Rukhsana Kausar 1, Stephen Drinkwater 2

Similar documents
Self-employed immigrants and their employees: Evidence from Swedish employer-employee data

THE EMPLOYABILITY AND WELFARE OF FEMALE LABOR MIGRANTS IN INDONESIAN CITIES

NERO INTEGRATION OF REFUGEES (NORDIC COUNTRIES) Emily Farchy, ELS/IMD

Defining migratory status in the context of the 2030 Agenda

Quantitative Analysis of Migration and Development in South Asia

THE EMPLOYMENT ADJUSTMENT OF MALE IMMIGRANTS IN ENGLAND *

English - Or. English ECONOMICS DEPARTMENT ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE

Are Refugees Different from Economic Immigrants? Some Empirical Evidence on the Heterogeneity of Immigrant Groups in the U.S.

ASYLUM SEEKERS AND REFUGEES DO NOT GET LARGE HANDOUTS FROM THE STATE ASYLUM IN SCOTLAND BRITAIN'S ASYLUM SYSTEM IS VERY TOUGH THE FACTS ASYLUM

Table A.2 reports the complete set of estimates of equation (1). We distinguish between personal

Rural and Urban Migrants in India:

Economic Activity in London

Some Key Issues of Migrant Integration in Europe. Stephen Castles

Effects of Institutions on Migrant Wages in China and Indonesia

Leaving work behind? The impact of emigration on female labour force participation in Morocco

The Cultural Origin of Saving Behaviour. Joan Costa Font, LSE Paola Giuliano, UCLA Berkay Ozcan*, LSE

THE EFFECT OF WORKING BAN PERIODS FOR ASYLUM SEEKERS ON REFUGEES EMPLOYMENT RATES IN EUROPE

The wage gap between the public and the private sector among. Canadian-born and immigrant workers

The Labour Market Performance of Immigrant and. Canadian-born Workers by Age Groups. By Yulong Hou ( )

Refugee Law In Hong Kong

Language Proficiency and Earnings of Non-Official Language. Mother Tongue Immigrants: The Case of Toronto, Montreal and Quebec City

Rural and Urban Migrants in India:

Remittances and Poverty. in Guatemala* Richard H. Adams, Jr. Development Research Group (DECRG) MSN MC World Bank.

The Vulnerability of Asylum Seekers and Refugees in Informal Settlements in Italy

Learning about Irregular Migration from a unique survey

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

The Role of Acculturation, Context of Reception and Capitals in the Economic Integration of Latino Newcomers to the Midwest in 2009

Onward, return, repeated and circular migration among immigrants of Moroccan origin. Merging datasets as a strategy for testing migration theories.

The impact of Syrian refugees on German Labour Market

Assimilation of Migrants. Alessandra Venturini

European Immigrants in the UK Before and After the 2004 Enlargement

Differences in labour market outcomes between natives, refugees and other migrants in the UK 1

Can Immigrants Insure against Shocks as well as the Native-born?

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%

Intra-Rural Migration and Pathways to Greater Well-Being: Evidence from Tanzania

5. Destination Consumption

Design of Specialized Surveys of International Migration: The MED-HIMS Experience

MATS HAMMARSTEDT & CHIZHENG MIAO 2018:4. Self-employed immigrants and their employees Evidence from Swedish employer-employee data

Remittances and the Brain Drain: Evidence from Microdata for Sub-Saharan Africa

What about the Women? Female Headship, Poverty and Vulnerability

Interaction Between Economic and Political Factors In the Migration Decision*

A wage premium or penalty: Marriage migration and intermarriage effects among the children of immigrants?

Employment Rate Gaps between Immigrants and Non-immigrants in. Canada in the Last Three Decades

F E M M Faculty of Economics and Management Magdeburg

High School Model United Nations February 26-February 27, 2011

Effects of remittances on health expenditure and types of treatment of international migrants households in Bangladesh

Labour Market Success of Immigrants to Australia: An analysis of an Index of Labour Market Success

Characteristics of the Ethnographic Sample of First- and Second-Generation Latin American Immigrants in the New York to Philadelphia Urban Corridor

Postwar Migration in Southern Europe,

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

Refugee Versus Economic Immigrant Labor Market Assimilation in the United States: A Case Study of Vietnamese Refugees

PROJECTING THE LABOUR SUPPLY TO 2024

Wage Differentials between Ethnic. Groups in Hong Kong in 2006

The Impact of International Remittance on Poverty, Household Consumption and Investment in Urban Ethiopia: Evidence from Cross-Sectional Measures*

Labour Mobility Interregional Migration Theories Theoretical Models Competitive model International migration

Precautionary Savings by Natives and Immigrants in Germany

A glass-ceiling effect for immigrants in the Italian labour market?

