By Senator Ratna Omidvar, Founder, Global Diversity Exchange
This article was originally published on the World Economic Forum website.
In the management of global migration, the world is clinging to outdated infrastructure and patterns of mobility, says Canadian senator Ratna Omidvar, member of the Global Future Council on Migration. The contribution immigrants make to their host communities is not widely understood, and countries need to begin showing an interest in all migrants, not just skilled labour.
How do you see the state of migration today?
In the management of global migration, we are clinging to outdated infrastructure and patterns of mobility. We operate reactively instead of planning for the future.
I look back at the major migration trends of the last decade, and I wonder what could be different had we been prepared. The last decade gave us the largest number of displaced people since the Second World War, a steadily rising death toll in the Mediterranean, populist politics that traded on fear of immigration, and new environmental factors driving people from their homes. With the clarity of hindsight, planning for these realities could have strengthened the wellbeing of host communities, supported immigrants to move and prosper, and even saved lives.
Which issues related to migration do you perceive to be misunderstood or inadequately appreciated?
The evidence of the contributions immigrants can make to their host communities is not widely understood or accepted. This is true of both camps: those who think immigration is bad, and those who think it is good. The impact of immigration on communities is nuanced, and in many studies we see evidence of different outcomes due to different policy and social contexts. Robert Putnam found evidence of ebbing trust leading people to “hunker down” in diverse American communities, while Keith Banting found the opposite effect in equally diverse Canadian communities, where trust and engagement bloomed alongside immigration.
Sometimes, perception and reality are at odds. For example, a community or country may demonstrate positive gains from immigration but public opinion stubbornly disagrees. Where these contradictions persist, it is important to think about how to change perceptions.
What will be the most significant migration issues over the next 10 years?
One is the integration of displaced populations. Over 65 million people are currently displaced. The majority – 54% or 35 million – come from Somalia, Afghanistan and Syria. Their displacement will be long-term. They are in need of the basics of survival, employment opportunities, services, and community. Planning for integration instead of displacement means a shift from building temporary solutions to permanent infrastructure.
A second is tackling inequality in destination communities. Dissatisfaction at home and disillusionment with globalisation is a driving political force behind the recent rejectionist movement in countries that have swung towards closed-border nationalism. Inequality that builds a “marginalized majority” of native citizens boosts the power of anti-immigration narratives.
A third significant issue is preparing cities for ecological migration. The changing climate is causing people to move in mass and sometimes invisible numbers. City planners have not kept pace and internal migrants especially in the Global South are landing in slums and informal housing. As thinkers like Katherine Boo and Doug Saunders have documented, the fortunes of those who land in slums depend on policies that keep them in or help them out. Will these increasingly populated places of arrival become permanent homes, or temporary launch pads?
Fourth, planning for new patterns of resettlement should be a high priority. It is becoming clear that resettlement models in traditional destination countries like Canada, Australia and parts of Europe are in need of a refresh. They were built for cities not yet transformed by the defining socio-economic trends of the past decades: the growth of informal jobs, and the passage of poverty from inner cities to suburbs. Urban planning for integration means changing the physical centres of gravity in settlement.
What do you think the Global Future Council on Migration can contribute to the global effort to help migrants?
Given the diversity of members and contributors, I believe the Council on Migration has a major role in framing the conversation, and injecting facts and evidence into the political conversations that tend towards emotional arguments. I hope that we can deepen public understanding of the benefits of migration, diversity and inclusion. We must do this soberly: migration is not a silver bullet to our problems, but it can lead to shared prosperity for migrants and for host communities under the right conditions.
Using our diversity, we can also find the global good practices that can be replicated in other jurisdictions, such as Germany’s upskilling for refugees in universities and the trades, or Canada’s private sponsorship of refugees programme.
What more needs to be done for migrants?
It’s incredible to imagine that, because of visa restrictions, people are willing to risk their lives to find safety and opportunity. They will pay ten times what a legal trip on an airplane would cost, huge sums of money, to make dangerous overland trips or flee on unsafe boats. This is because we are intentionally making it difficult for people to migrate. We need more channels of safe, legal migration.
Regarding refugees in particular, resettlement commitments need to be honoured and raised. Countries taking part in the leader’s summit in New York in September committed to roughly doubling the number of refugees they collectively admit through resettlement or other third country admission programmes to more than 360,000 refugees. This is a significant number, but it amounts to under 2% of the 21.3 million refugees registered with the UN.
What do you think the migration situation will be by 2030?
Unless we fix issues of global governance, migration risks tearing the EU apart. We are going to see the hardening of attitudes in certain regions because they don’t see the opportunity in migration. Part of that comes from the fact that people only see migration as a good thing when we think of the highly skilled. But highly skilled people are more likely to come, settle, and then get recruited elsewhere. The long-term solution is to give a hand out to people now. The payoff is that their children will succeed, and those children will build the next generation of lawyers, doctors and create prosperity in those countries.
