InGRID2 Expert Workshop Integration of Migrants and Refugees in Household Panel Surveys

Similar documents
Surveying recently arrived refugees in Germany: the approach of the IAB-BAMF-SOEP-Refugee Study

Large-scale refugee immigration

Displaced Persons in Austria Survey (DiPAS)

Survey respondents 1.9% 19.6% 6.3% 9.1% 11% 11% 0.1% 21.1% Gender 23.6% 76.4% Age 0.3% 8.6% 22.9% 45.6% 2.7% 19.7%

A spike in the number of asylum seekers in the EU

Seminar Vocational education and training (VET) and social integration of refugees and immigrants in Israel and Germany

Fair Labour Market Integration of Refugees

Germany as a Country of Admission for Syrian Refugees

Migration Challenge or Opportunity? - Introduction. 15th Munich Economic Summit

Supplementary Materials for

Second EU Immigrants and Minorities, Integration and Discrimination Survey: Main results

Tracing Emigrating Populations from Highly-Developed Countries Resident Registration Data as a Sampling Frame for International German Migrants

Migration, Demography and Labour Mobility

econstor Make Your Publications Visible.

Community perceptions of migrants and immigration. D e c e m b e r

Asylum Applicants. Overview. Database. 59 CESifo DICE Report 3/2016 (September)

Studying life circumstances of refugees in Germany: A feasibility analysis

Policy Measures for the Inclusion of New Immigrants in Germany. Ines Michalowski Queens Interna;onal Ins;tute on Social Policy August 22-24, 2016

UK attitudes toward the Arab world an Arab News/YouGov poll

Do natives beliefs about refugees education level affect attitudes toward refugees? Evidence from randomized survey experiments

Attitudes towards Refugees and Asylum Seekers

COMMUNITY PERCEPTIONS OF MIGRANTS AND IMMIGRATION

Choice of destination country: evidence from refugees in Australia and potential asylum seekers in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka

We are here to help? Volunteering Behavior among Immigrants in Germany

Introduction to data on ethnicity

North York City of Toronto Community Council Area Profiles 2016 Census

EU-MIDIS II The Second European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey. Andrey Ivanov Jaroslav Kling

Visit IOM s interactive map to view data on flows: migration.iom.int/europe

Migration to Norway. Key note address to NFU conference: Globalisation: Nation States, Forced Migration and Human Rights Trondheim Nov 2008

Introduction to the Refugee Context and Higher Education Programmes Supporting Refugees in Germany

Refugees crossing Canadian border from U.S. NANOS SURVEY

Measuring the numbers and characteristics of refugees

Measuring International Migration- Related SDGs with U.S. Census Bureau Data

Who influences the formation of political attitudes and decisions in young people? Evidence from the referendum on Scottish independence

people/hectare Ward Toronto

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA OFFICE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE RIGHTS OF NATIONAL MINORITIES

Labour Market Integration of Refugees Key Considerations

Summary. Flight with little baggage. The life situation of Dutch Somalis. Flight to the Netherlands

INTEGRATING HUMANITARIAN MIGRANTS IN OECD COUNTRIES: LESSONS AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

Migration and Higher Education in Germany

Scarborough City of Toronto Community Council Area Profiles 2016 Census

INFORMATION & RESEARCH

Ward 17 Davenport City of Toronto Ward Profiles 2016 Census

GALLUP DAILY TRACKING

Refugees living in Wales

June Technical Report: India State Survey. India State Survey Research Program

Working paper 20. Distr.: General. 8 April English

Integrating refugees: insights from the past

16-17 NOVEMBER 2017 CONFERENCE WORKSHOP Improving the visibility of refugees skills SPEAKER POWERPOINTS

SOEP-Core v33.1 MIGSPELL and REFUGSPELL: The Migration- Biographies of Samples M1/M2 and M3/M4

Researching hard-to-reach and vulnerable groups

Determinants of International Migration in Egypt: Results of the 2013 Egypt-HIMS

The Sudan Consortium African and International Civil Society Action for Sudan. Sudan Public Opinion Poll Khartoum State

RETURN MIGRATION IN ALBANIA

A New Beginning Refugee Integration in Europe

Social Outcomes of Immigrants and Refugees in Canada: Data Innovations, Knowledge and Gaps

econstor Make Your Publications Visible.

