2 International migration and integration from a longitudinal perspective

Abstract

In a context of continuous international migration, it is important to have the appropriate tools to measure the social and structural integration of populations with a migration background. Measuring integration makes all the more sense when approached longitudinally, i.e. from the moment migrants arrive in Switzerland and for the whole length of their stay here. Today, existing data enable such descriptions to be made and this article discusses three longitudinal measures relating to integration. First, the development of professional status, as expressed by wage differentials in relation to the whole population, reveals a gradual but incomplete integration of persons with a migration background, with substantial differences depending on their origins. Next, social integration as expressed by three indicators, shows, in particular, the influence the length of stay has on the level of interaction between Swiss natives and migrants. Finally, the different patterns of migration coexisting in Switzerland can be identified by analysing international mobility and returns home.

2.1 Introduction

The last few decades have been marked by globalisation and the gradual opening of national borders. This has led to the growing mobility of goods, capital and people. Many new developments (better access to job opportunities abroad, the specialisation of regional and national economic activities and the subsequent need for international skills and improved mobility within the European Union) have maintained migration flows between European countries. Migratory movements from the rest of the world towards Europe have remained high in the wake of international conflicts. This situation has helped focus the attention of policy makers, the media, the public and researchers on the phenomenon of migration. Means of action have been gradually put in place, often to limit or control migration flows, but sometimes also to recruit foreign labour and routinely to encourage the integration or inclusion of migrants This chapter focuses on foreign nationals who arrive in Switzerland in their lifetime. Below we use the term ‘foreign (im)migrants’ to qualify these persons. in the host society.

During the 20^th century, the States thus gradually adopted integration policies designed to manage the flows of migrant workers, families and refugees after their arrival. The European States’ statistical offices have equipped themselves with modern tools to monitor and measure population movements and the living conditions and integration of different groups of foreign nationals. The measurement of the integration levels of migrant or foreign populations really gathered momentum in the last twenty years of the 20^th century, when international organisations (such as Eurostat, OECD or the European Council) or national ones gradually began to address the matter. The growing interest in the latter can be explained in part by the effects of the 1973 oil crisis in Europe, which profoundly changed migration flows: migrations for longer periods of time and less closely linked to work gradually increased, replacing migration that had been dominated by workers arriving alone in the hiring countries, usually for a limited period of time. As the reasons for migration became more complex, it proved necessary to measure the consequences on both the host society and the migrating communities.

Today in Switzerland we have data allowing us to measure the phenomenon of migration almost instantaneously (see monthly statistics from the State Secretariat for Migration) www.sem.admin.ch → Publications & services → Facts and figures → Foreign Population Statistics (last accessed on 14.05.2020). and, despite certain limits due to its complexity, the integration of people with a migration background (e.g. FSO integration monitoring developed at the request of the Federal Council) www.bfs.admin.ch → Look for statistics → Population → Migration and integration → Integration indicators (last accessed on 14.05.2020; see also Chapter 1 ). . The approach used to measure migration flows and social or structural integration is usually a transversal one: arrivals and departures are documented, the number of migrants living in the country are measured, while the economic or social situation of a specific group of people is described on a particular date without taking account of their length of stay or what took place prior to the date of data collection.

This cross-sectional approach undoubtedly provides important information but does not take account of the fact that migrant populations evolve according to arrivals, departures and natural population change (births and deaths). For this reason, it is difficult to analyse changes in behaviour over time (on the labour market, for instance) of a group of migrants if this group changes every year depending on natural change and migrations. For example, for a group of foreign immigrants arriving in Switzerland, skills in the host region’s language will certainly improve the longer they stay. This improvement is one of the indicators most used in measuring social integration. But if this group is renewed due to arrivals and departures, the standard of language skills will be influenced and weakened by the presence of new immigrants and the return of former ones. It would be wrong to conclude that the group is poorly, or not at all integrated linguistically, as this would fail to take into account the group’s average length of stay in Switzerland. Longitudinal measurement of processes, especially integration processes, takes the length of stay into account. This is essential in order to avoid erroneous interpretations.

The approach adopted in this chapter follows, where possible, immigrant cohorts defined by the year of their arrival in Switzerland in order to shed light on the processes of integration. This article focuses on three ways of describing these cohorts. After an introduction, it first describes integration into the labour market (known as structural integration) of different migrant cohorts in Switzerland. The notion of structural integration is important in a country where most migration is related to the labour market; it indicates people’s ability to integrate efficiently into the labour market and subsequently to make a success of their migration.