Settling In: Public Policy and the Labor Market Adjustment of New Immigrants to Australia. Deborah A. Cobb-Clark

Is Immigration Good For the Canadian Economy?

A glass-ceiling effect for immigrants in the Italian labour market?

Legal Status at Entry, Economic Performance, and Self-employment Proclivity: A Bi-national Study of Immigrants*

Refugees in Sweden: Economic integration and wage convergence

Monthly Migration Movements Afghan Displacement Summary Migration to Europe November 2017

IMMIGRANTS IN THE ISRAELI HI- TECH INDUSTRY: COMPARISON TO NATIVES AND THE EFFECT OF TRAINING

Determinants of Highly-Skilled Migration Taiwan s Experiences

UCD GEARY INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES. How did Immigrants fare in the Irish Labour Market over the Great Recession?

Gender wage gap among Canadian-born and immigrant workers. with respect to visible minority status

Immigration and Internal Mobility in Canada Appendices A and B. Appendix A: Two-step Instrumentation strategy: Procedure and detailed results

The immigrant-native pay gap in Germany

Model United Nations College of Charleston November 3-4, Humanitarian Committee: Refugee crisis General Assembly of the United Nations

This is a repository copy of The Over-Education of UK Immigrants and Minority Ethnic Groups: Evidence from the Labour Force Survey.

Trade Liberalization in India: Impact on Gender Segregation

Intra-Rural Migration and Pathways to Greater Well-Being: Evidence from Tanzania

Self-Selection and the Earnings of Immigrants

TECHNICAL APPENDIX. Immigrant Earnings Growth: Selection Bias or Real Progress. Garnett Picot and Patrizio Piraino*

Welsh Action for Refugees: briefing for Assembly Members. The Welsh Refugee Coalition. Wales: Nation of Sanctuary. The Refugee Crisis

TAKING THE RIGHTS STEPS Children s Rights: Wales and the World. Separated Children Seeking Sanctuary in Wales Swansea University, 11/12 th June 2012

Why are Immigrants Underrepresented in Politics? Evidence From Sweden

Can immigrants insure against shocks as well as the native-born?

An Analysis of Rural to Urban Labour Migration in India with Special Reference to Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes

Public Attitudes toward Asylum Seekers across Europe

Supplementary Materials for

Returning to the Question of a Wage Premium for Returning Migrants

DETERMINANTS OF INTERNAL MIGRATION IN PAKISTAN

Nordic Journal of Political Economy

Benefit levels and US immigrants welfare receipts

INTERNATIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS ON REFUGEE STATISTICS (IRRS)

GEORG-AUGUST-UNIVERSITÄT GÖTTINGEN

Refugees

BASICS OF REFUGEE PROTECTION S O O J I N H Y U N G, A S S O C I A T E P R O T E C T I O N O F F I C E R

Centre for Economic Policy Research

Profile of Migration and Remittances: Croatia

Australian Lawyers for Human Rights Refugee Law Kit 2004 (last updated 30 November 2004)

Rethinking Australian Migration

Asylum seekers: 13 things you should know

DO POVERTY DETERMINANTS DIFFER OVER EXPENDITURE DECILES? A SRI LANKAN CASE FROM 1990 TO 2010

The Causes of Wage Differentials between Immigrant and Native Physicians

The Employment of Low-Skilled Immigrant Men in the United States

New Zealand s approach to Refugees: Legal obligations and current practices

What makes someone British?