How s Life in Hungary?

ANNUAL SURVEY REPORT: AZERBAIJAN

Asylum in the EU28 Large increase to almost asylum applicants registered in the EU28 in 2013 Largest group from Syria

ADVICE FOR AFGHAN REFUGEES AND THEIR ADVISORS

ASYLUM IN GERMANY DURING THE NEW EXODUS - A SECONDARY ANALYSIS ON OFFICIAL REPORTS

Budapest Process 14 th Meeting of the Budapest Process Working Group on the South East European Region. Budapest, 3-4 June Summary/Conclusions

How s Life in Belgium?

PERCO Platform for European Red Cross Cooperation on Refugees, Asylum-seekers and Migrants

The Employment Experience of Refugees in the Netherlands

Investigating the dynamics of migration and health in Australia: A Longitudinal study

Ward 4 Etobicoke Centre City of Toronto Ward Profiles 2016 Census

EF.FR/4/05 26 May 2005

Islamophobia and the American Elections How Does It Look in America and The Middle East?

CARIM-East Methodological Workshop II. Warsaw, 28 October 2011

ANNUAL SURVEY REPORT: ARMENIA

How s Life in Germany?

COUNTRY FACTSHEET: CROATIA 2012

A Profile of Germany s Refugee Populations

Migration, asylum and refugees in Germany: Understanding the data

SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research

How s Life in Portugal?

Survey of Edmontonians 2016 : Draft Report. June 2014

How s Life in Iceland?

EUROBAROMETER 67 PUBLIC OPINION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION SPRING This survey was requested and coordinated by Directorate-General Communication.

Ward 14 Parkdale-High Park City of Toronto Ward Profiles 2016 Census

How s Life in Ireland?

CONGRESS THEME & TRACKS

TOWARDS A GLOBAL COMPACT ON REFUGEES

REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONTEXT

Refugee Job Seeker Integration in Germany

ANNUAL SURVEY REPORT: REGIONAL OVERVIEW

Triple disadvantage? The integration of refugee women. Summary of findings

How s Life in the Slovak Republic?

Integration of refugees 10 lessons from OECD work

COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 4 May /10 MIGR 43 SOC 311

Monthly Migration Movements Afghan Displacement Summary Migration to Europe November 2017

Measuring Refugee Integration using the Labour Force Survey

ANNUAL SURVEY REPORT: GEORGIA

Asylum and afterwards?

2.2 THE SOCIAL AND DEMOGRAPHIC COMPOSITION OF EMIGRANTS FROM HUNGARY

University of Bristol - Explore Bristol Research

How s Life in the Netherlands?

Public Attitudes toward Asylum Seekers across Europe

Transcription:

InGRID2 Expert Workshop Integration of Migrants and Refugees in Household Panel Surveys Methodological Challenges and first results of the IAB-BAMF-SOEP Sample of Refugees in Germany Maria Metzing & Jürgen Schupp Budapest, April 25th, 2018

Integration of Migrants and Refugees in Household Panel Surveys 1. SOEP, Samples, Sampling Procedure and Weighting 2. Challenges in Fieldwork 3. Content and First Results

SOEP (German Socio-Economic Panel Study) 1984: start of the survey with two sub-samples: one presenting a representative picture of the entire population and one with an aboveaverage proportion of immigrants from the guest worker countries now 33 waves available, wave 34 in autumn, wave 35 in the field and wave 36 in preparation Longest-running longitudinal multiple-cohort study of private households and persons in the Federal Republic of Germany ( Living in Germany ) Started with 6,000 households in 1984, actually approx. 15,000 households about 30,000 individuals Over-sampling of foreigners, migrants, 2013/15 (with IAB) East Germans (1990), high-income, families with small children Various top-up and refresher samples Starting 2016 with a random sample of refugees (with IAB/BAMF) 3

