integrering av innvandrere i arbeidslivet · education family refugee. ikke alle blir… 0 20 40 60...

Integreringavinnvandrereiarbeidslivet

BerntBratsberg,FrischsenteretByggerpåsamarbeidmedOddbjørnRaaumogKnutRøedNorskTrygdemedisinskForening,8.mars2018

Innvandrereogarbeidsliv

•  Introduksjon•  BoGdseffekter:IntegreringeJerinnvandringsgrunn

•  TapavjobbogfortsaJdeltakelse•  Betydningavtrygdesatser•  Introduksjonsprogrammet

Forskningsprosjekterominnvandrerepåarbeidsmarkedet

•  Bratsberg,Bernt,OddbjørnRaaum,andKnutRøed(2016),“Flyktningerpådetnorskearbeidsmarkedet,”Søkelyspåarbeidslivet33(3):185-207.

•  Bratsberg,Bernt,OddbjørnRaaum,andKnutRøed(2016),“LabormarketintegraGonofrefugeesinNorway,”inF.Fasani(ed),RefugeesandEconomicMigrants:Facts,policiesandchallenges,VoxEU.orgBook,CEPRPress:37-52.

•  Bratsberg,Bernt,OddbjørnRaaum,andKnutRøed(2017),“ImmigrantLaborMarketIntegraGonacrossAdmissionClasses,”NordicEconomicPolicyReview2017,17-54.(Hermedoppdatertedata)

•  BerntBratsberg,OddbjørnRaaum,andKnutRøed(2017),“ImmigrantResponsestoSocialInsuranceGenerosity,”FrischCentre,December2017

•  Bratsberg,Bernt,OddbjørnRaaum,andKnutRøed(2018),“JobLossandImmigrantLaborMarketPerformance,”Economica,85:124–151.doi:10.1111/ecca.12244

•  BerntBratsberg,OddbjørnRaaum,andKnutRøed(2018),“EconomicIntegraGonofRefugees:EffectsoftheNorwegianIntroducGonProgram,”FrischCentre(inprogress)

Migrasjonfremmervelferden!

•  Storeøkonomiskegevinstervedfribevegelseavarbeidskrah(Clemens,2011;Kennan,2012;Rodrik,2016)

•  Men:Flyktninger,familieinnvandrere,og(inoengrad)arbeidsinnvandrerefralavinntektslandharlavesysselsejngsraterogstortstønadsbehov.

FlyktningeriUSAvs.Europa

•  IUSAintegreresflyktningerraskereinniarbeidsmarkedetennandreinnvandrergrupper(Borjas,1982;Cortes,2004;ChinandCortes,2015)– Høyhumankapital(utdanning,språkkunnskaper),langGdshorisont.

•  Europeiskeerfaringermerblandet?

Flyktningerharlaveresysselsejngennandremigranterideflesteland

Kilde:Dumontetal.(2016)

MendehentersegGlsynelatenderasktinn

Source:Dustmannetal.(2016)

Vanskeligåstudereintegrasjonover;d

•  HvordanpåvirkesintegrasjonavboGd?•  Metodiskeunordringer– TverrsniJsdatakan«lureoss»– Ulikeinnvandringskohorterharforskjelligeopprinnelseslandogankommervedulikealdre

– UlikeinnvandringskohorterutseJesforulikekonjunktursituasjoner

– Retur-ogvideremigrasjonerselekGv

BRR,NEPR2017Følgerdesammeinnvandrerneovermangeår,fordelteJerinnvandringsgrunn.

•  Alleinnvandrerefrabosejngsår,18-47årvedankomst,fra1990

•  Innvandringsårsak/landbakgrunn:–  Flukt(flyktningerogasylsøkere)–  Gjenforeningelleretableringavfamilie–  Arbeidellerutdanningfralavinntektsland–  NyeEU–  GamleEU

•  Hovedinntektskilde:Arbeidellertrygd/stønad?–  Sammenlignerinntekterfraarbeidogoverføringer

BruJoinnvandringGlNorge1990-20160

1020

3040

5060

Imm

igra

tion

(100

0s)

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

New EUOld EU/OECDWork (LDC)EducationFamilyRefugee

Ikkealleblir…0

2040

6080

100

020

4060

8010

0

0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20

A. Refugee B. Family C. Education

D. Work (LDC) E. Old EU/OECD F. New EU

1990-94 1995-99 2000-04 2005-09 2010-15

In N

orw

ay (%

)

Years since entry

Ikkealleblir…

•  FortsaJiNorgeeJer10år:– Flyktninger 85%– Familiemigranter 85%– NyeEU 70%– Arbeid(lavinntektsland) 45%– GamleEU 40%– Utdanning(lavinntektsland) 30%

Innvandrerandeler

Note:PopulaGonconsistsofthoseaged25-65andinNorwayatendofeachcalendaryear.