Structural integration is a component of social or socio-cultural integration, which covers in more general terms the interactions and exchanges between migrants and the host country (see for example Alba and Nee 1997). For this reason, the second part of this article addresses some specific aspects of social integration, referring to Swiss natives’ and foreign immigrants’ ability to coexist, and more broadly to interactions between the latter and the host country. The third part will analyse the experience of the pre-defined cohort groups, by considering three possible outcomes: status quo (remaining in Switzerland as a foreigner), obtaining Swiss citizenship, or leaving Switzerland. The conclusion compares and contrasts the main results obtained.

2.2 Data Longitudinal data used in this chapter were provided by the Federal Statistical Office (FSO). The Migration-Mobility survey is run by the National Centre of Competence in Research, nccr — on the move, and funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF).

Information on the arrival of migrants in Switzerland and on the monitoring of the period after their migration can be gathered from various sources. As part of its research on migration, the National Centre of Competence in Research (nccr — on the move) has compiled a longitudinal database in cooperation with the FSO (Steiner and Wanner 2015). This database links the Central Aliens Register (ZAR, subsequently ZEMIS, 1998–2010) with STATPOP (2010–2016) and the Central Compensation Office registers (CCO, individual accounts 1998–2016). It enables foreign migrants to be monitored from their arrival and documents their economic experience. Three cohorts are considered here: foreign nationals who immigrated in 2000 (i.e. just before the free movement of persons between Switzerland and the EU came into force), in 2005 (i.e. just after) and in 2010. Persons migrating to Switzerland under the asylum process were not included in the analysis. The results presented in this chapter refer to changes in immigrants’ income from employment in comparison to the reference group, i.e. the total population of Switzerland. They are descriptive in that no variables were controlled for that could influence the level of income (such as age, level of education or number of years in the profession). The analysis studies trends in the divergence observed between migrant groups and the reference population.

The three cohorts represent three periods in which immigration levels differed greatly: in 2000 there were some 80 000 arrivals in the permanent resident population, in 2005, 100 000 and in 2010, 140 000. These figures, although obtained from official statistics, underestimate the actual number of arrivals as they are based only on the permanent resident population (defined as persons holding a residence permit valid for at least one year). If persons without permanent residence are included (people arriving with a seasonal, in 2000, or short-term permit), the 2000 cohort had 177 000 arrivals, the 2005 cohort 164 5000 and the 2010 cohort 202 000 arrivals. These are the numbers that were taken into account for the analysis. German, Portuguese, French and Italian citizens were the four main national groups immigrating to Switzerland, representing roughly 50% of the population that immigrated to Switzerland in the three years observed (see also Chapter 1.1.5). Men were in the majority and in 2000 accounted for 59% of immigrants. This proportion was 56% in 2010.

We should mention a restriction due to the methodology for the 2000 and 2005 cohorts. Only persons who remained in Switzerland up until 2008 were attributed a 13-digit OASI number (AHVN13), which was used to link the different registers. For this reason, we have no labour-market status for foreigners who left Switzerland before 2008 (or those who obtained Swiss citizenship prior to that year). We can, however, document changes to their status (departure, mainly, sometimes naturalisation).

The Migration-Mobility survey is the second source used. This is a survey organised by the nccr — on the move, amongst a sample of foreign nationals (Steiner and Wanner 2019). The first wave took place in autumn 2016 (5973 foreign immigrants interviewed), the second in autumn 2018 (7740 participants, of whom 2023 made up a panel responding for the second time after 2016). The survey concerned persons born abroad, of foreign nationality, aged 24 to 64 in 2016, and holders of an L, B, C, Ci or FDFA permit, who arrived in Switzerland in 2006 or after at the age of 18 or over. During the first wave, the sample concentrated on 11 nationality groups responsible for the main migration flows towards Switzerland. All nationalities were included in the second wave.

The survey gathers original source information on people’s migration history, their professional and social life in Switzerland, their experience of migration and their hopes concerning the outcome of that migration. In this chapter, we use the results from two waves of the survey (2016 and 2018), by comparing where necessary the answers from 2018 with those from 2016 in order to obtain a longitudinal view of integration.