Existing Migration Samples in the SOEP Existing Migration Samples in the SOEP (1984, 1994) Immigration up to 1983 ( Guest Workers, Sample B) Immigration from 1984-94 ( Ethnic Germans, Sample D) General population refreshers (Samples E, H, K), with oversampling of migrants (Samples F and J) IAB-SOEP Migration Samples (2013, 2015) Immigration between 1995-2012 (also refugees) and second-generation migrants (Adult Anchor Person (majority EU-25, Sample M1) Immigration between 2009-14 (often EU-27, Sample M2) 4

The IAB-BAMF-SOEP Refugee Samples (M3, M4 & M5) Background (initial applications for asylum, BAMF) 2013: 109,580 2014: 173,072 2015: 441,899 2016: 722,370 2017: 198,317 Target Population Asylum seekers migrating to Germany between Jan. 2013 and Jan. 2016 (M3 & M4) and between Jan. 2016 and Dec. 2016 (M5) Applications still being processed, person with protection from removal on humanitarian grounds, and temporary residence permit (both private and institutional households) Sampling Central Register of Foreigners of the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF), monthly updates Addresses held by the local Foreigners Registration Office 5

Summary of all Migration boosts of the SOEP Wave Report 2016, p. 42 6

Number of Adult Anchor Persons by Origin (M3) Country of Origin Frame (AZR) Gross Sample Syria 208,692 (39.7) 6,586 (42.2) Afghanistan 41,510 (7.9) 1,569 (10.1) Iraq 38,367 (7.3) 2,204 (14.1) Albania, Serbia, Kosovo 49,204 (9.4) 852 (5.5) Eritrea, Somalia 35,745 (6.8) 1,396 (8.9) Iran, Pakistan 23,301 (4.4) 587 (3.8) Other 128,379 (24.4) 2,406 (15.4) Total 525,198 (100) 15,600 (100) Sampling by gender (Female), Age (30+), Country of birth (Non-Europe), and status (Permit) Sample size M3 (estimated): 1,600 households with 2,700 adults, and 500 children Sample size M4 (estimated): 1,600 households with 2,000 adults, and 1,600 children 7

Steps of the Sampling Procedure Two Step sampling procedure 1. Regional Clustering of Foreigners Registration Offices 369 clusters (min. 300 adults in target population) Länder borders, geographical proximity 2. Random selection of sample points (sampling probabilities proportional to size) 99 PSUs in M3, 95 PSUs in M4, and 99 PSUs in M5 3. Random selection of 80 anchor persons per point (gross sample) Provision of the addresses by local Foreigners Registration Offices Sampling probability by gender (female), Age (30+), Country of birth (non- Europe), and status (permit) 8

Sampled Foreigners Registration Offices in M3 & M4 M3 M4 In Sample Not in Sample In Sample Not in Sample 9

Nonresponse-Rates M3 & M4 Distribution in % (case numbers in parentheses) Completed interviews with anchor person 48.7 (3,336) Household non-response 51.3 (3,512) among those (%): not locatable 40.2 (1,412) not accessible 17.6 (617) illness or nursing care 1.7 (61) mental or language problems 8.9 (311) no time 18.4 (645) currently not willing 4.8 (170) refusal 8.4 (296) Total 100 (3,512) Total 100 (6,848) 10

Cross Sectional Weighting and Integration into SOEP-Core 1. Design Weighting (Inverse Sampling Probabilities) 2. Nonresponse Weighting Propensity-Score Model Linking survey to register data anonimously Aggregated regional information about respondents and nonrespondents living area Interviewer information on the housing and the residential surrounding 3. Post-Stratification I 4. Integration into SOEP-Core (Post-Stratification II) 5. Longitudinal Weight 11

Integration of Migrants and Refugees in Household Panel Surveys 1. SOEP, Samples, Sampling Procedure and Weighting 2. Challenges in Fieldwork 3. Content and First Results

Challenges in the Fieldwork 1. Interviews in Arrival Centers, Public and Private Housing Access to arrival centers and public housing Support of the (joint) Welfare Associations on local level Cooperation of the local registration offices crucial 2. Language barriers Visual translation Audio records Interpreters (Hotline) 3. Modes F2F (CAPI) Mobile phone app (Living in Germany) 13