In Canada, we have taken that approach. Once people get here, after a rigorous screening process, we throw the government behind them. We educate and upskill them where needed, teach them the national languages, help them get jobs and integrate into society. Finally, we put them on the path to citizenship.
Global migration will continue to become even more normalised. There will be leading countries that realise long-term solutions for integration helps natives and newcomers to prosper. There will be problems along the way, but I think we might be quite surprised by what happens next. We might see countries not currently on the map stepping up and becoming big players.
What would be your ideal migration scenario in 2030?
By that time, I hope that displaced people worldwide are considered a mainstream source for immigration to countries in need of economic and population growth. There are over 65 million displaced people, and yet advanced and emerging economies alike are struggling with labour shortages.
Second, I would like to see a global governance system that qualifies people professionally. One hurdle that still remains for migrants is coming to a new country where their qualifications are not recognised. On top of this type of structural barrier, we know that immigrants face discrimination and bias, which impacts their work and wellbeing. By 2030, I want people who move from one city to another and not worry about the colour of their skin or the barriers to requalify in their field of training. They will worry about what someone who moves from Toronto to Ottawa worries about: the restaurants, the rent, the weather.
The Annual Meeting of the Global Future Councils is taking place on 13-14 November in Dubai.
Source: www.weforum.org
How can we create more welcoming and compassionate societies? One policy at a time. Here are nine initiatives to better promote inclusion, from a cross-section of speakers at this week’s 6 Degrees forum.
By Kamal Al-Solaylee, Mathieu Lefevre, Luis Larrain, Ratna Omidvar, Richard van der Laken, Bessma Momani, Pete Sweetnam, Madeleine Redfern, and Naheed Nenshi
This article originally appeared as part of OpenCanada.org’s series Finding Home: An exploration of inclusive societies, as part of the 2016 6 Degrees event.
1. Inspire an entire generation with a single book.
— Kamal Al-Solaylee, Canadian journalism professor and author
Late last December, the Swedish Women’s Lobby announced plans to give a free copy of Nigerian novelist Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s short book We Should All Be Feminists to every 16-year-old in Sweden. The news stuck with me ever since. The more I thought about it, the more I admired the thinking behind a policy in which an author, her publisher and a community of women’s groups managed to amplify the message and contributions of feminism to public life through the power of books.
But it was the choice of Adichie that I found particularly inspired. As a black, Nigerian author who has written about the multiple experiences of living in Africa (and outside it) in such award-winning books as Half of a Yellow Sun and Americanah, Adichie blends gender and race issues and refuses to see one independent of the other. It’s vital for all of us who write about or work on issues of inclusion and diversity to get off the one-struggle, each-to-his-own high horses. It’s impossible to separate problems arising from gender inequality, even in a liberal democracy like Sweden, from wider discussions of race and global migration. About 16 percent of Sweden’s population was born elsewhere, and waves of migration continue — in 2015, 163,000 displaced individuals applied to Sweden for asylum — against a growing chorus of disapproval and xenophobia. In introducing young Swedes to the importance of feminism, Adichie’s book doubles as a gateway into a world outside their Scandinavian comfort zone.
I also love the idea of giving away a single book to an entire generation. We live in a world where cultural touchstones are all too rare — there’s simply too much of everything and very little stands out anymore. Giving a generation a common vocabulary around gender rights ensures that they will all be on the same page —literally — but, more importantly, emotionally and politically. Books can do that.
Kamal Al-Solaylee is a journalism professor at Ryerson University in Toronto and the author of the national bestsellers Intolerable: A Memoir of Extremes and Brown: What Being Brown in the World Today Means (to Everyone).
2. Let them eat tofu.
— Mathieu Lefevre, creator of new venture, Plus 1
The shocking Burkini ban imposed by some mayors in France (and later annulled by France’s highest court) is only the latest in a series of clashes around the place of Islam in modern France and the interpretation of secularism (“laïcité”). France, rocked by horrendous terrorist attacks and with the National Front on the rise, is a tense place right now.
Food has long been a battleground in this debate. In 2015 the mayor of Chalon-sur-Saone, a town of about 45,000 people, passed a rule banning alternatives to pork in school cafeterias. He invoked the principle of “vivre ensemble” (living together), arguing that offering different menus on religious grounds was a form of discrimination. Typically, such measures are backed by a strange coalition of secularists on the left and the centre-right, and anti-immigrant groups. Muslim groups appealed, arguing that the proposal targets them directly. They lost. The court ruled that the mayor was providing the children with the required public service (i.e. safe, varied and nutritious food). Muslims and liberals opposed to the ban were furious.
Having a calm debate on French identity and the place of religion (that is code for Islam in today’s France) is essential, but appears impossible in the short term. Yet pragmatic solutions to questions like serving alternatives to pork in schools need to be found.