2.3 Integration in professional life

Social insurance data (CCO registers) provide information on the income subject to contributions, which allows measurement of the development in the migrant cohorts’ income from employment (Graph G2.1). For the male cohort that arrived in 2000, median income rose from CHF 42 000 for the year following arrival to CHF 70 400 in 2015. This represents an increase of 58% (women 54%). Income rose at the same pace for the 2005 and 2010 cohorts. These trends bear out the hypothesis of gradual integration into the labour market, which assumes that upon arrival in Switzerland, some migrants accept wages that are low in relation to their qualifications, anticipating that they will then make rapid progress on the labour market (Sicherman and Galor 1990, Grunau and Pecoraro 2016). Nevertheless, the gap between the median income of migrants and that of the whole labour force in Switzerland (reference population indicated in red in Graph G2.1) remains wide. The migrant population as a whole is unable to close the gap initially observed between itself and the Swiss average.

Female migrants, on the other hand, rapidly close the gap between themselves and the reference population. However, it is not possible to make meaningful statements about these results as no data on weekly hours worked are available. These hours can vary considerably depending on factors such as age, family situation or country of origin.

Compared to the total population, the median income from employment of the male immigrant cohorts shows a shortfall that can be expressed as a percentage of the median income of the reference group. Calculated for each successive cohort and taking into account the length of stay, the difference narrows, indicating gradual structural integration. Despite this reduction, the gap never closes completely and stabilises at around 15% (Graph G2.2).

The persistence of this gap can be explained by several factors, such as a lack of training and qualifications, the presence of immigrants in low pay sectors, the difficulty in transferring to the host country professional skills obtained in the country of origin, problems in obtaining recognition of qualifications acquired abroad or mismatched employment that can sometimes be linked to discrimination. Compared to other industrialised countries, Switzerland has relatively low rates of mismatched employment, according to the OECD (Quintini 2011). Among certain migrant groups, however, the phenomenon remains common (Pecoraro and Wanner 2019), leading to income disadvantage.

These general tendencies conceal situations that vary greatly, depending on the nationality. Among male foreigners arriving in Switzerland in 2000, German nationals have incomes higher than that of the reference population. This difference is apparent upon arrival and continues to increase (Graph G2.3). French citizens and those of other EU/EFTA countries gradually draw level with the reference median income and even overtake it at the end of the period, implying successful professional integration. Italian and Portuguese citizens as well as third-country nationals only partly make up the income shortfall in relation to the reference population. This is largely due to the fact that this population is active in low pay sectors. Graph G2.3 also illustrates the fact that German nationals, with high incomes, showed the most spectacular increase between 2001 and 2015. This contributed to the narrowing of the gap mentioned in Graph G2.2 between the total population and immigrants. The relative gap between immigrants belonging to lower paid communities tends to increase over time.

The Migration-Mobility survey provides further information about migrants’ structural integration. It first reports on migrants’ self-rated satisfaction with their employment. More than half (53%) of employed persons interviewed in 2018 rated their professional situation very positively (on a scale of 0 (completely dissatisfied) to 7 (completely satisfied) they indicated a 6 or 7), whereas only 3% said they were deeply unsatisfied (a 0 or 1). Furthermore, 79% of employed persons confirmed their professional situation had improved due to migration (Graph G2.4). Although more than 60% said they were satisfied with the progress in their professional situation, employed persons in the second half of their working life (aged 45 and over) and persons arriving in Switzerland for family reasons had a less favourable opinion, as did women compared with men.

In addition, a large majority of persons interviewed for the survey said that their work made rather or very good use of their skill set. The question was worded as follows: ‘On a scale of 0 (not at all) to 7 (to a very large degree), how well is your skill set put to use in your current job? By skill set we mean your formal education and training as well as the skills that you have acquired at work (training and on the job).’ Certain groups, however, said that their skills were only moderately well-used: this includes young migrants, those who came to Switzerland for non-professional reasons (e.g. for family reasons), those holding secondary education qualifications (often employed in low-skilled work in Switzerland), as well as those from the region ‘rest of Europe’ (mainly from the Balkan countries) or from the African continent (Graph G2.5). These overall positive results can be partly explained by the fact that a large number of migrants (almost half) arrived in Switzerland with a signed employment contract, i.e. they had a relatively good idea of what to expect when they accepted to come to Switzerland to work. Persons arriving in Switzerland for family reasons or due to factors encouraging them to leave their country of origin did not, of course, have this opportunity. Their situation is not quite as positive because their professional integration began only after their arrival and certain migrants will have been obliged, for purely financial reasons, to accept work that gives them no satisfaction.