Usage of questionnaire translation and audio support Visual Usage (%) translation English 16.1 Arabic 62.2 Farsi 12.6 Pashto 1.0 Urdu 1.7 Kurmanji 3.4 Source: Martin Kroh et al. (2017). 14

Usage of audio files Audio Files Usage (%) For every question 7.2 For 2/3 of the questions 6.3 For 50% of the questions 4.0 In less than 50% 9.1 Not used 73.4 Source: Martin Kroh et al. (2017). 15

Mobile phone app Problem: Solution: highly mobile population mobile phone app 1. Address maintenance (5%) 2. Request telephone numbers (45%) 3. Refresh information for refugees regularly Source: Martin Kroh et al. (2017). 16

Civic engagement in the refugee context Since 2015 commitment of large numbers of volunteers who wanted to help these newcomers upon their arrival. The Mentoring of Refugees-Project MORE has partnered with the social start-up Start with a Friend e.v., which has created more than 2500 mentor-like relationships (known in German as Tandems ) between refugees and locals since 2014. Like many other civic initiatives for refugees, Start with a Friend aims at creating friendships between refugees and locals and providing emotional as well as practical support. 17

Special Add-On-Study Mentoring of Refugees Design of the Study The MORE study uses a randomized controlled trial that will be conducted with participants of the IAB-BAMF-SOEP Refugee Sample 2017 and 2018. Participants who are interested in participating in the study are being randomly selected into either the group of about 50 participants (the treatment group) or the group of 500 non-participants (the control group). All participants will be matched with a local by Start with a Friend for a mentoring relationship. Both the treatment and the control group will be interviewed annually as part of the IAB-BAMF-SOEP Refugee Sample. 18

Special Add-On-Study Mentoring of Refugees

Integration of Migrants and Refugees in Household Panel Surveys 1. SOEP, Samples, Sampling Procedure and Weighting 2. Challenges in Fieldwork 3. Content and First Results

Integrating refugees: insights from the past Economic Bulletin, 2016/No. 35 A special issue of the DIW Economic Bulletin (No. 35/2016) analyzes 2013 survey data provided by several hundred refugees living in Germany. Most of the individuals in this group migrated between the years 1990 and 2010, and to a large extent, they came from the West Balkans and Arab or Muslim nations countries of origin that are playing a major role in the current immigration wave These empirical findings may allow us to draw conclusions about how refugees in the recent past were able to successfully integrate into the education system and labor market 21

Integrating refugees: insights from the past http://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.542002.de /diw_econ_bull_2016-34.pdf The primary data basis is the IAB-SOEP Migration Sample, a joint initiative between the Institute for Employment Research (IAB) and the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP); most of the analyses in this EB are based on results from surveys conducted in 2013. Data on refugees in Germany are compared to those of non-refugee migrants who entered the country during the same time period. This issue of the EB investigates five different areas of refugee integration: the skillsets of refugees who came to Germany, as well as their educational backgrounds and professional qualifications from abroad; refugees language acquisition; labor market participation; landing their first job in Germany; and the use of voluntary education programs by children and young people with refugee backgrounds 22

Content Survey Year 2016 2017 Sample Questionnaire M3 & M4 (1st-time respondents) M3 & M4 (repeating respondents) M5 (1st-time respondents) Individual biography x x x Household x x x Residential surroundings x (x) x Integrated child(ren) Pre-teen (including cognitive testing) Early teen (including cognitive testing) Teen (including cognitive testing) x x x x 23

Some characteristics of the life situation Population without migration background Population with migration background Refugees (arrived before 2013) Refugees (arrived after 2013) German citizenship (%) 100 57 39 0 Average length of stay (years) X 26 20 1 Age at immigration (mean) X 23 24 29 Housing conditions Rent per sqm (mean) 7.1 7.7 8 - Household size (number of persons) 1.9 2.3 3.2 2.6 / 1.5 Living sqm per person (mean) 60 47 31 29 / 9 24