05

1015

200

510

1520

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Population

Employment Social Insurance

New EUOld EU/OECDWork (LDC)EducationFamilyRefugee

Perc

ent

Innvandrerandeler

Note:PopulaGonconsistsofthoseaged25-65andinNorwayatendofeachcalendaryear.

Integrasjonsprosessen

•  Forflyktningerforventervilavesysselsejngsraterdeførsteårene

•  OverGdforventerviøkendearbeidsmarkedsdeltakelse–  Språk–  Utdanning–  Erfaring–  NeJverk

•  MenyrkeserfaringgirogsårejgheterGlinntektssikring•  Tidligereforskningharvistatinnvandrereersårbarefor

konjunktursvingningerogrammeshardereavjobbtap•  Ikkeopplagtatintegrasjonsprosessenvedvareridetlange

løp

VikGgsteinntektskilde:Data

FluktFamilie+limmigrant

Familie+lnorskfødt NyeEU GamleEU Norskfødt

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

A.Menn

Jobb 0,581 0,768 0,799 0,883 0,890 0,871

Overføringer 0,379 0,164 0,149 0,050 0,046 0,120

Observasjoner 366.136 109.390 75.442 322.823 402.884 2.093.261

B.Kvinner

Jobb 0,463 0,508 0,733 0,803 0,846 0,803

Overføringer 0,416 0,213 0,102 0,064 0,050 0,168

Observasjoner 231.710 301.878 214.786 191.564 291.723 1.963.026

Note:Samplesarerestrictedtothose25-62yearsofage,notineducaGon,andinthecountryattheendoftheobservaGonyear.Immigrantsamplesarefurtherrestrictedtothose18-47yearsofageatentryandwhoenteredbetween1990and2013.ObservaGonperiodis1993-2014.NaGvesamplesare10percentrandompopulaGonextracts.

SysselseDng:AndelavinnvandreresomhararbeidsomvikGgsteinntektskilde.EJerboGd.

PopulaGonconsistsofthoseaged25-62andinNorwayatendofeachcalendaryear.

020

4060

8010

0

0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20

A. Men B. Women

Refugee Fam imm Fam Nor New EU Old EU

Empl

oym

ent (

%)

Years since entry

Stønad:Andelavinnvandreresomhartrygd/stønadsomvikGgsteinntektskilde.EJerboGd.

PopulaGonconsistsofthoseaged25-66andinNorwayatendofeachcalendaryear.

020

4060

0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20

A. Men B. Women

Refugee Fam imm Fam Nor New EU Old EU

Soci

al in

sura

nce

(%)

Years since entry

StaGsGskanalyse:Isoleringavårsakssammenhenger

ViønskeråidenGfisereeffekteravbo;d,kontrollertfor•  alder,•  ankomstår,•  opprinnelsesland,•  konjunkturer•  Individuellekjennetegn-utdanning.

Regresjonsanalyse:Predikertsysselsejngsdifferansemellominnvandrereognorskfødte

Note:DifferenGalsarebasedonaregressionmodelthatcontrolsforeducaGonalaJainment,whetherschoolingisacquiredinNorway,whetherthehighestaJainmentisfromNorway,whethereducaGoninformaGonismissing,localunemployment,andageatentry—allinteractedwiththefiveadmissioncategories.Theregressionfurthercontrolsforage,countyofresidence,yearofobservaGon,andcountryofbirth,aswellaseducaGonalaJainmentandlocalunemploymentinteractedwithnaGvestatus.DifferenGalsareevaluatedattheweightedaverageeducaGonalaJainmentineachimmigrantsample.

