Rising numbers of young immigrants and refugees entering European schools following the 2015–16 migration crisis strained system capacity and injected new urgency into debates about how to support diverse learners and their families. This report examines the challenges facing European education systems and identifies key lessons to improve migrant inclusion in schools and integration more broadly.
This report examines the evolution of civic education in five countries—Denmark, France, Germany, Sweden, and the United Kingdom—and highlights the goals and pedagogical choices inherent to different approaches. When designing and implementing such programs, policymakers and educators face a number of tradeoffs, including whether to focus on imparting formal knowledge versus developing individual capabilities (e.g., critical thinking and empathy); demanding national loyalty versus empowering individual citizens though open discussion; fostering collective versus individual virtues; and encouraging rational criticism versus respect for all cultures.
As longsimmering passions related to federal immigration policies have come to a full boil, less noted but no less important debates are taking place at state and local levels with regards to policies affecting immigrants and their children. As states are increasingly diverging in their responses, this report examines how some of the key policies and programs that support long-term integration success are faring in this volatile era. This report briefly examines how some of the key policies and programs that support the long-term integration success of immigrants and refugees are faring in this volatile era of immigration policy change, as well as key areas to watch ahead.
Looking back after one year in office, it is striking how just closely the Trump administration’s actions on immigration have hewed to priorities Donald Trump outlined in an uncommonly detailed policy speech in August 2016. This report revisits those pledges to assess where the administration has made the most and least headway, and what its policy agenda ahead might look like. In an August 2016 campaign speech in Arizona, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump laid out in ten detailed points the immigration policy he intended to pursue if elected. While it is unreasonable to hold any President strictly accountable for every promise made on the campaign trail, especially after only one year in office, Trump’s Arizona speech has proven a remarkably clear roadmap for understanding his priorities since entering the White House. This report revisits this ten-point plan, assessing how far the administration has come on each goal since inauguration and considering where its focus may lie in the coming years.
As policymakers in Europe and other high-income countries search for ways to reduce unmanaged migration, they are paying new attention to addressing the drivers of migration, in particular the lack of economic opportunities in countries of origin.
This policy brief assesses the major policy shifts that have occurred since January 2017 via executive orders, agency memoranda, and changes to existing programs and practice. It finds that the White House has made a significant down payment on the candidate’s immigration agenda, one of the most activist of any chief executive in modern times. Still, the courts, state and local jurisdictions that have limited their cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, and Congress have slowed or stalled some of the administration’s ambitions.
As policymakers in countries around the world look to expand their migration-management policy toolkits, a growing number have sought cooperation with neighboring states and those further along common migration corridors. This shift is rooted in part in a recognition that unilateral action is often of limited effect and can have unintended consequences. Closing a border, absent a broader regional strategy, often diverts rather than stems flows, pushing migrants to instead travel new (and often more dangerous) routes. While most partnerships aim to improve border management, return those migrants who are found not to have a claim to remain, and address the underlying drivers of migration, such cooperation does not always bear the intended fruit. This Transatlantic Council Statement, which caps a series on partnerships that can respond to the next decade’s migration challenges, explores how countries along different migration corridors are working to cooperatively manage migration—and why the results of these partnerships have been so mixed. Though reducing arrivals and increasing returns have long been of central importance to destination countries, some are beginning to appreciate the need to look beyond short-term enforcement aims to sustain cooperation with origin and transit countries. In doing so, policymakers may need to find ways to ensure both sides derive real benefits from cooperation, think critically about how to address politically sensitive issues, and develop a forward-looking approach to monitoring and acting to pre-empt potential crises.
While EU ambitions to cooperate with migrants’ countries of origin and transit stretch back more than two decades, they took on fresh urgency following the 2015–16 European migrant and refugee crisis, when migration management rocketed to the top of the policy agenda. In 2016, the European Union introduced the Migration Partnership Framework to guide EU and Member State engagement with third countries and embed migration objectives within broader foreign and development policy domains. In addition to sharpening existing tools for collaboratively tackling migration objectives, the framework draws on the strength of bilateral relationships between Member States and third countries and reorganizes the bloc’s financial commitments. This report critically examines whether this approach has put the European Union on track to reach the framework’s stated aims—strengthening borders, stepping up the return of migrants without authorization to stay in Europe, and addressing the root causes of migration—and, if not, what adjustments are needed. By taking a close look at the migration landscapes in four partner countries (Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Mali, and Niger) and how key socioeconomic and political factors in each affect EU engagement, the report illustrates some of the challenges inherent to this new generation of partnerships. Chief among them are identifying the right partners, reconciling divergent EU and partner-country priorities, setting clear benchmarks and conducting robust evaluation, and modulating how progress is communicated to European publics. While EU policymakers acted quickly to launch the framework following the crisis, the authors find a number of areas in need of review if these migration partnerships are to have the desired lasting impact.
The links between global development and migration run deep, though only in recent years have their connections been a part of the global debate. Development policies that promote good governance, economic opportunities, and health can shape the decisions individuals make about whether to emigrate or remain where they live, and migration has been shown to contribute to the development of countries of origin and destination alike. These policy areas have recently converged around a common goal of facilitating safe, orderly, and regular migration—articulated in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and promised for the Global Compact for Migration to be put forward for UN Member State consideration in 2018.