d 6.5- policy synthesis and integrative report on mismatch ... · d 6.5 3– policy synthesis and...

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under Grant Agreement no. 613256.

D 6.5- Policy Synthesis and Integrative Report

on Mismatch and Migration

Lucia Mýtna Kureková, Slovak Governance Institute

Renate Ortlieb, University of Graz

STYLE-WP6:

Mismatch: Migration

Submission date - Planned: 31/08/16 Actual: 14/07/16

2 Lucia Mýtna Kureková and Renate Ortlieb

STYLE Working Papers are peer-reviewed outputs from the www.style-research.eu project. The

series is edited by the project coordinator Professor Jacqueline O’Reilly. These working papers are

intended to meet the European Commission’s expected impact from the project:

i) to ‘advance the knowledge base that underpins the formulation and implementation of

relevant policies in Europe with the aim of enhancing the employment of young people and

their transition to economic and social independence’, and

ii) to engage with ‘relevant communities, stakeholders and practitioners in the research with a

view to supporting employment policies in Europe.’ Contributions to a dialogue about these

results can be made through the project website www.style-research.eu, or by following us

on Twitter @STYLEEU.

To cite this report:

Kureková, L.M. and R. Ortlieb (2016) Policy Synthesis and Integrative Report on Mismatch and

Migration STYLE Working Papers, WP6.5. CROME, University of Brighton, Brighton. http://www.style-

research.eu/publications

© Copyright is held by the authors

About the authors Lucia Mýtna Kureková – http://www.style-research.eu/team/lucia-mytna-kurekova/

Renate Ortlieb – http://www.style-research.eu/team/renate-ortlieb/

Acknowledgements

The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh

Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant

agreement no. 613256.

D 6.5 – Policy synthesis and integrative report on Mismatch and Migration 3

Executive Summary

This paper is a synthesis report for Work Package 6 – Mismatch: Migration and Mobility - in the

STYLE project. It summarizes the focus, key findings and policy themes of this work package, which

examined the conditions under which intra-EU youth mobility improves labour market chances of

young people. It consisted of interrelated tasks analysing the selectivity of recent intra-EU migration,

migrants’ and returnees’ integration patterns, and the role of labour market actors, policies and

institutions in facilitating better labour market outcomes of migrants and returnees. It covered a

number of receiving and sending countries in Europe that were affected by the 2008-2009 economic

crisis to different degrees. The report raises five policy themes: labour market underperformance of

intra-EU migrants; gendered character of labour mobility; scope for greater role of public institutions in

improving labour market outcomes of migrants and returnees; continued challenge of over-

qualification and benefits and challenges of online data and comparative research in migration

studies.

Key words: Intra-EU mobility, labour market, youth, synthesis, policy


Table of Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 6

1.1 Return migration after the crisis ............................................................................................. 6

1.2 Working conditions and labour market intermediaries ........................................................... 7

1.3 Re-emerging migration patterns: structures and policy lessons ............................................. 8

1.4 Labour market outcomes and integration of youth migrants: comparative view ..................... 9

2. Emerging policy lessons ............................................................................................................ 11

2.1 Anti-discriminatory practices and integration tools are needed for intra-EU mobility as well as

for third-country immigrants ........................................................................................................... 11

2.2 Gender is a salient factor in migration and return ................................................................ 12

2.3 Public institutions can better facilitate labour market integration of migrants and returnees . 12

2.4 Skill matching continues to be a challenge .......................................................................... 12

2.5 Methodological implications ................................................................................................. 13

3. Bibliography ............................................................................................................................... 14

4. Recent titles in this series .......................................................................................................... 15

5. Research Partners ..................................................................................................................... 21

6. Advisory Groups ........................................................................................................................ 22


Abbreviations

A2 The two countries that joined the EU in 2007

A8 The eight countries that joined the EU in 2004

CEE Central and Eastern Europe

CV Curriculum Vitae

EFTA European Free Trade Association

ESS European Social Survey

EU European Union

EU8 The eight countries that joined the EU in 2004

EURES European Employment Services

LFS Labour Force Survey

PES Public Employment Services

UK United Kingdom


1. Introduction This report summarizes the focus, key findings and policy themes of Work Package 6 which

examined the conditions under which intra-EU youth mobility improves labour market chances of

young people. It consisted of interrelated tasks analysing the selectivity of recent intra-EU migration,

migrants’ and returnees’ integration patterns, and the role of labour market actors, policies and

institutions in facilitating better labour market outcomes of migrants and returnees. It covered a

number of receiving and sending countries in Europe that were affected by the 2008-2009 economic

crisis to different degrees.