-.6-.5

-.4-.3

-.2-.1

0

0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20

A. Men B. Women

Refugee Fam imm Fam Nor New EU Old EU 95% CI

Empl

oym

ent d

iffere

nce

vs. n

ative

s

Years since entry

Regresjonsanalyse:Predikertdifferanseistønadsavhengighetmellominnvandrereognorskfødte

-.10

.1.2

.3.4

.5

0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20

A. Men B. Women

Refugee Fam imm Fam Nor New EU Old EU 95% CI

Soci

al in

sura

nce

diffe

renc

e vs

. nat

ives

Years since entry

Faktorersomskihersysselsejngsprofileneoppellerned

•  Utdanningfraopprinnelsesland•  UtdanningfraNorge•  Konjunktursituasjonen•  Aldervedankomst•  Opprinnelsesland

(1)Utdanningfrahjemlandet:

Note:Men

-.1-.0

50

.05

.1

Pred

icte

d em

ploy

men

t diff

eren

tial (

ref=

sec

onda

ry)

Refugee FamImm FamNor NewEU OldEU Native

Compulsory Tertiary 95% CI

(2)UtdanningfraNorge:

-.05

0.0

5.1

.15

.2.2

5

Pred

icted

em

pl d

iff (r

ef=

fore

ign

scho

olin

g)

Refugee FamImm FamNor

Compulsory Secondary Tertiary 95% CI

Note:Men

(3)UtdanningfraNorgesomerlavereennhøyestefullførte:

-.05

0.0

5.1

Pre

d em

pl d

iff (r

ef=

fore

ign

educ

abo

ve N

orw

egia

n)

Refugee FamImm FamNor

Men Women 95% CI

(4)Lokalarbeidsledighet:

-6-4

-20

Pred

icte

d ef

fect

on

empl

oym

ent

Refugee FamImm FamNor NewEU OldEU Native

Men Women 95% CI

(5)Aldervedankomst(menn):

-.15

-.1-.0

50

.05

Pre

d em

pl d

iff (r

ef=

age

25-2

9)

Refugee FamImm FamNor NewEU OldEU

Age 18-24 Age 30-34 Age 35-39 Age 40-47 95% CI

Opprinnelseslandavstorbetydning.FordelingavflyktningereJeropprinnelsesland:

Note

Men Women

Afghanistan Bosnia Eritrea Iran

Iraq Kosovo Other Somalia

«Effekter»avopprinnelsesland:

Note

-.2-.1

0.1

.2

Pred

em

pl d

iff (r

ef=

refu

gee

aver

age)

Afghanistan Bosnia Eritrea Iran Iraq Kosovo Somalia

Men Women 95% CI

IntegreringeJerinnvandringsgrunn

– FormangeinnvandrereserintegrasjonsprosessenutGlåmistetrykketeJer5-10år,ogdereJergåirevers.

– DeJetyderpåatviikkegreieråutnyJedetpotensialetsomfakGskerder.

Hvorfor?

1.Konjunkturer•  InnvandreremersensiGveforkonjunktursvingninger•  MerGlbøyeligGlåjobbeibedrihersomnedbemannerellerstenger•  MerGlbøyeligGlåbliplukketutforoppsigelsevednedbemanning

–  Sistinn–førstut–  Mer“marginale”jobber

•  StørrenegaGveffektavjobbtap–  Mindrefleksibelkompetanse

2.Kompetanse

•  UtdanningfrahjemlandetavbegrensetverdiiNorge•  KanbetydårligejobbmuligheterrelaGvtGlreellkompetanseogambisjoner

Hvorfor?

3.Inntektssikring•  Høyekompensasjonsgraderiinntektssikringsordninger

–  ProgressivitetogforsørgerGllegg–  Dårligejobbmuligheter

•  LitennyJeforskjellpåjobbogikke-jobb

4.IntegreringspoliGkk•  Fokuspå«førstejobb»girogsåbilleJGlinntekssikring,menutennødvendigvisådannegrunnlagforenlevedykGgyrkeskarriere

Toforskningsprosjekterominnvandrerepåarbeidsmarkedet

•  Bratsberg,Bernt,OddbjørnRaaum,andKnutRøed,“JobLossandImmigrantLaborMarketPerformance,”Economica,2018

•  BerntBratsberg,OddbjørnRaaum,andKnutRøed,“ImmigrantResponsestoSocialInsuranceGenerosity,”FrischCentre,November2017

•  Bratsberg,Bernt,OddbjørnRaaum,andKnutRøed,“JobLossandImmigrantLaborMarketPerformance,”Economica,forthcoming