Just such a way out of the school meal crisis is gaining ground: the vegetarian option. Schools could offer a healthy, environmentally friendly and widely acceptable vegetarian alternative to all types of meat, including pork. This would be served everyday, not just on days where pork is on the menu.
Over 150,000 people signed a petition on Change.org in favour of the vegetarian option and a bill is being sent to Parliament. Local experiments in Saint Etienne and Perpignan have been successful. The City of Paris should test this: with 30 million school meals served annually, the political and environmental impact would be significant.
Mathieu Lefevre is currently reinventing French and European dreams with Plus 1. Formerly with New Cities Foundation and World Bank.
3. Push harder on same-sex marriage.
— Luis Larrain, Chilean activist
Regarding the LGBT community, equal marriage is a great way to promote inclusion for several reasons.
First, because it is possible: it has been already implemented in over 20 countries, including Canada, and it is being discussed in several others, including my homeland, Chile. Second, because it is very efficient, as it doesn’t need a lot of taxpayers’ money to be implemented. Additionally, its scope is much broader than expected, as it doesn’t only benefit the couples who are getting married but also their families and friends, who are happy to see how their loved ones are included in society; the whole national LGBT community, as they live now in a place where the state tells them that being gay or lesbian is as valid as being straight; and the whole of society, as all its members live now in a place where diversity is considered a value and not a problem, and where minorities’ rights are respected.
I hope the rest of the world realizes one day that culture shouldn’t serve as an excuse to deny people their fundamental rights, regardless of their sexual orientation, race, gender, religion or any other characteristic.
Luis Larrain is an activist based in Santiago, Chile. He is co-founder of Fundación Iguales, the largest LBTGI organization in the country.
4. Increase diversity in boardrooms.
— Ratna Omidvar, Canadian Senator
Pluralism in leadership is but one of many ways to embed effective diversity and inclusion into our everyday communities. We’ve heard it before: our communities are diverse, why isn’t our leadership? Pluralistic leadership at the top reflects a truly inclusive and diverse community where society demonstrates openness, receptivity and acceptance to a wide range of thoughts, peoples and ideas.
Initiatives like DiverseCity onBoard and organizations like the Canadian Board Diversity Council (CBDC) build leadership capacity and focus on pluralistic leadership in Canadian institutions. DiverseCity onBoard’s mandate is to increase diversity on the boards of not-for-profit organizations and public agencies across the nation; CBDC measures and promotes the progress of Canada’s largest corporate boards in diversifying their leadership. These initiatives are key to achieving truly inclusive and diverse communities by developing and investing in plural leadership.
Civil society efforts are even more effective when paired with public policy. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made international headlines with his reply when asked about gender parity in his cabinet: “Because it’s 2015.” But we can do better. The next step is to expand these policy levers to underscore the need for diverse leadership not solely in terms of gender or ethnicity, but across all facets of diversity.
Ultimately, the key to making a difference lies in a change in leadership. Making room at the top for diversity is in the hands of those who are now there, and they can begin to make room for diversity by looking for, including and listening to people who are not like themselves. Ordinary Canadians from underrepresented groups can then sign on to make a difference in our communities. And our public and corporate institutions must appoint truly diverse leadership so that our communities can benefit from effective inclusivity that generates innovative ideas and actions, and makes pluralistic leadership the norm at all levels of society.
Ratna Omidvar is a member of the Senate of Canada, and an internationally recognized expert on migration, diversity and inclusion. She is the founding Executive Director of the Global Diversity Exchange at Ryerson University, Toronto.
5. Reframe refugees through photography.
— Richard van der Laken, What Design Can Do
The fact that the humanitarian crisis is so pressing means that media channels, NGOs, pressure groups, governments and others constantly seek images that represent those affected.
The digital platform Reframe Refugees — presented as part of the What Design Can Do Refugee Challenge 2016 — taps in to the demand for images and creates a service provided by refugees and for the benefit of refugees.
Reframe is a photo-based platform where refugees, 90 percent of whom carry a smartphone, can share their side of the story and show us what they want us to see. Their uploaded photos, with personal descriptions, are quality checked and then offered for purchase by media companies. Payment takes the form of a donation to a charity that aids the refugee cause, chosen by the buyer.
The concept of reframing public narratives through refugee photography is powerful, challenging to achieve and do well, but definitely worth prototyping.
Richard van der Laken is a graphic designer and entrepreneur from the Netherlands. He runs What Design Can Do, a global project that seeks design responses to humanitarian crises.
6. Implement blind recruitment.
— Bessma Momani, CIGI senior fellow
Canada would be well served to follow “blind recruitment,” where names are removed from job applications in both the private and public sector until after interviews are confirmed.