The various professional integration indicators for migrant cohorts highlight the contrasting results: income gaps are observed in relation to the reference population. For certain nationalities, these differences do not seem to reduce over time. Furthermore, for women and migrants arriving for reasons not related to work, professional integration is sub-optimal. However, the self-rated use of migrants’ professional skills on the labour market is quite good. Migrants also indicate an improvement in their professional situation following migration. The following section analyses the extent to which professional integration contributes to successful social integration.

2.4 Integration in social life

Social integration is broader than professional or structural integration and is also more complex to measure or translate by means of indicators. This concept reflects the level of interaction between migrants and the host society, and their capacity to participate in social and collective life. Indicators of language, social networks and inter-ethnic marriage are often used to measure migrants’ social integration (see Vigdor 2008, for example). The Migration-Mobility survey investigates three aspects of this integration: command of the host region’s language, interest in news and current affairs in Switzerland and in the country of origin, and participation in voluntary activities.

2.4.1 Linguistic integration

When asked about comprehension and their ability to express themselves in the local language, migrants who were interviewed in 2016 and 2018 produced the following results in 2016: 51% said they understood the whole of a conversation, 23.5% almost everything, 13.5% parts of a conversation and 12% little or nothing. Around 31% also said they could speak the local language fluently, whereas 26% were able to utter only a few words or nothing at all. Interviewing the same persons after a two-year interval enabled migrants’ progress in language skills to be identified during the two years covered by the survey. Among those who said there were gaps in their skills in 2016, 36.5% said in 2018 that they understood the language better than in 2016 and 33% said they had improved their speaking skills. The remaining 63% (67%, respectively) said there had been no progress, or in a few rare cases, rated their language skills less highly. An improvement in understanding of the local language (first column in grey in Table T2.1a and T2.1b) was significantly more frequent among migrants arriving in Switzerland for professional reasons and aged from 45–54. It was less frequent among migrants who came to Switzerland for reasons other than professional ones, as well as among those aged 55 and over. The ability to express oneself improved more often for people of African origin, those aged under 35 and those with lower secondary level education. This improvement was seen less often among people with tertiary level education and among the oldest people. Contrary to general expectations, the relationship between the level of education and acquisition of the host region’s language is reversed. This is possibly due to the fact that highly qualified migrants, often English speakers, are able to live in Switzerland and use English. They do not feel the need to learn the local language as much as those whose mother tongue is Spanish or Portuguese or those with a lower level of education, for example.

2.4.2 Interest in news and current affairs

Overall, migrants interviewed for the Migration-Mobility survey, whether in 2016 or in 2018, indicated a high level of interest in what is happening in Switzerland, but also in news from their country of origin. The figures in Graph G2.6 are average values for the answers given by the panel in 2016 and 2018. Respondents indicated their interest on a scale of 0 (not at all interested) to 7 (very interested). This average lies between 4.4 and 5.9 on a scale of 0 to 7. Migrants almost always say they were slightly more interested in what is happening in Switzerland (blue squares) compared with their country of origin (orange and red squares). The gap was wider for European citizens from non-EU countries and for African citizens as well as for men, for people with upper secondary education and migrants in the second half of their working life. It is smaller for women, who are equally interested in the current affairs of the host country and those of their country of origin, migrants from Asia, low-skilled workers and the youngest people.

The results show an openness towards the host country, sign of a willingness to integrate socially, but also an interest in the country of origins that remains high. This interest is, however, relatively low among non-EU/EFTA European and African communities. The results also show that in 2016 persons of Spanish, North American and British origins said they were more interested in news about their country than in Swiss news and current affairs. The survey took place during the American presidential elections, just before the Brexit referendum and during the Catalan independence debate. These events may have temporarily increased the three groups’ interest in news from their countries of origin.

Generally speaking, interest in Swiss current affairs gradually increased for the panel between 2016 and 2018, but the difference was not statistically significant. Interest in the current affairs of the country of origin remained stable.