Transcription:

Who is Better off? Employment Differentials between Refugees/ Asylum Seekers and Economic Immigrants in the UK Rukhsana Kausar 1, Stephen Drinkwater 2 Labour Force Survey user meeting Thursday 2 December 2010 Royal Statistical Society, London 1 University of Surrey 2 Swansea University

Difference Between Economic Immigrants and Refugees Refugee Definition according to 1951 UN Convention The word refugee refers to a person who owing to a well founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality or membership of a particular social group or political opinion is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country. Asylum Seeker: Someone who is fleeing persecution in his or her country and has arrived in another country and exercises the legal right to apply for asylum/ individuals claim to be refugees who are waiting for a decision from the Home Office on their cases. Economic Migrant: Someone who migrates purely on economic motives with the expectation of increasing their lifetime income. Their economic behaviour differs in terms of their work effort, consumption, savings (remittances) and human capital investment.

Empirical Literature Review Many studies on the labour market performance of immigrants but relatively few that focus on refugees/asylum seekers including: Lindley (2002) Analysis of labour market performance of different immigrants groups using quarterly Labour Force Survey data (1995-2000) for the UK. Findings - Larger earnings penalties and higher unemployment propensities for individuals from refugee sending countries and significant unexplainable ethnic penalties. Cortes (2004) Analysis of implicit time horizon differences and effects on human capital investment for US refugees and economic immigrants in the US. Findings-Faster earning growth for refugees over time due to the higher country-specific human capital investment of refugees.

Objectives of this paper To Analyze labour market performance of Refugees & Asylum Seekers in the UK, focusing specifically on their Economic activity and employment. By attempting to make a clear distinction between Refugees/Asylum Seekers and Economic To examine the labour market assimilation of asylum seekers/refugees (relative to other immigrants) in terms of their employment and returns to education as well as ethnicity.

Data Sources For labour market and socio-economic variables Quarterly Labour Force Survey 2001-2006 For the construction of different migrant categories various sources used: Asylum Statistics United Kingdom 1989-2006 Home Office Statistical Bulletin Control of Immigration Statistics Home Office, for the years 2000, 2003 and 2006 The State of the World s Refugees- UNHCR- 1997-98 A Humanitarian Agenda The State of the World s Refugees- UNHCR-2000

Methodology for Categorization of Asylum Seekers and Refugees Asylum Seekers and Refugees category is defined using the following data Data for number of asylum applications made 1989-2006 Refugees and Business Acceptance Ratio for settlement Refugee- Business Ratio Rb-ratio >5 : Category I 1 5 : Category II 0< & < 1 : Category III 0 : Category IV Asylum Seekers and Refugees are divided in to four categories using these sources Categories of Asylum seekers and Refugees I Refugees and asylum seekers II Mixed Refugees and Economic III Mainly Economic IV Economic

Table 1: Example of Countries in each Category LFS Code County No. of Asylum Applications Refugee - Business Ratio Category I,II, III,IV 11 Australia ----- <1 IV 14 Kenya High in Mid 1990s 1-5 II 16 Tanzania High 1993-96 1-5 I: 1989-96 II:>=1997 26 Jamaica Nothing until 1996, High in early 2000 >5: 2000 <1:2003& 2006 IV: 1989-95 III:>=1996 108 Iraq High in late 1990s & early 2000s >5 I: >=1989

Economic Activity/Inactivity by Immigrant Category; Males Category Refugees & Asylum Seekers Mixed Refugees & Eco. Mainly Economic Economic Total Employed 60.17 % 76.03 % 87.82 % 86.21 % 79.48 % Unemployed 12.33 % 9.38 % 4.80 % 5.69 % 7.52 % Students 3.33 % 1.51 % 1.15 % 1.20 % 1.67 % Looking after Family/ 1.11 % 0.82 % 0.79 % 0.63% 0.79% Home Temporarily Sick/ Injured/Disabled 2.34 % 2.05 % 0.86 % 0.79 % 1.34 % Long Term Sick/ Injured/Disabled 4.99 % 3.08 % 1.22 % 1.58 % 2.47 % Not Looking Jobs 15.72 % 7.12 % 3.37 % 3.90 % 6.74 % No. of Observations 1622 1460 1396 3670 8148