•  BerntBratsberg,OddbjørnRaaum,andKnutRøed,“ImmigrantResponsestoSocialInsuranceGenerosity,”FrischCentre,November2017

•  Bratsberg,Bernt,OddbjørnRaaum,andKnutRøed(2017),“ImmigrantLaborMarketIntegraGonacrossAdmissionClasses,”NordicEconomicPolicyReview2017,17-54.–  Hermedoppdatertedata

OmsGllingerogjobbtap

BenyJerossav

•  Bedrihsnedleggelser/konkurser•  Storenedbemanninger

Eksponeringvs.effektaveksponering

Data

•  Skillermellomkonkursogminst60%nedbemanning

•  Konkurser/nedbemanningerårene1994-2010–  FraVOF(BOF)samtArbeidstakerregisteret

•  AnsaJealder25-55år•  Innvandrere–  «Ikke-vestlige»(LDC),«vestlige»(EEA)

•  Norskfødteisammealdersspenn

Eksponeringforkonkurs/nedbemanningdenærmestetreårene(prosent)

LDCimm EEAimm NaGve

Firmbankruptyrs1-3(%) 2.8 2.6 1.8

Firmdownsizesyrs1-3(%) 11.0 9.0 8.1

Observa+ons 168872 201543 7923400

Økteksponeringforkonkursellernedbemanninger.(Prosentpoeng/100)

Dataforeffektanalyse

•  Grunnetmuligseleksjonservipåarbeidsstokken–  2årførkonkursen(nedbemanning)erregistrertsombasisår(årnull)

–  Bedrihermedminst10ansaJe–  SysselsaJ2årfør«årnull»,minsteJårsansiennitet,ikkemoJaJdagpengervedarbeidsløshetelleruføretrygd

–  SolidfoNesteiarbeidsmarkedet

•  KonkursiVOF,ellerreduksjoniarbeidsstokkenmedminst60%fra31.12Glsammedatonesteår

Ledighetsinsidensrundtkonkurs/nedbemanning0

2040

60

-3 0 3 6 -3 0 3 6 -3 0 3 6

LDC immigrant EEA immigrant Native

Bankrupt Downsize Stable

Reg

unem

ploy

ed d

urin

g ye

ar (%

)

Years since base year

Sysselsejng,førogeJer70

8090

100

-3 0 3 6 -3 0 3 6 -3 0 3 6



Empl

oyed

(%)


Realinntektsutvikling(relaGv)80

9010

011

012

0

-3 0 3 6 -3 0 3 6 -3 0 3 6



Rea

l ear

ning

s re

lativ

e to

bas

e ye

ar


Sysselsejngseffekterkonkurs Men Women First

postyear

5yearperiod

9yearperiod

Firstpostyear

5yearperiod

9yearperiod

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)Bankrupt -0.050 -0.166 -0.291 -0.089 -0.308 -0.346 (0.004) (0.015) (0.042) (0.009) (0.032) (0.084)

LDC* -0.083 -0.204 -0.290 -0.042 -0.138 -0.289bankrupt

(0.010) (0.032) (0.094) (0.021) (0.080) (0.229)

Obs 571537

471883 311862 258

720 214944 145097

Oppsummeringeffekter

•  Konkurs=>langsikGgfallisysselsejngogarbeidsinntekt

•  KonsekvensenelangtmeralvorligforLDCinnvandrere

•  Storenedbemanningerrammerogsåsysselsejngpålangtsikt,svakereennforkonkursereJersomikkeallemisterjobben

Seleksjonsskjevhet?

•  Jobberinnvandrereognordmennpåforskjelligearbeidsplasser?SorteringeJerarbeidsplass?– Hvaomvifølgermedarbeiderefrasammevirksomhet?

Robustnessanalyses,firmfixedeffects Employment Logearnings

Withfirmfixed

effectsAsTable3,firm

fesampleWithfirmfixed

effectsAsTable3,firm

fesample (1) (2) (3) (4) Bankrupt -0.042*** -0.185*** (0.005) (0.018)LDC*bankrupt -0.046** -0.048*** -0.135* -0.114** (0.023) (0.015) (0.073) (0.053)EEA*bankrupt 0.024 0.010 0.001 0.037 (0.020) (0.011) (0.057) (0.038) Downsize -0.007*** -0.038*** (0.002) (0.007)LDC*downsize -0.029*** -0.038*** -0.071** -0.087*** (0.010) (0.007) (0.033) (0.026)EEA*downsize -0.009 -0.008* -0.011 0.009 (0.006) (0.005) (0.020) (0.016) Observa+ons 850151 850151 844859 844859Fixedeffects 36403 36165

Jobbtap

VikGgforklaringpåforskjellermellomgrupperisysselsejngsutviklingoginntekstvekst?