The research was organized around these four tasks:

Task 6.1. Return migration after the crisis

Task 6.2. Working conditions and labour market intermediaries

Task 6.3. Re-emerging migration patterns: structures and policy lessons

Task 6.4. Labour market outcomes and integration of youth migrants: comparative view

1.1 Return migration after the crisis

This task analysed return migration of young people (15–34 years) in two CEE countries – Estonia

and Slovakia. The countries share a similar history of outmigration, but differ in other important

respects, such as the social policies or the impact of the crisis. The thematic focus of the report was

particularly on the selection of migrants and returnees and the integration trajectories of the returnees

in the home labour markets. The authors used a mixed-method approach to analysing return

migration. They used data from numerous sources, including Labour Force Survey data, online CV

data, administrative data, and interviews with stakeholders and returnees, census data (Estonia) and

web survey data (Slovakia).

The key findings are that foreign work experience generally brings positive benefits to individuals and

is viewed rather positively also by employers in both countries. Young Estonian returnees reap

benefits in terms of higher wages, but no evidence was found of a positive effect of migration and

return on the upward occupational mobility of the returnees. In Slovakia, young individuals with post-

accession foreign work experience are more attractive in the labour market than those without such a

record. Return migrants in Slovakia initially face a higher risk of short-term unemployment, but they

exit unemployment registries at a higher rate than stayers. Estonian returnees that register with the

labour office, however, exit the registry at slower rate than the unemployed in general. Unemployment

of Slovak returnees might be ‘voluntary’ in the sense of taking time to find a job that matches their

skills and preferences (for example in terms of the expected wage). Generally, positive results in

terms of re-integration are facilitated in both countries by the fact that returnees are positively

selected in terms of education.

While employers in both countries perceive returnees mostly positively, it matters what type of

experience the returnees gained with larger benefits for having worked in a matching field or having

developed skills needed in the labour market. In both countries, migrants as well as employers

attribute a set of skills conducive to success in the job search and good performance at work to

foreign work experience. In addition to language, social skills, a positive approach, a problem-solving

attitude and greater cultural sensitivity and tolerance are also assets.


Returnees expect higher salary, which is viewed ambiguously by employers. This might in particular

make matching more difficult in the less skilled and less paid segments of the labour market. Through

higher wage expectations, returnees might exert pressure on wage growth in home economies.

Returnees are more ready to apply for positions advertised abroad than stayers, suggesting

possibilities for re-emigration and circular patterns of mobility. In Slovakia, those migrants who

decided to work abroad due to low salaries in Slovakia had higher chances of facing difficulties in re-

integration into the labour market after returning.

Regarding the role of institutions in the re-integration process, especially high-skilled young returnees

bypass institutions and tend to rely on personal networks and family, while the internet serves as the

key job search tool. Welfare policies are not a driver of return or re-integration in Slovakia and

Estonia, but access to services is considered and evaluated in the migration decision and upon

return, especially with respect to family-related issues (i.e. maternity benefits, health care).

Unemployment benefits provide a framework for possibly better job-skill matching for returnees.

Evidence in the Slovak case study implies that return is typically not driven by worsened labour

market conditions abroad, but a combination of individual-level factors and opportunities in the home

country. From this perspective, the recent financial crisis had more of a contextual rather than

deterministic effect on return decisions of Slovak migrants.

Reference: Masso, J., Kureková, L. M., Tverdostup, M., and Žilinčíková, Z. (2016) Return migration

patterns of young return migrants after the crises in the CEE countries: Estonia and Slovakia, STYLE

Working Papers, WP6.1. CROME, University of Brighton, Brighton.

1.2 Working conditions and labour market intermediaries

This task explored the role of public and private labour market intermediaries (public employment

services (PES), temporary employment agencies) for youth mobility in Europe. Positioned between

employers and job seekers, labour market intermediaries often are involved in transnational recruiting

processes. The report analysed recruiting strategies of employers and job search strategies of young

migrants, thereby also taking account of the working conditions of young migrants.

The research used a comparative design, focusing on the situation of young EU8 migrants in Austria

and young Swedes in Norway. Austria and Norway provide particularly attractive job prospects to

migrants, since in comparison with other countries, youth unemployment rates are low, wage levels

are high and working conditions are good. Furthermore, in both countries, several industries are

characterised by labour shortages.

The research concentrated on three industries with a high demand for labour: tourism, care/health

and high-tech. It draws on 116 interviews, conducted with young migrants, employers, labour market

intermediaries and other experts.