This has been proven to help fight against racism and unconscious bias of employers. This has already been adopted in the public sector of the United Kingdom and one Canadian MP, Ahmed Hussen, has proposed this for Canada. Simply put, most of our government institutions and halls of decision-making are still lacking visible minorities, despite the fact that ethnocultural communities are now increasingly as or more educated than their counterparts and are a sizeable part of our society.
There is discrimination in our public and private sector and this small step toward ensuring a level playing field can be of immense benefit.
Finally, the Toronto Symphony Orchestra started its blind auditions, where performers were not visible to others as they played their instruments. This has helped the TSO now become a far more diverse symphony thanks to ensuring that the most talented individual is playing and not the person with the easiest name to pronounce.
Bessma Momani is an Associate Professor at the University of Waterloo’s Balsillie School of International Affairs and a senior fellow at the Centre for International Governance and Innovation.
7. Provide humanitarian flights.
— Pete Sweetnam, Director, Migrant Offshore Aid Station (MOAS)
Two years ago, MOAS (Migrant Offshore Aid Station) was founded as a disaster relief organization in response to the deadly consequences of the migration crisis in the Mediterranean Sea. Two years on, we are still dealing with those same consequences. Not only that, but the needless loss of life in the Mediterranean has only increased as a lack of alternatives are forcing asylum seekers further into the hands of smugglers, who take them on ever more dangerous routes, both on land and at sea. The horrors our search-and-rescue crews have borne witness to have only served to reinforce our belief that ‘No One Deserves to Die at Sea,’ but we are also aware that our work is not the solution to the problem. Our efforts at sea are merely a stop-gap since sustainable solutions have yet to be established.
With our experience on the frontlines of the most devastating humanitarian catastrophe of our generation, MOAS is calling for a radical rethink of the global migration crisis through the creation of humanitarian flights — a visionary policy that addresses the missing link in the EU’s asylum policy by granting a group of asylum seekers trapped in Libya legal entry to Europe — from countries of transit where the living conditions for asylum seekers are deteriorating and access to basic human rights, particularly protection, are lacking. Humanitarian flights are the only sustainable and long-term solution for the ongoing and unprecedented mass movement of people, which history has clearly demonstrated will not and cannot be stopped by building walls, hiding behind razor wire or militarizing the sea.
Pete Sweetnam is the Executive Director of the Migrant Offshore Aid Station (MOAS). He has been involved in development and relief sectors for over 30 years.
8. Support Nunavut’s Article 23.
— Madeleine Redfern, Mayor of Iqaluit
In Nunavut, Inuit have always been the majority ethnic group in the region and, as they have for the past 20-plus years, make up 85 percent of the territory’s population. As in many other Indigenous regions, Nunavut Inuit have a modern-day land claims agreement, similar to treaties.
In our claims agreement, Article 23 attempts to increase Inuit inclusion in the government workforce, which is the primary employer in the territory. The reason behind Article 23 is to ameliorate the historical problem of Inuit not being hired and therefore being under represented even in the public institutions that are set up to serve them.
While some non-Inuit have criticized Article 23 for its priority or preferential hiring as discriminatory, the law permits government to address systemic discrimination that has resulted in under representation of minorities. Fundamentally, democratic societies understand that their public institutions should and need to reflect the people that they serve and that is the basis behind Article 23. The north has long been governed and managed by a non-Indigenous minority over the Indigenous majority.
Article 23 obligates the government, whether local, territorial or federal within Nunavut, to increase the number of Inuit within its bureaucracies to proportional representation levels. This means that each level of government should ideally have 85 percent Inuit within each of its respective public institutions. Furthermore, not just 85 percent at the entry or lower levels but 85 percent throughout, in all sectors and all professions.
Before 1999, the Government of Northwest Territories employed approximately 50 percent Inuit in the Eastern portion of the territory (what would become Nunavut) and in 2015, the Government of Nunavut employed approximately 50 percent Inuit. The number of government jobs has increased but proportionally Inuit remain significantly under represented. In 2006, Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. (NTI) sued the Government of Canada for failing to fulfill its land clams obligations, including specifically failing to increase the number of Inuit in government. NTI and the Government of Canada settled the lawsuit in 2015 with the Government of Canada paying NTI $225.5 million ($175 million for initiatives to provide Inuit with skills and qualifications needed for employment). The federal government is also giving the Government of Nunavut an additional $50 million over eight years to fund training initiatives and programs to enhance Inuit employment and fulfill its obligations under Article 23.
There is recognition that the biggest hurdle for government in hiring and increasing Inuit employment within its institutions is the lack of Inuit with sufficient education, skills and experience. Therefore, the goal for this settlement money is to wisely invest it and thereby give more Inuit the opportunity to gain the requisite capabilities necessary to compete and secure employment, fulfilling their individual aspirations and achieving the original spirit and intent of the land claims agreement, which is to see Inuit governing and managing all aspects of democratic governance. This would create a distinctly unique Inuit territory within Canada based on democratic principles that promote Inuit political and societal aspirations, while respecting the rights of non-Inuit and the multiculturalism of Canada.