SysselsejngoginntektsvekstoverGd80

9010

011

012

0

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10

Employment Real earnings


Inde

x re

lativ

e to

bas

e ye

ar


Jobbtap

VikGgforklaringpåforskjellermellomgrupperisysselsejngsutviklingoginntekstvekst?

•  A.Eksponering-Enandelavdesommisterjobbenblirikkeledige-  Desomopplevdekonkursvetvimistetjobben,cahalvpartenblearbeidsledige=>forhverviobservererfrajobbGlledighetvetviattomistetjobben.

⇒ Eksponering=innstrømming*2⇒ NaGves:10,5%;LDCimmigrants:24%over2år

•  B.EffektKausaleffektavåmistejobben=effektavkonkurs,justertforandelblearbeidstakereutenkonkurssommistetjobben(«contaminaGonbias»)•  A.ogB.=>Jobbtapforklarer50%avforskjellisysselsejng(8,4pp)og60%avforskjelliinntektsvekst(15logpnts)mellomLDCinnvandrereogetnisknorskeover3-årsperiode,liktfordeltpåeksponeringogeffekter

Toforskningsprosjekterominnvandrerepåarbeidsmarkedet

•  Bratsberg,Bernt,OddbjørnRaaum,andKnutRøed,“JobLossandImmigrantLaborMarketPerformance,”Economica

•  BerntBratsberg,OddbjørnRaaum,andKnutRøed,“ImmigrantResponsestoSocialInsuranceGenerosity,”FrischCentre,November2017(inprogress)

Researchques+ons

Labormarketsuccessofimmigrantsfromlowincomecountries;Whatistheroleofgeneroussocialinsurancereplacementrates?A.  DoprogramparGcipantspostponetransiGontojobswhen

programbenefitsbecomemoregenerous?

B.  AreimmigrantsmoreresponsivetochangeinbenefitsthannaGves?

C.  Dohigherbenefitsaffectfutureearnings(fromwork)andincomes?Differentforimmigrants?

D.  InterpreGngdifferenGaleffects:ImmigrantbackgroundorothercharacterisGcswithdifferenGalbenefiteffects(e.g.,earningspotenGal)?

Iden+fica+onofeffectsChallenge:BenefitformulacontainsarichnumberofcharacterisGcs=>benefitstypicallycorrelatewithunobservedfactorsthataffectpost-programoutcomes=>inneedofrulesgeneraGng(exogenous)randomvariaGoninbenefits

•  Largetemporarydisabilityprogram(TDI)inNorway.IndividualadministraGverecordscombinedwithtaxanddemographicregisters(fullpopulaGon)

•  Benefitgenerosityeffect:Labormarketandincomeresponsestohigherprogrambenefits

SoluGon:Benefitreformin2002,newprinciples,possibletocalculatebenefitsunderoldandnewrules=>random-assignmentlikevariaGonacrosseligibleapplicants

•  Relatedstudies:Nielsenetal(2010),Fevangetal(2016),MullenandStabile(2016),Borghansetal(2014)

EmpiricalresearchquesGon

•  Doimmigrantsandotherpersonswithpoorearnings/jobprospectsrespondmorestronglytochangesinsocialinsurance(dis)incenGves?

•  IdenGficaGonbymeansofareforminthetemporarydisabilityinsurance(TDI)programinNorwayinJanuary2002

•  AnewprincipleforcalculaGonofbenefits–  Froma“pensionmodel”toan“earningsreplacementmodel”–  OnlyearningsthelastthreeyearsmaJer–  Higherminimumlevelsandbenefitsforimmigrantswithfewyearsof

residenceinNorway–  Lowerchildallowances

•  Averageabsolutechange(upordown)inbenefitlevels:23%

Data

•  TDIprogramparGcipants,programentry1999-2004–  (3yrseachsideofreform)

