and Europe as a whole.

The Green Deal does not address the issue of migrants nor does it specifically define their position in the strategy development of the EU. The Green Deal is the initial strategic document, but the action plans that derive from it also fail to mention the general migrant population. The existence of a substantial migrant population on the territory of the EU cannot be ignored, especially on matters such as the quality of life and their integration in society. The migrant population is vulnerable to many risks and as research shows the general migrant population is at a high risk of poverty, due to a significantly less favorable position on the labor market. In such circumstances, the migrant population is exposed to energy poverty, social exclusion and other negative phenomena that make their position difficult and present a constant problem for the migrant population itself, as well as for the EU countries where they live in. With the growing energy crisis, energy poverty becomes an extremely important and pressing issue and it requires finding adequate and rapid solutions, for a much larger part of the EU population is exposed to energy poverty.

Precise data (scientifically based research and/or official databases) cannot be considered as reliable, because the energy crisis occurred in the second half of 2022, with the predictions that the energy crisis will intensify. These circumstances can result in the worsening of the risks the general migrant population faces. With the additional vast influx of refugees, (caused by the Ukraine War) the territory of the EU is now home to several million people which are particularly sensitive to energy poverty. The results of this paper provide the first insight into the risks of poverty or social exclusion of the migrant population, in countries located on the Western Balkans migration route, as well as in the EU destination countries. The collected data can certainly be used for further academic analysis, conceptualization and adoption of certain policies towards energy poverty mitigation, especially in the Western Balkan region.

The main limitations of the study are primarily reflected in the insufficiently reliable data that is used. Namely, currently there is no accurate data on the number of migrants who live or have come to the territory EU in the observed research period. There is no developed database or methodology census of the migrant population. A certain number of migrants reside in EU countries without a specific status, they are not evidenced in their host country, and thus any analysis that involves the general migrant population cannot be considered completely accurate. It is important to emphasize that the data concerning the general migrant population and its integration in the WB region is vague or non-existent.

Furthermore, a significant methodological limitation exists due to the use of the Migrant Integration Policy Index, and within it two indicators: a) Labor market mobility score and b) Anti-discrimination score. Both taken indicators are composite indexes, which means that they are composed by aggregation of individual inputs indicators, but the indicators themselves that make up the mentioned indexes, if the aggregation method, are not available, so it cannot be ruled out that the error was caused by the methodological inaccuracy of composite index itself. These two indicators are composite indexes which are aggregated based on the input indicators, but the number of input indicators, categories or method of aggregation are not publicly available, instead the values are a result of a subject matter expert opinion in each observed country.

The EU, like the whole world, faces a great number of complex challenges. The economic and energy crisis, the increase in energy prices, energy supply problems, and the increase in the number of migrants and refugees open numerous issues that require quick and effective solutions. The main objective of this study was to provide insight into the position of migrants who came to the EU via Western Balkan migrant route, as well as their risk of poverty, energy poverty, and social exclusion.

The high rates of risk of poverty or social exclusion of migrants in the EU, and the MIPEX scores depict the inequality and entrenched disadvantage migrants experience. It is therefore necessary to acknowledge the essential role migrants will play in the sectors that will bear the brunt of the transition envisaged by the Deal. Inclusion of migration as a relevant point of contention in the European Green Deal would guarantee that a relevant and growing part of the citizens of Europe will be incorporated in this process. Progressing, the decision-makers should make sure that these issues are present during the transition of Deal’s abstract concepts into measurable impact and ensure that migrant populations are participating in all processes leading to its implementation

The main limitations of the research are reflected in the limited selection of available variables and the use of indices for which the methodology by which they are aggregated is not clear.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Funding

No funding.

Authors' contributions

MK is the sole author of this manuscript. MK prepared concept of the study, participated in data collection, analysis, and interpretation of the results. MK completed manuscript editing and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

Manuscript has been translated by the Author.

European Commission, Financing the green transition: The European Green Deal.
Exploring the links between green economy and migration https://www.mieux-initiative.eu/en/news-events/news/209-exploring-the-links-between-green-economy-and-migration.
Migration and the European Green Deal | Environmental Migration Portal https://environmentalmigration.iom.int/blogs/migration-and-european-green-deal (accessed 2022-09-02).
Exploring the links between green economy and migration https://www.mieux-initiative.eu/en/news-events/news/209-exploring-the-links-between-green-economy-and-migration.
Investment Plan and Just Transition Mechanism, Press release, January 14, 2020,https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_17 (accessed 2022-06-25).
European Commission, Financing the green transition: The European Green Deal Investment Plan and Just Transition Mechanism, Press release, January 14, 2020, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_17 (accessed 2022-06-25).
The Just Transition Mechanism: making sure no one is left behind https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal/finance-and-green-deal/just-transition-mechanism_en.
ILO. Decent Work https://.
International Labor Organization. Extending Social Protection to Migrant Workers, Refugees, and their Families: Guide for Policymakers and Practitioners https://www.ilo.org/global/topics/labour-migration/publications/WCMS_826684/lang--en/index.htm.
102nd Session, I. L. C. Conference guide – 102nd Session of the International Labour Conference - Building a future with decent work (Revised version) https://www.ilo.org/ilc/ILCSessions/previous-sessions/102/WCMS_204345/lang--en/index.htm (accessed 2022-09-02).
Greenman, E.; Xie, Y. Is Assimilation Theory Dead? The Effect of Assimilation on Adolescent Well-Being. Social Science Research 2008, 37 (1), 109–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2007.07.003.
Weaver, M. Angela Merkel: German multiculturalism has “utterly failed” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/oct/17/angela-merkel-german-multiculturalism-failed.
Bean, S. K. B., Frank D. Assimilation Models, Old and New: Explaining a Long-Term Processhttps://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/assimilation-models-old-and-new-explaining-long-term-process.
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 3.6.2003 COM (2003) 336 final COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS on immigration, integration and employment
Garcés-Mascareñas, B.; Penninx, R. Integration Processes and Policies in Europe; Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21674-4.
One in five people in the EU at risk of poverty or social exclusion https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/edn-20211015-1.

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Editorial decision: Major revision
11 Oct, 2022
Reviews received at journal
04 Oct, 2022
Reviewers agreed at journal
03 Oct, 2022
Reviewers invited by journal
03 Oct, 2022
Editor assigned by journal
29 Sep, 2022
Submission checks completed at journal
29 Sep, 2022
First submitted to journal
26 Sep, 2022

You are reading this latest preprint version

The EU and the Western Balkan response during the Migrant Crisis: is the European Green Deal inclusive for all?

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Background

Methods

Results

Risk from poverty, energy poverty and social exclusion

Migrant Integration Policy Index

Discussion

Conclusions

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1