Madeleine Redfern is the Mayor of Iqaluit. She has 25 years of experience working on housing, education, employment, business, economic development and governance.
9. Promote the three Ps: policy, programs and people.
— Naheed Nenshi, Mayor of Calgary
We are blessed to live in a country where the concept of pluralism is often considered one of our core values. And when that concept is challenged, as we saw during the last federal election, the majority of Canadians will step forward to defend it. Our response to Syrian refugees is a good example — as that crisis unfolded and Canadians learned more about the role we could play, the most common question (and dare I say most “Canadian” of questions) was: how can I help?
It’s helpful to consider the state of pluralism in Canada through the frame of 3Ps (Policy, Programs and People) and how they work together. The right application of all three can yield the most impressive results. For example, we’ve learned that, when it comes to building community, the most effective government policies enable local action. While the federal government may create the policy and NGOs craft the programs, it’s ultimately the people who make it all work. With resources and encouragement, Canadians do amazing things.
The result has been even better than expected: Canada has welcomed many thousands of new citizens without the doom foretold by those who struggle to imagine the pluralism we both take for granted and fight to maintain. With smart policy enabling the best of ourselves, we’ve made Canada and the world an even better place.
Naheed Nenshi is the Mayor of Calgary. He was Canada’s first tenured professor in the field of nonprofit management at Mount Royal University’s Bissett School of Business and a former business advisor.
Source: OpenCanada.org
By Hannah Postel, Center for Global Development
Last year, twenty-four people fled their homes every minute. More people are now displaced outside their home than at any other time since UNHCR records began; these mass movements will only continue as conflict, disaster, extreme poverty, and other hardships force people to seek safety and opportunity. Unfortunately, most recent policy solutions have been ad hoc and based in fear. Can we do better? CGD and co-host ODI recently convened a panel of experts to discuss the economics and politics of this crucial question. CGD Senior Fellow Michael Clemens was joined by Ratna Omidvar, a member of Canada’s Upper House of Parliament, ODI Managing Director Marta Foresti, and Talent Beyond Boundaries Executive Director Sayre Nyce to share a number of policy innovations with the potential to create shared value for survival migrants and destination countries alike.
Outstanding solutions
The panelists all agreed that what has been decreed a migration or refugee crisis is rather a crisis of politics. Politically viable solutions to larger movements of people seeking safety have been achieved in the past, and are in fact a key part of Europe’s history. Foresti pointed out that due to a lack of solidarity, German Chancellor Angela Merkel was forced to backpedal on her original strong leadership in accepting refugees. As the recent Brexit vote and the rise of far-right parties have shown, current policies have been based on fear, not pragmatism. Sudden flows of migrants raise legitimate security concerns, but experts see security best enhanced by innovative channels for well-regulated and mutually beneficial forms of movement rather than militarization and increased informality. The number of recent arrivals in Europe has been difficult to manage mainly due to a lack of much-needed solidarity and responsibility sharing.
Out of touch with reality
Moreover, the current international system is not built to accommodate the needs of people currently on the move. The definition of a refugee was established 60 years ago for a completely different political context, and does not include other motivations of survival migration, including climate change, natural disasters, and extreme poverty. Watch Clemens describe those left out of the current system:
It is clear that the prevailing aim of migration policy has been to obstruct movement. The European Union has dedicated €1.8 billion to combatting the “root causes” of movement in Africa, in hopes of encouraging people to stay home. However, Foresti described recent ODI research showing the impossibility of changing someone’s mind about migrating. In fact, attempting to shut people out yields a vast missed opportunity. As Clemens and coauthors have shown, the exact same person doing the exact same task can make up to ten times more in one place than another. Admitting refugees to fill labor market needs would benefit both the refugee and the host country. CGD was fortunate to recently host acclaimed journalist and political economist Philippe Legrain to describe the findings of his recent report Refugees Work. Rather than being a burden, Legrain cites research by the International Monetary Fund suggesting that welcoming refugees pays off, yielding two euros in economic benefits for every one invested – within five years.
Notable policy innovations
However, a few standout examples illustrate that these challenges are not insurmountable. Omidvar and Nyce both shared compelling strategies targeted at unlocking the great potential of refugees in destination countries. Canada’s private sponsorship program has been lauded for its efficiency and additionality, enabling private citizens to host refugees above and beyond those admitted through formal government channels. In contrast to the dominant political narrative in the US and Europe, Omidvar described how “every level of government in Canada has sought to outdo itself to accept more refugees,” based on the fundamental belief that Canada will succeed better if refugees and immigrants prosper with it. Watch Omidvar explain more details of the “Canadian exceptionalism” embodied in this program’s success below.