•  Age27to59atprogramentry•  FollowparGcipantsthrough2014

DescripGvestaGsGcs,TDIprogramparGcipants Men Women Immigrants NaGves Immigrants NaGves (1) (2) (3) (4)Age 40.0 40.4 39.9 40.4Educa+onalaaainment(%) Compulsory 40.5 42.0 46.7 40.5Unknown 8.2 0.8 8.3 0.4

Employedyearbefore(%) 74.2 86.2 72.0 83.4Avg.earnings3prioryears 264695 380300 204891 267696

TDIbenefits(NOK): Pre-reformrules 158881 227417 125113 172352Post-reformrules 210578 250443 179469 199768

Impliedreplacement(pre-tax): Pre-reformrules 0.620 0.593 0.606 0.642Post-reformrules 0.798 0.654 0.878 0.744

Spelldura+on(months) 24.8 25.0 27.7 29.3Spelloutcome: Employment 32.9 49.9 26.8 42.7

Numberofspells 7128 64346 5267 67909Frac+onpostreform 59.0 54.4 63.2 54.8

DistribuGonofbenefitchangeduetothereform

Thedistribu+onofhypothe+calchangeinbenefitsfromthe2002TDIreform,bygenderandimmigrantstatus.Poten+alclaimantswithlongtermsickleave

0.0

05.0

1.0

150

.005

.01

.015

-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 200

A. Immigrant men B. Immigrant women

C. Native men D. Native women

Potential entrants pre-reform Potential entrants post-reform

Dens

ity

Reform benefit gain (1000 NOK)

EsGmatedhazardrateelasGciGeswrtTDIbenefits Men Women Immigrants NaGves Immigrants NaGves (1) (2) (3) (4)

LogactualTDIbenefitEffectontransi+onto:

Employment -0.647***(0.143)

-0.311***(0.068)

-0.424***(0.127)

-0.084(0.052)

PDI -0.086(0.180)

-0.136(0.102)

0.028(0.160)

-0.111(0.086)

Unemployment -0.538(0.398)

-0.103(0.250)

-0.466(0.675)

0.156(0.383)

Non-par+cipa+on -0.069(0.127)

-0.137(0.091)

0.128(0.111)

-0.171**(0.084)

Numberofspells 7128 63346 5267 67909

Numberofsupportpointsin

heterogeneitydistribu+on5 6 1 6

EsGmatedeffectsonannuallaborearningsofaEuroincreaseintheTDIbenefit

-.6-.4

-.20

.2-.6

-.4-.2

0.2

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10

A. Immigrant men B. Native men

C. Immigrant women D. Native women

Effe

ct e

stim

ate,

ear

ning

s

Years since program entry

EsGmatedeffectsonaher-taxincomeofaEuroincreaseintheTDIbenefit

-.20

.2.4

-.20

.2.4

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10



Effe

ct e

stim

ate,

afte

r-tax

inco

me


Crosseffectsonspousallaborsupply?

EsGmatedeffectsonspouseearningsofaEuroincreaseinTDIbenefits

-1-.5

0.5

-1-.5

0.5

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10



Effe

ct o

n sp

ouse

's ea

rnin

gs


EsGmatedeffectsonhouseholdaher-taxincomeofaEuroincreaseinTDIbenefits

-.50

.5-.5

0.5

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10



Effe

ct o

n af

ter-t

ax fa

mily

inco

me


ImmigrantsorcharacterisGcsofimmigrants?

ImmigrantsandnaGvesdifferwrtpotenGalearningsandhouseholdcharacterisGcs

Men Women Immigrants NaGves Immigrants NaGves (1) (2) (3) (4) A.Valua+onofemployment:Averageof3bestearningsyears,12-3yrsbefore(%)

Low(p1-p25ofimmigrantdistribu+on) 25.0 3.7 25.0 5.1Medium(p26-p75ofimmigrantdistribu+on)

50.0 39.4 50.0 45.5

High(p76-p100ofimmigrantdistribu+on) 25.0 56.9 25.0 49.4 B.Valua+onofnon-employment:Familystatus(%)

Low(single) 33.1 65.4 30.1 53.3Medium(employedspouse) 30.2 26.0 47.4 41.4High(spousehomemaker) 36.7 8.6 22.4 5.3

