The social and employment dimensions of the EU's Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs: What are the opportunities for monitoring and improving the situation of migrants and ethnic minorities in the EU's Lisbon Strategy?

10 Nov 2022 CategoryURG rights and employment Author Umain Recommends

Originally published here.

The Lisbon strategy is the most important driver of EU socio-economic policy, and heavily influences the policy priorities of Member  States. It  is important  for actors  in the  racial equality and migration  fields to  understand the Lisbon Strategy  in  order  to  capitalise  on  the  opportunities  it presents for improving the situation of people vulnerable to racism. Which  people are vulnerable to  racism? ENAR  has defined the  following communities  in  Europe  as  being  vulnerable to  racism: Roma,  Sinti  and  Travellers;  migrants  including EU  nationals  and  third  country  nationals,  particularly undocumented  migrants  and  asylum  seekers;  the  Jewish community;  the  Muslim  community;  long-standing  ethnic minority  communities;  national  minorities;  more  recent migrants;  and  EU  citizens  in  the  context  of  intra-EU migration.

While there appears to be a correlation between a community’s vulnerability to  racism and its socio-economic standing,  there  are exceptions.  For  example,  many  Jewish communities do not experience widespread socio-economic disadvantage  despite  the  long-standing  racism  they  have encountered. The target  group for this  research is  ‘migrants and  ethnic minorities’, a term which broadly encompasses most of the communities  vulnerable to  racism  and  reflects  the  target group  of  the  Lisbon  strategy  (which  does  not  explicitly include  religious  communities). 

Despite  focusing  on ‘migrants  and  ethnic minorities’, this  paper  includes  the relevant information found on religious groups and national minorities, albeit very limited. The purpose of this publication is to examine the social and employment dimensions of the Lisbon Strategy in order to establish the extent to which the situation of migrants and ethnic minorities and others vulnerable  to racism is taken into  account  in  European  and  national strategies  with  a view  to identifying advocacy  strategies  for  anti-racist civil  society organisations  to  ensure  that this  issue  is given the attention it requires.

Monitoring  the  situation  of  migrants  and  ethnic minorities is one of the most effective ways for ensuring that the Lisbon strategy improves  the socio-economic life of migrant and ethnic minorities. Statistics can reveal inequalities as well as measure the impact of strategies put in place to overcome these inequalities. Statistics point to the fact that there is a problem, and that something (more) needs to be done so that all people in European societies are able to realise their full potential. The Lisbon strategy uses indicators, targets and  benchmarks to focus  the attention of  Member  States  and  to  monitor  the  effectiveness  of the  strategy. 

To  a  limited  degree  there  are  indicators to monitor  the situation  of  migrants  and  ethnic  minorities. This publication provides commentary on whether existing monitoring, particularly  in relation  to migrants and ethnic minorities, is effective and suggests options for addressing the limitations identified. Chapter  one  provides  an  overview  of  the  overarching Lisbon Open Method of Coordination (OMC). It examines its  framework  and  policy  priorities  as  outlined  in  the Integrated  Guidelines  on  Growth  and  Jobs,  which  directs the  work  of the  European  Employment  Strategy and  the Social Inclusion and Social Protection Strategy.

The Lisbon OMC’s  monitoring  framework  is examined, including  use of indicators, targets, benchmarking and its  newly devised analytical  tool  (LIME  assessment  framework),  which measures the impact of migration and integration. Chapter two  examines the  data options for monitoring the socio-economic situation  of migrants  and ethnic minorities.  It  looks  at  the  available  data  sources  that allow  for  comparability across  EU  states  and  notes  the limitations of migration-related  data and  the absence of data on  ethnic background,  race and  religion.

It  looks at the strengths and  weakness  of using  data  on country of birth  and  nationality  as  ‘proxy  variables’  for  capturing migrant  status  and  provides  suggestions  for  examining the situation of different categories of migrants and ethnic minorities using EU data. It highlights the value of the 2008 ‘Labour Force Survey ad hoc module on the labour market situation  of  migrants  and  their  immediate  descendants’ in better understanding the situation of different types of migrants and concludes  with a brief examination of work being done by the Social Inclusion and Social Protection Strategy to improve data on migrants and ethnic minorities at the national level.