Talent Beyond Boundaries has taken a more market-based approach, focusing on labor mobility for refugees worldwide. It recently launched a pilot program linking this largely overlooked talent pool – refugees – to the global labor market. Its Talent Catalog accumulates and verifies data on refugee skills and preferences including work history and education, enabling corporate partners facing skill shortages to directly fill labor needs. This approach both gives refugees an opportunity to be self-reliant and helps countries and local economies in need of skilled workers.
Moving forward
The panelists all agreed on the potential to look for solutions in non-traditional destinations, experimenting with ideas less contingent on toxic national politics. Talent Beyond Boundaries has taken this idea to heart, focusing on companies in non-traditional destinations such as Africa and Latin America rather than the US, Europe, and the Gulf. Clemens’ proposed Global Skills Partnership would be a new kind of agreement between employers and/or governments in destination countries and training centers in origin countries, to link skill formation with migration for the mutual benefit of origin countries, destination countries, and migrants.
Massive strides can also be made through minor tweaks to existing immigration regulations. Nyce explained how the need to mark a “country of return” on a work visa application to the US all but prevents refugee admission, due to the lack of a stable home country. Part of Canada’s success in welcoming refugees so efficiently has come from the government’s decision to designate all Syrians outside of Syria as prima facie refugees. This bypasses the need for UNHCR refugee status validation, a process that can take years, Omidvar explained. She also highlighted the strides that could be made by making travel safer. Thousands of asylum-seekers have tragically perished on perilous boat and land journeys – often paying a smuggler multiple times more than a plane ticket would cost. Establishing a humanitarian visa system would both save lives and undercut smuggling markets.
“When you have crises of the kind we are experiencing today,” Omidvar concluded, “there is a huge amount of chaos, and from this chaos comes points of light that you can learn from, absorb, and embed into policy.” We share Omidvar’s optimism, and hope that the global community will take advantage of opportunities to think outside the box and create a 21st century migration policy founded on pragmatism and mutual benefit.
Thanks to Michael Clemens for helpful comments.
Source: Center for Global Development
Click here for the CGD Podcast from August 2, 2016 featuring Ratna Omidvar.
The “two-way-street” metaphor paints a simplistic picture of integration. It’s a much more complex and dynamic process.
By Andrew Griffith, Policy Options
When immigration officials and advocates talk about the integration process for new Canadians, often they reach for the metaphor of a “two-way street.” Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada notes that “the focus of the integration programs at CIC is on operationalizing the ‘two-way street approach’…through assisting individuals to become active, connected and productive citizens.” The Canadian Index on Immigration Integration talks about the “metaphorical meeting of the immigrant and the receiving population somewhere in the middle of the street.” Former Immigration minister Jason Kenney used the phrase in speeches, where he emphasized the duty of newcomers to adapt to their new home and the responsibility of Canadians to accommodate them.
But does a metaphor matter? It does, given Canada’s increasingly diverse population and the challenges of ensuring successful integration of immigrants and their children. Getting the metaphor right will convey expectations to newcomers and the host society alike regarding their respective roles in the integration process.
Read the full article
Source: Policy Options
By Senator Ratna Omidvar, Founder, Global Diversity Exchange
This article was originally published on SenCAPlus, the Senate’s Digital Magazine.
Every four years, audiences in Canada and across the globe turn their eyes towards the Summer Olympic Games. Thousands of spectators travel to watch the games live and billions more watch at home. Over the past month, the world’s attention has focused on Brazil and the 2016 Rio Olympic Games. Audiences have thrilled to the spectacle of the world’s finest athletes at the pinnacle of competition, representing over 200 nations across the globe. As we welcome our Canadian athletes home from Rio and celebrate their tremendous success, we also reflect on another team of remarkable competitors: the first-ever Refugee Olympic Team.
This year, 10 refugees from four countries — the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, South Sudan and Syria — were selected from a shortlist of 43 displaced athletes worldwide to compete under the Olympic flag. The team included two swimmers, two judokas, a marathoner and five medium-distance runners. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) worked together to support the team as part of an effort to raise awareness of the refugee crisis and celebrate the courage and perseverance of all refugees.
What makes the Olympic Games so captivating are the individual human stories that play out over the course of competition. The athletes of the Refugee Olympic Team provided a uniquely compelling narrative to this human drama. Perhaps the most obvious example is that of 18 year old Syrian swimmer Yusra Mardini. While fleeing Syria via Turkey in 2015, she found herself stranded in the Aegean Sea along with 19 other refugees, in a boat whose engine had stopped; she responded by jumping into the water, along with her sister, and pushing the boat for more than three hours until they reached safety in Greece. Now living in Germany, Mardini draws inspiration from her experience: “I want to represent all the refugees because I want to show everyone that, after the pain, after the storm, comes calm days.”