EsGmatedimpactofincreaseinTDIbenefitsonaverageearningsoverfive-yearperiodaherTDIentry,withandwithoutinteracGonswiththevalueof

employmentandnon-employment Men Women NaGves Immigrant

interacGonNaGves Immigrant

interacGon (1) (2) (3) (4)A.Withoutinterac+onsbetweenbenefitsandvalueofemploymentandnon-employment

-0.097***(0.030)

-0.219***(0.080)

-0.056**(0.024)

-0.164**(0.081)

B.Withinterac+onsbetweenbenefitsandvalueofemploymentandnon-employment

Baseline(lowvalueofemployment/highvalueofnon-employment)

-0.404***(0.132)

-0.144*(0.086)

-0.317***(0.112)

-0.103(0.083)

+mediumvalueofemployment 0.187*(0.107)

0.004(0.085)

+highvalueofemployment 0.310***(0.110)

0.165*(0.085)

+mediumvalueofnon-employment 0.057(0.088)

0.202**(0.084)

+lowvalueofnon-employment 0.065(0.086)

0.142*(0.086)

Contribu+onsandresults

A.  HigherbenefitspostponethetransiGonfromTDItoemploymentand

reducefuturelaborearnings

B.  ImmigrantresponsesaresignificantlystrongerthanthoseofnaGves

C.  ThestrongerresponseamongimmigrantsispartlyduetotheirlargersharewithlowearningspotenGal(forwhomresponsesarelargerevenfornaGves)

D.  Totalaher-taxincomeincreasesamongnaGvesinresponsetohigherbenefits,butmuchlesssoforimmigrants

E.  Findcrosseffectsonspouses’laborsupply,parGcularlyfromimmigrantwomentoimmigrantmen

Innvandreresintegreringpåarbeidsmarkedet

•  Tiltaksomvirker?– Utdanning– Tidligarbeid– Underholdkrav– Vilkårforsosialhjelp–  Introduksjonsprogrammet

•  Kausaleeffekter?

IntroducGonprogram

ThemajorprogramforrefugeeintegraGonsince2004•  “Refugeesandtheirfamilieswhohavebeengrantedaresidence

permitinNorwayhavetherightto/areobligedtocompleteanintroductoryprogram.AllmunicipaliGesthatseJlerefugeesareobligedtooffertheprogram”

•  “ThepurposeistoincreasethepossibilityofnewlyarrivedimmigrantsparGcipaGnginworkingandsociallifeandtoincreasetheirfinancialindependence”

•  Two(three)years,individualsGpend/grantof2G(NOK187268)peryear

Source:IMDIwebpage

IntroducGonprogram

Who

• Age18-55• Recentrefugeesandfamily

• WithneedsforbasicqualificaGons

• 2017:27000parGcipants

What

• FullGmetraining• 2–3yrs•  Individualizedplans•  ‘QualificaGons’–noteducaGon

• Mandatoryprogram–sGpendGedtoacGveparGcipaGon

• Testrequirementssince2013

• Passrequirementssince2017

How

• TransfersfromcentraladmintomunicipaliGes

• 2016budget:NOK11.5bill

• MunicipalityautonomyinorganisaGon

• Legislatedrequirement,butfewguidelines

AdaptedfromDjuveandKavli(2017)andIMDi(2017)

EvaluateeffectsofintroducGonprogram?

Difference-in-differencesdesign:

•  Treatmentgrp: Refugeesandtheirfamily•  Controlgroup: Familytonon-refugeeimmigrants

–  Immigrantsfromthesamesourcecountries

•  Pre-reformcohorts: 1999-2001•  Post-reformcohorts: 2003-2005

–  Followfor14and10yrsaheradmission

Programtake-uprates

Treatmentgrp:Iraq(28%),Somalia(16%),Afghanistan(8%),Kosovo(7%),Iran(6%)Controlgroup:Pakistan(11%),Vietnam(10%),SriLanka(8%),Turkey(7%),Iran(5%)..