Economic Activity/Inactivity by Immigrant Category; Females Category Refugees & Asylum Seekers Mixed Refugees& Eco. Mainly Economic Economic Total Employed 36.54 % 36.55 % 61.41 % 66.10 % 55.20 % Unemployed 5.95 % 4.91 % 5.44 % 4.60 % 5.04 % Students 3.62 % 1.89 % 1.47 % 1.29 % 1.83 % Looking after Family/ Home 29.66 % 33.71 % 18.35 % 16.22 % 21.84 % Temporarily Sick/ Injured/Disabled 1.81 % 1.70 % 0.98 % 0.85 % 1.18 % Long Term Sick/ Injured/Disabled 11.68 % 13.36 % 6.79 % 5.55 % 8.13 % Not Looking Jobs 10.74 % 7.88 % 5.57 % 5.38 % 6.78 % No. of Observations 1713 1587 1635 4717 9652

Employment Job Type by Immigrant Category Category Refugees & Asylum Seekers Mixed Refugees & Eco. Mainly Economic Economic Total Males Permanent 70.85 % 77.15 % 76.05 % 77.04 % 75.95 % Temporary 10.89 % 8.16 % 12.38 % 9.97 % 10.25 % Self-Employed 18.26 % 14.69 % 11.56 % 12.99 % 13.80 % No. of Observations 964 1103 1220 3149 6436 Females Permanent 81.45 % 82.02 % 79.14 % 79.13 % 79.72 % Temporary 12.26 % 12.04 % 13.24 % 12.79 % 12.73 % Self-Employed 6.29 % 5.93 % 7.62 % 8.08 % 7.55 % No. of Observations 620 573 997 3095 5285

Empirical Methodology A formal regression analysis is used to explore the determinants of employments for immigrants and to compare the earnings of refugees/asylum seekers relative to other immigrants = 0 if not employed and = 1 if employed Z i = A Set of Control Variables γ = Associated vector of Coefficients for Z i Im mig i = Set of Dummies for Immigrants category δ = Associated vector of coefficients for Co ε = Constant & = Error Term Im mig i

Table 4: Regression Estimates for Employment for Males and Females Males Medium Education 0.096*** (0.012) High Education 0.124*** (0.010) Asians -0.038** (0.012) Black -0.084*** (0.017) Chinese & Others -0.096*** (0.013) No. of Dependent Children -0.023*** (0.004) Mixed Refugees & Economic 0.141*** (0.016) Mainly Economic 0.227*** (0.015) Economic 0.206*** (0.014) Years since Migration 0.009*** (0.001) Females 0.021*** (0.012) 0.129*** (0.011) -0.191*** (0.014) -0.040* (0.016) -0.138*** (0.014) 0.119*** (0.005) 0.087*** (0.016) 0.219*** (0.013) 0.169*** (0.013) 0.012*** (0.001) No. of Obs 8039 9555 Adj R-squared 0.143 0.249 Note: Robust standard errors are in parentheses and default categories are low educated, white and refugees and asylum seekers (Category 1). *p<0.1; ** p <0.05; *** p<0.01 (two-tailed tests)

Table 5: Regression Estimates for Employment for Immigrant Category; Males Refugees & Asylum Seekers Mixed Refugees & Economic Mainly Economic Economic Medium Education 0.155*** (0.028) 0.060* (0.029) 0.037** (0.029) 0.021*** (0.012) High Education 0.183*** (0.028) 0.085** (0.027) 0.082*** (0.023) 0.129*** (0.011) East 0.105 (0.062) 0.061*** (0.041) 0.041 (0.034) 0.081*** (0.019) 0.006 (0.037) -0.035 (0.031) -0.016 (0.028) -0.022 (0.014) South 0.151** (0.047) 0.067* (0.37) 0.062* (0.027) 0.086*** (0.016) Asians -0.058* -0.069* -0.024-0.191*** (0.029) (0.039) (0.017) (0.014) Black 0.018-0.030-0.19*** -0.040* (0.034) (0.039) (0.051) (0.016) Chinese & Others 0.122*** -0.129** -0.098** -0.138*** (0.031) (0.046) (0.030) (0.014) No. of Dependent -0.047*** -0.026** -0.029** 0.007 Children (0.011) (0.009) (0.010) (0.005) Years since 0.029*** 0.006*** 0.008*** 0.002 Migration (0.003) (0.003) (0.002) (0.001) No. of Obs 1617 1455 1386 3581 Adj R-squared 0.178 0.077 0.096 0.087 Note: Robust standard errors are in parenthesis. Default categories are low educated and white. *p<0.1; ** p <0.05; *** p<0.01 (two-tailed tests).

