Policy and Institutional Coherence for Migration and Development: A Dashboard

Dr. Melissa SiegelElaine McGregor

Department 2

Background and Rationale

• Global discussions on M&D– Cross-cutting policy area

• M&D in academia – Complex relationship

• Policy Coherence for development

Department 3

Objectives

• To encourage policy makers to reflect on their own context

• To enable critical self-assessment of levels of PICMD

• To identify areas for improvement.• To promote more efforts to understanding

the links between M&D in different contexts

Department 4

Developing the Dashboard

Establishing Concepts and

Underlying Assumptions

Literature Review: Causal

Linkages

Literature Review:

Measurement of Policy

Coherence

Development of

Prelimenary Indicators

Piloting the Dashboard

Department 5

Definitions and Assumptions

• Broad definition of (human) development• The choice to migrate is considered

positive • Measures to harness the positive links

between migration and development are inherently diverse and context-specific

• Cumulative impact of a wide range of policies lead to greater PICMD.

Department 6

Literature Review: Causal Linkages

• Gathered sparse evidence on the impacts of migration and development policies– E.g. Visa restrictions reduce overall

circulation (Czaika & de Haas, 2014)– E.g. Countries with restrictive emigration

policies have less migration than similar countries (McKenzie, 2007)

Department 7

Literature Review: Measuring PCD

• No systematic approach or measurement tools• Range of strategies used in other policies areas

dependent on existing evidence and availability of data

• Clear identification of insitutional factors contributing to PCD• Political commitment, interministerial bodies etc

• Use of indicators based on theoretical or empirically established causal linkages between policy domain and development

Department 8

Factors to Consider when Developing Indicators

• Measurable• Data availability • Evidence based• Managable number of indicators

Department 9

The Dashboard• Indicators are presented in three main categories

– institutional indicators (applicable to both sending and receiving countries);

– policy coherence indicators for migrant sending countries;

– policy indicators for migrant receiving countries.• Each category has four specific objectives • Each indicator is identified as relating to migration

policy, migration-related development policy or other policy domains.

• Each indicator indicates whether it is an input, output or outcome

Department 10

Insitutional Coherence

• Four objectives for ICD:1. Migration and Development is established as a

distinct policy domain, underpinned by an explicit political commitment

2. Policies are based on best available evidence3. Effective implementation of policy

commitments4. Effective horizontal and vertical coordination

across government

Department 11

IC1: M&D Established as Distinct Policy Domain (7 indicators)

• Public committment to acknowledge development in migation policies

• Participation in regional and global fora• Ratification of conventions: C97, C143, MWC• Migration taken into account in development plans

Department 12

IC2: Policies are Based on Best Evidence (4 indicators)

• Funding of independent research on migration and development

• Existance of a migration profile that was developed by relevant ministries in cooperation

• Impact evaluations conducted on programmes

Department 13

IC3: Effective Implementation of Policy Committments (2 indicators)

• Funding is allocated to programmes in the area of migration and development

• Funding is allocated for evaluations.

Department 14

IC4: Effective Vertical and Horizontal Cooperation (4 indicators)

• Existance of a interagency body/committee on migration and development which– meets on a regular basis; and– is representative of actors working on migration

• The body/office in charge of migration takes development into account

Department 15

Policy Coherence for Migration and Development in Destination Countries

• Four strategic objectives:– Reduce costs (social and monetary) of migration to

facilitate (labour) mobility and make moving safer and more affordable for migrants

– Effective protection of the rights of migrants and their families

– Promote social cohesion and development by facilitating the integration of migrants into society and the labour market

– Enhance the development impact of migration for countries of origin

Department 16

PCR1: Reduce costs of migration (5 indicators) • Regulation framework for recruitment

agencies• No costs to migrants• Multiple entry visas• No Pre-migration integration tests• No arbitrary quotas for migrants

Department 17

PCR2: Protection of Rights (11 indicators)• Access to health care• Access to education• Access to labour markets• Migrant unemployment rates equal to natives• Right to change employer• Right to join trade unions• Access to justice• Local voting rights (for long-term residents)• Right to form associations• Family reunification• Portable pensions

Department 18

PCR3: Promotion of integration/social cohesion (7 indicators)

• Dual citizenship• Access to citizenship• Educational support for migrant children• Migrant children education performance on par with

natives• Cost of language courses low • Skill recognition mechanisms in place• Cost of higher education for migrant children equal

to natives

Department 19

PCR4: Enhance Development Impact (3 indicators)

• Multiple remittance service providers• Remittance cost low• Temporary return programmes available

Department 20

Limitation

• Data limitations• The dashboard cannot identify

incoherence• Work in progress

Department 21

Thank you!

melissa.siegel@maastrichtuniversity.nle.mcgregor@maastrichtuniversity.nl