Mardini’s story, along with the stories of the other refugee Olympians, are all part of a greater narrative: refugees have the same aspirations and the same potential as citizens of any country, and can achieve great things only if given the opportunity. Sadly, even as we cheered on these athletes we were also aware of the absences — the athletes who didn’t make it to safety, such as Samia Omar, the 21 year old Somali runner who drowned while trying to cross the Mediterranean in 2012. Both the triumphs and the tragedies are symbolic of a crisis which affects not just elite athletes, but an entire generation of human talent: doctors, artists, teachers, entrepreneurs, political leaders, all lost to their communities of origin.
While none of the Refugee Olympic Team reached the podium, they captured the attention of athletes and spectators around the world. They received a thunderous standing ovation at the opening ceremonies, and world leaders such as Pope Francis and U.S. President Barack Obama sent messages of support and encouragement. In his closing address, IOC President Thomas Bach said: “You have inspired us with your talent and human spirit. You are a symbol of hope to the millions of refugees in the world. We will continue to stay at your side after these Olympic Games.”
As the 2016 Rio Olympics pass into memory, the challenge is to ensure that this support doesn’t fade away. Let us take renewed inspiration from these refugee Olympians, and work to ensure that all of the world’s displaced people are given a chance to reach their potential and make successful lives for themselves.
Source: SenCAPlus
By Lord Michael Hastings, Global Head of Citizenship for KPMG International, and Dr. Khalid Koser, Executive Director of the Global Community Engagement and Resilience Fund (GCERF)
The Economics of Migration
Today’s debate surrounding migration is increasingly polarised, with public opinion in the US and Europe showing growing hostility towards migrants. The UK’s Brexit campaign was, in part, fuelled by these anxieties, and we have seen the same kind of sentiment play out in the course of the current US election campaign.
The reality, however, is that well-managed migration can benefit national economies. Despite the popular belief that a new wave of immigrants will increase unemployment, the National Institute of Economics and Social Research says there is no aggregate impact of migration on unemployment.
Similar misconceptions abound about the strain on public services. Certainly there is some initial stress while services are improved and families integrate into their new communities. However, most migrants tend to be younger and more economically active than the average person in host countries, as well as being better educated. In the UK, for example, 35% of immigrants have a university degree (compared to the UK average of 26%), whilst in the US this figure is 27%.
A study by the OECD on the fiscal impact of migration over the last 50 years also concludes that immigration is not a long-term burden on the public purse. In fact, the contrary is true. High levels of education and a young work force means that on average immigration is a net benefactor fuelling aggregate demand and improving tax receipts that are reinvested in infrastructure and social services. Immigration similarly helps supplement human capital and with a high concentration of people in healthcare and STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) professions, R&D is improved which often has a knock on effect on productivity.
Immigration is also one way to address the growing demographic deficit (and consequent pension crisis). At the moment, it is estimated that Europe has four people of working age for every one person of pensionable age. By 2060 it is estimated that this will be two people working for every one pensioner. The same study, by the OECD, estimates that with an aging population GDP will reduce by 1.5% across Europe, and up to 5% in Germany.
Short Term Pain, Long Term Gain
Systems for integrating immigrants, especially on the scale recently witnessed in Western Europe, are often ineffective. Our politics and systems of government focus on the short-term challenges and are too impatient to realise the long-term benefits of immigration. Dividends only become clear 5-10 years later, but our debates and our systems are myopic reacting only to the immediate challenges.
School and healthcare services are often claimed to be stretched with additional burden coming from immigrants. These concerns are not without merit, but they are concerns that can and should be planned for. They are also concerns that should be listened to and to which governments should respond to appropriately, including with investment to improve services.
The elephant in the room, however, are the attacks that have been witnessed in France and Germany in recent months. It is easy when such atrocities have been committed to roll out the lazy arguments, to erect walls (both physical and metaphorical) and by doing so increase division and heighten the risk of further attacks. Security concerns have to be given the utmost consideration and clear action needs to be taken, but in the case of the attacks against France and Germany, the debate cannot ostracise the 1.6bn Muslims in the world. Political leaders need to ask more intelligent questions to understand why these attacks are happening, they need to listen to all communities and they need to make sure extremism and hate are not given the conditions to grow.
Where to go From Here?
How can we work towards a more informed debate and policy response to immigration? There is no silver bullet. To ensure that both the people migrating and the host country get the full benefit of the flow of human capital, we believe the following areas need further consideration:
- More evidence: There are still significant evidence gaps, for example on the impact of migration on salaries and competition in labour markets.
- The role of academics: Academics run the risk of becoming poor advocates. They should carry out relevant research and be given the right avenues to disseminate conclusions.
- Research and evidence needs to be better communicated: The first step is to understand the concerns of those who oppose migration so they can be addressed directly.
- The role of media: Media outlets have become increasingly divisive in their coverage. Efforts need to be made to redress this, including ensuring greater access to the sector for asylum seekers, refugees and under-represented minority groups.
- Create prominent advocates for migration from the private sector: There is an understanding that open labour markets and migration are good for business. These benefits been to be better communicated.