Table 6: Regression Estimates for Employment by Immigrant Category; Females Refugees & Asylum Seekers Mixed Refugees & Economic Mainly Economic Economic Refugees & Asylum Seekers Mixed Refugees & Economic Mainly Economic Economic Medium Education 0.168*** (0.026) 0.102** (0.027) 0.121*** (0.032) 0.074*** (0.018) High Education 0.193*** (0.025) 0.076** (0.026) 0.138*** (0.030) 0.074*** (0.017) Asians -0.023 (0.031) -0.316*** (0.044) -0.143*** (0.029) -0.182*** (0.022) Black -0.076* (0.030) 0.091* (0.045) -0.006 (0.045) -0.174*** (0.027) Chinese & Others -0.155*** (0.028) -0.195*** (0.049) -0.113** (0.035) -0.110*** (0.019) No. of Dependent Children -0.096*** (0.010) -0.072*** (0.008) -0.098*** (0.004) -0.150*** (0.009) Years since Migration 0.026*** (0.003) 0.008** (0.003) 0.011** (0.003) 0.012*** (0.001) No. of Obs 1704 1582 1634 4635 Adj R-squared 0.237 0.294 0.122 0.220 Note: Robust standard errors are in parenthesis. Default categories are low educated and white. *p<0.1; ** p <0.05; *** p<0.01 (two-tailed tests).

Table 7: Multinomial Logit Estimates for Different Job Types of Employment Males Females Temporary Self-Employed Temporary Self-Employed Medium Education 0.362* (0.130) 0.146 (0.100) 0.410** (0.134) High Education 0.514*** -0.154 0.590*** (0.118) (0.094) (0.128) London -0.415** 0.264** -0.569*** (0.128) (0.118) (0.133) South -0.364** 0.035-0.771*** (0.149) (0.135) (0.151) Asians -0.004-0.440*** 0.053 (0.128) (0.105) (0.135) Black 0.366** -1.267*** 0.201 (0.152) (0.165) (0.153) Chinese & Others 0.323** -0.674*** 0.156 (0.127) (0.129) (0.129) No. of Dependent -0.039 0.096** -0.033 Children (0.035) (0.038) (0.047) Mixed Refugees & -0.417** 0.036-0.214 Economic (0.162) (0.129) (0.190) Mainly Economic -0.129-0.304** -0.224 (0.146) (0.135) (0.163) Economic -0.432** -0.365** -0.330* (0.137) (0.114) (0.146) Years since Migration -0.114*** 0.089*** -0.114*** (0.014) (0.008) (0.014) No. of Obs 6344 5222-0.099 (0.158) 0.232 (0.139) 0.517** (0.193) 0.065 (0.211) -0.595** (0.171) -1.602*** (0.277) -0.431** (0.165) 0.248** (0.078) 0.495* (0.264) 0.533** (0.225) 0.389** (0.192) 0.050*** (0.013) Pseudo R-squared 0.066 0.069 Note: Robust standard errors are in parentheses. Default categories are single, low education, living in North, white, year 2006, in permanent employment and refugees and asylum seekers (Category 1). * p<0.1; ** p <0.005; *** p<0.01 (two-tailed tests

Conclusions Refugees/Asylum Seekers do worse than other immigrants in terms of having a job, both for males and females. Education, location, ethnicity and years since migration are important determinants of the labour market performance of immigrants. Returns to years since migration are the greatest for refugees and asylum seekers, showing faster assimilation over time compared to economic migrants. The separate results for education and migrant categories show that the highest returns to education for employment are experienced by refugees/asylum seekers.

Policy Implications: Policies should target the welfare of different migrant and ethnic groups because of the diversity in labour market outcomes. Ethnicity can not be ignored when analyzing the labour market performance of immigrants, therefore measures are required to further discourage discrimination. Investment in human capital is to be encouraged for migrants, including through the provision of English language training.