Chapter three focuses  on  the inclusion  of  migrants and ethnic  minorities  within  the  European  Employment Strategy (EES). It looks at monitoring at the European level through the use of indicators, and the limited use of targets and benchmarking.  Shortcomings in current monitoring at the EU level are highlighted and a number of opportunities for better monitoring are presented. The chapter then looks at the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy at the national level through  National Reform  Programmes by  identifying strategies  being  used to  improve  the  labour  market and educational outcomes of migrants and ethnic minorities as well as the use of target setting and indicators.

Chapter  four  focuses  on the  social  inclusion  strand  of the Social Inclusion and Social Protection strategy (the Social OMC). It provides an overview of the OMC framework and then outlines the extent to which migrants and ethnic minority  groups  are  targeted.  The  chapter  explains  how the  Social  OMC  monitors  progress  at  the  European  level through  the  use  of  indicators  (it does  not use  targets  or benchmarking  at  the  EU  level).

It  looks  at  the  limited monitoring  being  done on the  situation  of  migrants  and ethnic  minorities  at  the  EU  level and presents a number of  options  for  improvement. The  focus  then  turns  to  the national level. In  each  chapter  strategies  are  presented  that  are aimed at  making the situation of migrants and ethnic minorities a policy priority of the Lisbon strategy, both in its implementation at the EU and national levels. Racial equality and migration  actors  can use  this  information to inform their advocacy strategies as  well as their own data collection and analysis on the socio-economic situation of migrants and ethnic minorities.

The Commission has made significant efforts to encourage Member States to  address migrants  and ethnic minorities as a matter of urgency. It expresses its opinion that, while some  Member  States  take a comprehensive  approach  to the various dimensions of social inclusion (participation in the labour market and access to housing but also in social, cultural  and  political  life)  and  focus  on  involving  both immigrants  and  the  host  society,  the non-prioritisation of  the issue and  absence  of  details  in most National Action  Plans  on  Social  Inclusion  comes  across  as  a potentially serious omission.

The  Commission  has  stated  in  its  guidance  on  preparing National  Action  Plans  that  Member  States  are recommended to  reflect that  the social  integration of migrants needs to be given more attention on selecting key  objectives;  and  has  made  it  mandatory  to  report on  the  situation  of  migrants  and  ethnic  minorities in  National  Action  Plans.  Therefore,  it  is not surprising that  the  inclusion  of  migrants  and  ethnic  minorities is much  more prominent in the National Action Plans than in the National Reform  Programmes even  though there is a significant overlap between the issues identified in  the  National  Action  Plans  and  the  National  Reform Programmes, particularly  in the areas  of employment  and the labour market.Anti-racist civil society organisations can  advocate to Member States that migrants and ethnic minorities be included in National  Action  Plans on  Social  Inclusion as  a  specific  target  group.  This can include an  explicit reminder  of  the  Commission’s  strong  views  on  the prioritisation of migrants and ethnic minorities in National Action Plans.

The  significant  amount  of  work  being  done  at  the national level to improve the situation of migrants and ethnic  minorities  provides  opportunities  for  mutual learning,  however  the  lack  of  data  makes  it  difficult to  identify  best  practice.  The  Commission  has  already identified examples of good practice  in the 2009  National Action Plans on Social Inclusion and Member States could direct their attention to these successful initiatives to see if they have relevance for their own national situation.

Without  using  targets  and  benchmarks,  the  Commission has  been  largely  reliant  upon  the  will  of  Member States to  commit to improving the social inclusion of migrants and  ethnic minorities. If Member States agree to  proposals  to  introduce  target-setting  into  the  Social OMC,  this  would be an opportune  time to  ensure  that targets are disaggregated, where possible, to examine the situation of migrants and ethnic minorities.

The  Commission  notes  that  there  is  not  only  a  lack  of reliable data, but that data is required that can examine the situation of different types of migrants and ethnic minorities.  In addition, it is  taking active  steps  to  try to improve the  quantity and  quality of  information available, although its efforts  are focused at  the  national level. 

The Social OMC could give consideration to a number of data sources  that  have  been identified  in  this  paper  that can provide a  better understanding of the situation of migrants  and  ethnic  minorities,  and  which  provide  the potential  for a wider range  of  indicators  that  can  be disaggregated on migration-related grounds, or which directly  capture  migration-related  dimensions.  The Commission’s drive for better data to capture the situation of migrants  and ethnic  minorities suggests they are likely to  be  receptive  to  recommendations  in  this  area,  for example, that its only national indicator ‘employment gap of immigrants’ be recast as an EU level indicator.

You can read the complete article here.