Some characteristics of the life situation Income distribution Population without migration background Population Refugees with migration(arrived background before 2013) Refugees (arrived after 2013) <60 % (poverty rate) 13 20 48 94 60 % 100 % 33 34 40 5 100 % 150 % 33 29 10 1 >150 % 21 17 1 1 Equalized household net income (median) 1,667 1,500 969 404 25

Employment Status Population without migration background Population with migration background Refugees (arrived before 2013) Refugees (arrived after 2013) Full-time employment (%) 53 46 35 3 Part-time employment (%) 21 21 18 5 Temporarily not working (%) 1 2 1 0 Unemployed (%) 7 10 21 0 School/trainee /apprenticeship /study at university (%) 8 9 6 8 Not working (%) 10 11 19 83 thereof in couses (%) X X X 47 26

Some experiences and languages skills Perceived discrimination because of your ethnic origins (often) Concerns about xenophobia (share very concerned) Concerns about economic situation (share very concerned) Population without migration background Population Refugees with migration (arrived background before 2013) Refugees (arrived after 2013) - 4 6 10 48 43 37 8 12 19 39 33 Stay in Germany forever (yes) - 85 91 95 Transfers abroad 1 9 14 0 Language skills speaking - 75 66 17 writing - 65 52 20 reading - 76 65 25 27

Satisfaction Satisfaction with Population without migration background Population with migration background Refugees (arrived before 2013) Refugees (arrived after 2013) Your life today. 7.3 7.4 7.0 6.9 Your personal income. 6.5 6.1 5.3 5.2 Your dwelling situation. 8.0 7.7 6.9 6.2 28

Conclusion Immigration from EU-27 became a major issue in Germany Over the course of 2015, around one million refugees arrived in Germany The growing (forced) migration population poses a major challenge for Germany s policy makers, civic administrators, and society at large Government administrators, politicians, and the public need robust analyses of the accompanying and demographic changes based on valid and reliable empirical data Migrants and refugee cohorts were already part of the SOEP But: this population was only covered to a limited degree SOEP, IAB and BAMF-FZ develop a joint survey of recently arrived refugees That allows more complex analysis and comparative analysis of particular refugee 29

Backup Thank you for your attention. Research Infrastructure Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP ) at DIW Berlin German Institute for Economic Research e.v. Mohrenstraße 58, 10117 Berlin www.diw.de/soep Jürgen Schupp / jschupp@diw.de Maria Metzing / mmetzing@diw.de

Late Application for Asylum and the EASY Gap Tranche 1 (M3): registered adults as of Jan. 2016 (N=10,400) Tranche 2 (M3): newly registered adults as of April 2016 (N=5,200) Tranche 3 (M4): registered adults as of April 2016 (N=5,850) Tranche 4 (M4): registered underage persons as of June 2016 (N=9,750) Tranche 5 (M5): newly registered adults as of Jan. 2017 (N=3,368) Tranche 6 (M5): adults arrived between Jan. 2016 / Jan. 2017 (N=2,482) 31

Questionnaire for Refugee Samples (M3, M4 & M5) Individual biography questionnaire: Country of origin How respondent came to Germany Status of asylum procedure Arrival in Germany Intention to stay Language knowledge Support / networks Employment (prior to coming to Germany and now), income Education, training, and qualifications (in country of origin, recognition of qualifications, qualifications already obtained in Germany, currently ongoing training, numbers and figures test) 32

Questionnaire for Refugee Samples (M3, M4 & M5) Individual biography questionnaire: Health (SF12, loneliness, resilience, fear and depression, self-esteem) Personality (reciprocity, control beliefs, risk-taking) Attitudes and opinions (connection to country of origin, feeling welcome in Germany, perceptions of discrimination, religion, worries, political interest in country of origin and in Germany, conception of democracy, gender role images) Expectations for the future in relation to education and labor market participation Family situation Payments made Request for consent to record linkage 33

Questionnaire of the Refugee-Samples (M3, M4 & M5) Household questionnaire: Current housing / apartment Transfers received Provision of daily necessities Participation Children (attendance of daycare, preschool, school) 34