I really think we should be more careful with data
Yesterday Frontex released updated monthly data showing that 710,000 migrants crossed the EU’s external borders from January to September 2015. In a Twitter exchange with Nando Sigona (Univ. of Birmingham and Univ. of Oxford), Frontex clarified that it counts an individual migrant each time she crosses an external border; according to Frontex, “[t]his means that a large number of the [710,000] people who were counted when they arrived in Greece were again counted when [after passing through Greece, they entered] the EU for the second time through Hungary or Croatia.”
The 710,000 figure that was widely reported yesterday may overstate the number of individuals crossing the external borders by several hundred thousand. For example, Frontex reported that 350,000 migrants arrived in the Greek islands during the first nine months of 2015 and that 204,000 migrants crossed into Hungary during the same time period. Presumably a majority (or at least…
View original post 208 more words
In October I finished 5 months of interviews with the EU nationals in Canada I planned on having 75-100 of them, but after 66 I realized I could only get the French. Poles and Portuguese seem not to emigrate to Canada anymore 🙂 Having half of interviews with the French would be a distortion, plus there has been definite information saturation already at 50.
Now we go for analysis and then : fully fledged world-wide survey of EU nationals.
I have been taken by the refugee crisis in the last two months. Here are two pieces I wrote on this.
In fact in the first 3 months of 2015 (i.e. first 3 months of the program):
“(…)citizens of India, the Philippines, Pakistan and Ireland made up the top four nationalities in the Express Entry. Of the top 775 ranked candidates, there were 228 Indian nationals, 122 Filipinos, 46 from Pakistan, and 35 from Ireland. The list of top ten source countries was completed by citizens of Nigeria, China, Iran, the United Kingdom, Egypt and South Korea.”
ÉMIGRÉ – European emigration governance – emigration and diaspora policies and discourses in the post-crisis era
Project funded by the FP-7 Programme of the European Union, Marie Curie Individual Fellowships
Grant Agreement no. 624433
My name is Agnieszka Weinar and I am the Leading Researcher of the ÉMIGRÉ project. The purpose of the project is to analyse the impact of emigration and diaspora policies implemented on national and EU-level on migration strategies of EU nationals.
The project looks at the EU member states from the perspective of emigration governance. The main underlying theme of this research is that emigration and immigration are two sides of the same coin and thus European migration governance should be approached from two angles to understand its full dimension. The European Union is in fact still a region of emigration, with a majority of migrants staying within its boundaries, however important numbers leaving EU every year. Based on current global trends emigrants should be perceived as a potential asset. ÉMIGRÉ analyses emigration and diaspora policies of four EU Member States (UK, France, Portugal and Poland) as well as EU-level responses to emigration. I would like to know whether policies and actions of the EU countries support EU nationals in their migration project.
The key objectives are:
1) To close the knowledge gap on migration from the EU.
2) To enrich international migration governance studies by providing comparative analysis of actions of EU Member States in regards to emigration management.
3) To determine the relation between State identity formation/shifts and success of policy learning/policy transfer processes between levels of governance.
4) To contribute to evidence-based policy making at the EU level
The research is being carried out as a part of my individual Marie Curie Fellowship project implemented at the European University Institute in Florence and at Carleton University. My mentors are Prof. Rainer Baubock (firstname.lastname@example.org) and Prof. Howard Duncan (email@example.com).
The NHS data has many drawbacks, but still it is one of the best tools of capturing immigration to Canada. One has to pay attention to the following issues: 1) the definition of nationality of immigrant through the country of birth. This may be problematic as many of today immigrants coming from the EU have been born outside of their country of EU passport: either coming from another EU country or from outside of the EU, but naturalized. 2) The data also does not capture all EU-28 but shows the top source countries. 3) the data shows only permanent immigrants who immigrated to Canada prior to 2011.