2.4.3 Voluntary work in Switzerland

The third social integration indicator is the percentage of people taking part in voluntary activities in Switzerland (in sports, social, political or cultural organisations). This question was asked only in the 2016 Migration-Mobility survey. The question asked comprised a list of 7 organised voluntary activities, including cultural activities related to the host country. This indicator is particularly important because it is proof of direct interaction with the host population, as well as of the desire to become involved in various causes in the host country. The percentage is over 40% among migrants with tertiary-level education and training, migrants from West Africa, India and North America. Among Portuguese nationals, it is just above 20% (Graph G2.7). Overall, 16% of people interviewed take part in voluntary activities related to sport, 12% for charities and 9% for religious organisations.

Figures for 2016 on voluntary activity by the whole of Switzerland’s population aged 15 and over were published by the FSO, based on data gathered by the Swiss Labour Force Survey. www.bfs.admin.ch → Look for statistics → Work and income → Unpaid work → Voluntary work (last accessed on 14.05.2020). According to that survey, 23% of Swiss nationals and 8% of foreign nationals are involved in organised voluntary work. Foreigners are less likely than Swiss nationals to be involved in voluntary work. As the wording of the questions The question asked in the Swiss Labour Force Survey specifically referred to voluntary activity during the preceding four weeks. and the populations covered by the two surveys were different, no comparison can be made between the two sources.

According to the Migration-Mobility survey, involvement in voluntary work was greater among persons who arrived in 2013 or before compared with later cohorts. Significant result after controlling for factors of confusion. This situation again suggests a process of gradual integration in certain social activities in the host country.

The three indicators used show that social integration is not only gradual but also considerable. Unsurprisingly, the level of comprehension of the local language improves for a large percentage of migrants. The differences observed between groups for the three indicators suggest, however, that the speed of social integration can vary depending on individual characteristics and especially depending on whether migrants are able to use English as a lingua franca. Education is not always an indicator of integration and this result contradicts the hypothesis that a high level of education is conducive to integration.

2.5 Migration: temporary or permanent?

The third section of this article looks at migrants’ outcomes. To do this, data from the population registers are used.

Among persons arriving in 2000 (excl. asylum), more than 60% left Switzerland within ten years of arrival (Graph G2.8; see also Chapter 3.5). This percentage was slightly lower (56%) for the 2005 cohort; this fall can be accounted for by the fact that migrants from the European Union stay longer, or even permanently. This decline is also explained by the relative stability of the Swiss labour market compared with other European countries, some of which felt the full impact of the financial crisis.

The rate of departure from Switzerland in the ten years following arrival varies considerably depending on immigrants’ nationality; for the 2005 cohort it was 34% for Portuguese nationals and 71% for citizens for OECD member countries outside of the EU/EFTA These are citizens from the following countries: Australia, Canada, Chile, South Korea, Israel, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Turkey and USA. . This percentage varies between 60% and 65% within the three main immigrant groups (besides Portuguese nationals): German, French and Italian nationals (Graph G2.8).

Among immigrants still present in Switzerland ten years after their arrival, more than half were holders of a C permit at the end of the period. This was the case for 78% of German nationals who immigrated in 2005 and who were still in Switzerland in 2015. Among migrants still in Switzerland after 10 years, between 14% and 24% were B permit holders (probably due to repeated immigration and emigration) and a varying proportion of them were naturalised: 16% of citizens from OECD member countries outside of the EU/EFTA and 24% of citizens from countries that belong neither to the OECD nor EU/EFTA obtained Swiss citizenship during the 10 years after their arrival. During the period under observation, citizenship could be obtained before 12 years of residency in the case of marriage to a Swiss national (facilitated naturalisation) or if a person was in compulsory education in Switzerland. This means that a permanent stay in Switzerland for third-country nationals is often related to family circumstances giving access to speedy naturalisation.

The residence permit allocated upon arrival obviously has an effect on the migration outcome. In 2000, the A permit (seasonal permit) had run its course as it was abolished in 2002. It was, however, awarded to 39 200 people in 2000, compared with 63 900 people awarded a B permit and 69 400 people awarded an L permit (allowing a short stay of 3 to 12 months). In a small number of cases a C permit was awarded on arrival (4300). These people migrated to Switzerland in 2000 or in 2005. We have no information on their previous migration experience but we can assume that people awarded a C permit of residence on arrival had already resided in Switzerland in the past. The L permit, which at that time had recently come into force, fulfilled its role as a short-term permit, as more than 80% of those awarded an L permit on arrival had left Switzerland by 2010 (Graph G2.9). However, the seasonal permit seems to have often preceded a longer-term stay, as among holders of this permit, more than 40% were still in Switzerland ten years later.