- Independent commissions: Advocate the establishment of independent commissions, like the UK’s Independent Asylum Commission, that can inform policy decisions on migration outside the constraints of politics.
In essence, these recommendations ask for open, tolerant debate about the costs and benefits of migration. This is paramount to overcome the malaise of discussion in Europe, the US and other regions and ensure we are able to counter the demographic deficit and sustain our economies.
Lord Dr. (Michael) Hastings of Scarisbrick CBE is Global Head of Citizenship for KPMG International. Lord Hastings was previously the BBC’s first Head of Corporate Social Responsibility, having been its Head of Public Affairs. He is a Trustee of the Vodafone Group Foundation and was a non-executive Director of British Telecom (on the Board for Responsible and Sustainable Business) for nine years. Lord Hastings is also a Vice President of UNICEF (UK) and Tearfund. In 2005, he was awarded an independent peerage to the House of Lords.
Dr. Khalid Koser is Executive Director of the Global Community Engagement and Resilience Fund (GCERF). He is Non-Resident Fellow at the Lowy Institute, Non-Resident Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy Studies at the Brookings Institution, and Associate Fellow at Chatham House. He is Extraordinary Professor in Conflict, Peace, and Security at the University of Maastricht. Dr. Koser is chair of the World Economic Forum Global Agenda Council on Migration, and editor of the Journal of Refugee Studies. He was awarded the MBE for services to asylum seekers and refugees in the Queen’s 2014 New Year’s Honours List.
Source: Huffington Post
By Rajesh Mirchandani, Center for Global Development
Got 27,000 Canadian dollars? If so, why not sponsor a family of refugees?
“People have come together with this idea of sponsoring as something they can do that helps refugees… where they can get personally engaged,” says Ratna Omidvar, a longtime advocate for diversity and inclusion, who last year was personally recommended by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to take up a seat in Canada’s Upper House of Parliament as an independent Senator for Ontario.
In the August 2, 2016 edition of the CGD Podcast, Senator Omidvar discusses Canada’s experience of migration and refugees, and its unique program of private sponsorship.
Click here for the full podcast
Source: Center for Global Development
By Adrian Edwards, UNHCR
GENEVA, June 20 (UNHCR) – Wars and persecution have driven more people from their homes than at any time since UNHCR records began, according to a new report released today by the UN Refugee Agency.
The report, entitled Global Trends, noted that on average 24 people were forced to flee each minute in 2015, four times more than a decade earlier, when six people fled every 60 seconds.
The detailed study, which tracks forced displacement worldwide based on data from governments, partner agencies and UNHCR’s own reporting, found a total 65.3 million people were displaced at the end of 2015, compared to 59.5 million just 12 months earlier.
Read the full article
View the full UNHCR Global Trends report
Source: UNHCR.org
The #WithRefugees petition will be delivered to UN headquarters in New York ahead of the UN General Assembly high-level summit to address large movements of refugees and migrants, on September 19. Add your name to the #WithRefugees petition to send a clear message to governments that they must act with solidarity and shared responsibility.
By Bruce Katz and Luise Noring, the Brookings Institution.
The global refugee crisis is one of the great humanitarian challenges of our time. In Europe alone, the scale of the migration, the human suffering that has driven it, and the political complexities of resolving it have created tremendous strain. The crisis is roiling the political systems of individual countries and threatening the solidarity of the European Union. Leaders in Europe know that they must get a handle on the situation, and fast.
To date, most of the focus has been on the responsibilities of host countries. But looking only to national governments ignores the key role and actions of host cities. Refugees settle in specific places, and those places shoulder the burden of addressing the economic and social issues necessary to accommodate the influx.
Read the full article
Bruce J. Katz is the inaugural cross-disciplinary Centennial Scholar at the Brookings Institution. Luise Noring is a program director and assistant professor at Copenhagen Business School, and a Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution.
By Jonathan Woetzel, McKinsey & Company
Cities are productivity engines. They create productivity by enhancing the number and frequency of interactions. Higher population density equals higher frequency of interactions, and the more interactions there are, the more you can figure out what you’re good at and what you’re not. Then, we stop doing what’s not good, and we become better at the good. That’s specialization. That’s productivity. Doing that with as many people as you can creates the opportunity for growth.
The cities that are able to spread that interaction experience across their entire population are the ones that grow best and fastest. That’s because a city is not just a place to live. It’s a place to be employed and to experience having a new job and learning new skills. And if people aren’t able to do that—because they don’t have a home in the city, or they live too far from their work, or they have a sick parent for whom there’s no healthcare, or they have children for whom there’s no day care—those are people who are not experiencing as much productivity as they could. That’s a cost to the city. If they can’t be included, they will not be able to contribute.
Read the full article
Jonathan Woetzel is a director of the McKinsey Global Institute and a director in McKinsey’s Shanghai office.