Iraq(4%),Kosovo(4%)..Somalia(2%)..Afghanistan(1%)

020

4060

80

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

A. Treatment men B. Treatment women C. Control men D. Control women

Prog

ram

take-

up ra

te

Employment

Higherminimumlevels

N=266519

050

100

050

100

0 5 10 15 0 5 10 15

A. Treatment grp men B. Treatment grp women

C. Control grp men D. Control grp women

Pre-reform Post-reform

Empl

oym

ent (

%)

Years since entry

Socialinsurance0

2040

6080

020

4060

80

0 5 10 15 0 5 10 15




Soci

al in

sura

nce

(%)

Years since entry

Programeffectsonemployment

Higherminimumlevels

Note:Regressionscontrolforage(indicators25-57),localunemploymentrate,countyofrecidence,andyear(2000-2015)

-.4-.2

0.2

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10

A. Men B. Women

Estimate 95% CI

Refo

rm e

ffect

on

empl

oym

ent

Years since entry

Programeffectsonsocialinsurance

Higherminimumlevels


-.20

.2.4

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10

A. Men B. Women

Estimate 95% CI

Refo

rm e

ffect

on

socia

l insu

ranc

e

Years since entry

Robustness

•  ComposiGon:countryoforigin•  Age,periodandlocallabormarketeffectsfromlow-educatednaGves

•  WagesubsidiesduringiniGalyearsinpre-reformperiod

•  Earnings

ProgrameffectsonemploymentII

Higherminimumlevels


-.4-.2

0.2

-.4-.2

0.2

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10

A. Men DiD B. Men within-country C. Men low-educ native ref

D. Women DiD E. Women within-country F. Women low-educ native ref

Estimate 95% CI

Ref

orm

effe

ct o

n em

ploy

men

t

Years since entry

ProgrameffectsonsocialinsuranceII

Higherminimumlevels

-.20

.2.4

-.20

.2.4

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10

A. Men DiD B. Men within-country C. Men low-educ native ref

D. Women DiD E. Women within-country F. Women low-educ native ref

Estimate 95% CI

Ref

orm

effe

ct o

n so

cial

insu

ranc

e

Years since entry

Wagesubsidies

Higherminimumlevels

N=266519

05

1015

05

1015

0 5 10 15 0 5 10 15




Wag

e su

bsid

y (%

)

Years since entry

Programeffectsonemploymentahernejngoutwagesubsidies

Higherminimumlevels

N=266519

-.3-.2

-.10

.1

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10

A. Men B. Women

Estimate 95% CI

Ref

orm

effe

ct o

n em

ploy

men

t

Years since entry

EffectsoftheintroducGonprogram

•  Large,negaGveeffectonemploymentyrs1-3–  Programlock-in

•  PosiGveeffectsonemployment,malerefugeesyrs4-5•  Smalleffectonsocialinsurancereceiptoffemalerefugees9-10yrs

aherentry(?)•  Otherwise,nolong-termeffectsonemploymentorsocialinsurance

up-take

But,doesprogramleadto•  Humancapital,beJerjobs,higherpay?•  ImprovedoveralleconomicposiGonofrefugees?Examineearnings

Logearnings

Higherminimumlevels

N=149575

10.5

1111

.512

12.5

10.5

1111

.512

12.5

0 5 10 15 0 5 10 15




log

earn

ings

Years since entry

Programeffectsonlogearnings

Higherminimumlevels

Note:Regressionscontrolforage(indicators25-57),educaGonalaJainmentatadmission,localunemploymentrate,countyofrecidence(currentandatadmission;38indicators),year(2000-2015)andcountryofbirth(136indicators)

-1-.5

0.5

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10

A. Men B. Women

Estimate 95% CI

Ref

orm

effe

ct o

n lo

g ea

rnin

gs

Years since entry

ImmigrantlabormarketintegraGon:LessonsfromNorway

ThelabormarketintegraGonprocesslosessteamandgoesintoreverseaherjustafewyears,withrisingwelfaredependencyrateswithyearsinNorway

IntroducGonprogram:•  Largelock-ineffects•  PosiGveshort-termeffectsforrefugeemen•  Small,posiGvelong-termtermeffectsoneconomicstatusof

refugeewomen?•  Otherwise,nodiscernablelong-termeffectsoneconomicself-

sufficiency

KonsekvenserforpoliGkken

1. EnintegreringspoliGkkmedsterkerefokuspålangsikGgekarrieremuligheter

2. MerutdanningiNorgeog/ellerbedreutnyJelseavutdanningfrautlandet

3. EnmerakGvitetsorientertinntektssikring-StøJeGlåforbliiarbeidbedreennstøJeGlåholdesegutenfor-Merbrukavgradertinntektssikringsordninger

integrering av innvandrere i arbeidslivet · education family refugee. ikke alle blir… 0 20 40 60...

Documents