In 60% of cases, the B permit was followed by a stay of at least 10 years, with naturalisation in 15% of cases. Most people who arrived in Switzerland for family reunification fall into this category as they then meet the conditions for rapid naturalisation. Holders of a C permit on arrival often go on to stay long-term in Switzerland (in 85% of cases). In 2010, 20% of C permit holders obtained Swiss citizenship.

Compared to those proportions, people from the 2005 cohort who hold the short-term permit, which has gained importance since the seasonal permit was abolished, no longer systematically return to their country of origin: almost four in ten short-term permit holders on arrival were still resident in Switzerland 10 years later, mostly with a C permit. Some 50% of holders of a B permit on arrival in Switzerland were still here after 10 years. This shows that the differences in terms of migration pathway are less marked between L and B permits. Compared with the 2000 cohort, B permit holders arriving in Switzerland in 2005 became more mobile, as the percentage of them leaving the country rose from 40% to 48%.

Although the permit awarded upon arrival has a significant role to play in the length of stay, this role can also change over time. The short-term permit, which is not aimed at people staying long-term in Switzerland, now sees 4 in 10 holders staying for at least 10 years in Switzerland. In contrast, the B permit, which was supposed to precede a longer-term stay, now sees only one in two holders staying. Compared with the cohort that immigrated five years before, that of 2005 is characterised by a higher number of returns of B and even C permit holders.

The hypothesis by which the opening of borders stimulates migration flows, i.e. that it multiplies an individual’s migration movements, is only partly borne out by the data on international migration. In fact, the majority of immigrants in 2000 (2005, respectively) and who were still present in Switzerland 10 years later, remained resident in Switzerland throughout the whole period. A high proportion of return trips was seen only among persons holding a seasonal permit upon arrival in Switzerland (95%) and those holding an L permit upon arrival (2000 cohort: 69%, 2005 cohort: 43%). For those arriving with a B or C permit, the predominant model, adopted by at least 90% of these permit holders was to remain in Switzerland for the whole period (Graph G2.10). However, this result was obtained on the basis of data from the population registers and does not cover certain types of mobility, such as informal or short-term return trips (with no change of residence declared).

The Migration-Mobility survey provides some further information in this regard about the relationship that migrants have with their country of origin. In 2018, more than 90% of migrants returned at least once a year to their country of origin. Some 18% even returned at least once per month. More than half said that they had ties to their country of origin as most of their friends lived there. According to the Swiss Labour Force Survey 2017, which also includes the 2^nd generation (i.e. people with a migration background born in Switzerland), 67% return to their country of origin a least once a year. www.bfs.admin.ch → Look for statistics → Population → Migration and integration → Transnationalism (last accessed on 14.05.2020). Mobility seems to comprise trips made at more or less regular intervals depending on the distance between Switzerland and the country of origin. Such trips are made possible by the current means of transport and additionally by plane ticket prices which have fallen in recent decades.

2.6 Conclusion

Migration to a foreign country is an event that can have far-reaching repercussions on the person or family concerned. From the host society’s point of view, the phenomenon of migration presents a challenge, for both politics and the economy. With this in mind, it is important to have detailed knowledge of the integration characteristics of the populations concerned by migration as well as of their behaviour in terms of mobility. A wealth of literature has attempted to explain the choice between returning or remaining permanently, often referring to Borjas and Bratsberg’s theory of selective migration (1994). This theory distinguishes between two reasons for leaving the host country: on the one hand, the achievement of predefined migration goals (completion of education and training, e.g.); on the other, failure of the migration project due to misleading information about the potential gains of migration. Poor structural or social integration represents, for the migrant, failure of the migration project and encourages them to return home. Structural and social integration are closely linked to migration outcome.

Whether in terms of the labour market, language or social participation, the results presented in this article all show that integration into society is a long-term process. The process of integration does not end on an equal footing, if we consider, for example, the wage gap between migrants and the total population of Switzerland, but it does improve as the length of stay increases. Consequently, a country that aims for long-term migration will increase the chances of successful integration and the professional and social integration of migrants, in contrast to a country characterised by short-term migration. As a result, a sudden increase in migration flows, such as that observed since the start of the 21^st century in Switzerland, challenges social integration and cohesion policies as it leads to renewed migration flows and to the presence of recent migration populations at the start of the integration process. From a social cohesion perspective, migration at the start of the 21^st century, by virtue of the number of migrants concerned, posed a challenge for integration policy in Switzerland. The results presented here show that the situation of migrants on the labour market and in terms of social integration varies greatly according to individual characteristics, such as nationality, gender, the reason for migration or level of education. Regarding income from employment, the situation of German nationals in particular is very advantageous from the very beginning. This is probably linked to selective immigration (persons arriving in Switzerland have a high level of education). Moreover, their income increases significantly throughout their stay in Switzerland. In contrast, other nationalities show a rather low income from the start, with little increase. Migrant groups, therefore, can find themselves in very different situations. Despite this, satisfaction with employment is judged positively. This is probably due to the fact that in Switzerland migrants encounter working conditions which, although not always optimal, are considered better than those in the country of origin. The economic context explains these results and encourages professional integration.

The data on local language skills show that non-English-speaking populations make quicker progress regarding comprehension and speaking the host region’s language than do populations from English-speaking countries, although these may be better qualified. This result is probably due to the fact that highly qualified populations tend to live in larger urban zones where they can use English for every day communication. It does, however, raise questions about the host country’s expectations with regard to command of the local language and about the groups that linguistic integration policy should be targeting.

Finally, although they are descriptive in nature, the analyses reveal the ambiguous role played by residence permits. The latter obviously have an impact on the length of stay in Switzerland, but this impact is not clear-cut. Migrants frequently transit between short-term and annual permits: This is an interesting feature of migration policy in that the system does offer a certain amount of flexibility although this is limited for citizens of non-EU/EFTA countries.

In conclusion, this article makes use of descriptive statistics and adopts a longitudinal approach for a better understanding of the characteristics of integration and the outcome of migration. It does not intend to explain certain behaviours but to describe the situation and its development over time. The wealth of data henceforth available in Switzerland will enable in the near future more detailed analysis of the characteristics of migration and integration over a longer period of time while adopting a more analytical approach.

References

Alba, Richard, and Victor Nee (1997): Rethinking Assimilation Theory for a New Era of Immigration, International Migration Review, 31 (4), 826–874. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F019791839703100403 .

Borjas, George, and Bernt Bratsberg (1994): Who Leaves? The Outmigration of the Foreign-Born, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 78 (1), 165–176.

Grunau, Philipp, and Marco Pecoraro (2017): Educational mismatch and promotions to managerial positions: a test of the career mobility theory, Applied Economics, 49 (12), 1226–1240. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2016.1213369 .

Pecoraro, Marco, and Philippe Wanner (2019): Does the Recognition of Foreign Credentials Decrease the Risk for Immigrants of Being Mismatched in Education or Skills? In: Ilka Steiner and Philippe Wanner (eds): Migrants and Expats: The Swiss Migration and Mobility Nexus. IMISCOE Research Series. Cham: Springer Open, 161–186.

Quintini, Glenda (2011): Right for the Job: Over-qualified or Under-skilled? OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers No. 120. Paris: OECD Publishing. www.oecd.org/els/48650012.pdf (last accessed on 14.05.2020).

Sicherman, Nachum, and Oded Galor (1990): A theory of career mobility, Journal of Political Economy, 98 (1), 169–192. https://doi.org/10.1086/261674 .

Steiner, Ilka, and Philippe Wanner (2015): Towards a New Data Set for the Analysis of Migration and Integration in Switzerland. nccr — on the move, Working Paper No. 1. https://nccr-onthemove.ch/publications/towards-a-new-data-set-for-the-analysis-of-migration-and-integration-in-switzerland/ (last accessed on 14.05.2020).

Steiner, Ilka, and Philippe Wanner (eds 2019): Migrants and Expats: The Swiss Migration and Mobility Nexus. IMISCOE Research Series. Cham: Springer Open. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05671-1 .

Vigdor, Jacob L. (2008): Measuring Immigrant Assimilation in the United States. New York: Manhattan Institute, Civic Report No. 53. https://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/measuring-immigrant-assimilation-united-states-5835.html (last accessed on 14.05.2020).

About the author

Philippe Wanner (1964), Dr, Professor of demography at the University of Geneva. Areas of work: Swiss demography, migration and integration.