The results indicate that employers in Austria and Norway are interested in recruiting young migrants

from neighbouring EU countries, because they need great numbers of flexible workers. Young

migrants are attracted by good job opportunities – in particular by comparatively high salaries,

attractive career prospects and good working conditions. Further important drivers for young people

to apply for jobs in Austria or Norway are geographical proximity, good language skills and a certain

spirit of adventure. On the other hand, major obstacles for job matching are information deficits,

lacking social networks and insufficient foreign language skills.


Labour market intermediaries can help to overcome barriers within the transnational recruiting/job

search process. These institutions can have several functions. For instance, they provide information

or they serve as matchmakers who manage the entire recruiting process. Some labour market

intermediaries do the complete administrative work for both employers and young migrants.

According to the research findings and for the specific sectors under consideration, mainly private

companies are involved in transnational recruiting/job search processes. In contrast, public labour

market intermediaries (i.e.PES) only play a minor role. The importance of intermediaries varies across

industries and between the two countries. For instance, in Austria, in the 24-hour care sector they are

key players, who recruit women from EU8 countries to work in private households. Many of them get

support by other intermediary agencies located in EU8 countries in order to reach young people who

are willing to work in Austria. In Norway, the role of labour market intermediaries is related to the

worker skill level. They are more important for high-skilled migrants than for the lower skilled.

In both countries, labour market intermediaries have powerful positions in the triangular relationship

between themselves, employers and young migrants. Their impact on working conditions is strong,

but ambivalent. On the one hand, they have the power to secure good working conditions for young

migrants by counselling and controlling the employer. On the other hand, since usually they consider

employers as their main clients, they feel more committed to employers than to migrants. As a

consequence, the position of young migrants vis-à-vis employers and employment agencies is

weaker, bearing the risk of exploitation.

This research underlines the importance of labour market intermediaries for youth migration in

Europe. However, the authors advocate for drawing more attention on the needs of young migrants.

As one strategy to achieve this objective they suggest that public labour market intermediaries should

take a more active role in transnational recruiting/job search and matching processes of young

migrants in Europe.

Reference: Hyggen, C., Ortlieb, R., Sandlie, H.C. & Weiss, S. (2016) East-West and North-North

Migrating Youth and the Role of Labour Market Intermediaries. The Case of Austria and Norway,

STYLE Working Papers, WP6.2. CROME, University of Brighton, Brighton.

1.3 Re-emerging migration patterns: structures and policy

lessons

This task focused on intra-European migration flows from Southern and Eastern Europe to the rest of

Europe. The authors consistently compared Southern and Eastern European migration patterns with

figures on internal European migration from the rest of the EU as well as migration from non-EU

countries. This provided a broader picture of changing and dynamic migrant reservoir in Europe over

time. A combination of secondary sources, analysis of descriptive macro data on migration flows and

econometric analysis of micro data on labour market outcome of migrants with an emphasis on youth

were used.

The descriptive analysis using aggregate country data suggested that even though migration from

non-European countries is massive, the intra-European flows from Southern and Eastern Europe are

non-negligible with comparable emigration rates and differing trends and composition in the post-war

period. In the past, geographical proximity seems to lead migrants to choose nearby host countries


more than countries further away, such as Spanish inflows to France or Polish inflows to Germany. In

2000s such traditional trends seem to change, whereby Spanish migrants head rather to the UK and

Polish migrants go to Ireland.

With regards to the discourse on the Eastern enlargement of European Union, the analysis suggested

that rather than linking emigration from Eastern Europe to mainly EU membership, empirical evidence

points to a much more continuous process of opening since the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989, which

was further accelerated by the EU accession. In terms of skill composition of intra-European migrants,

review of post-war European guest-worker programs shows that such schemes mainly targeted low-

skilled, male, and relatively young workers from Southern Europe, Turkey, Yugoslavia, and Maghreb

until the mid-1970s. Compared to such inflows, the next decades have witnessed a shift in terms of

migrant types: Europe has largely received family and political migrants (asylum seekers and/or

refugees) until 1990s. Only since 2000s has high-skilled labour migration gained more prominence in

Europe.

The econometric analysis using pooled micro data from a Europe-wide survey, which allows studying

the youth migrants and nationals in more detail, suggested that observable characteristics explain

part of the differential labour market performance of migrants. In particular, the results highlighted that

migrants from Eastern and Southern Europe display important differences vis-à-vis natives in certain

labour outcomes such as employment, unemployment, and over-qualification at occupation held,

even after taking into account differences in demographic and socio-economic characteristics. The

unexplained differences could be due to unobserved heterogeneity among individuals and/or

differential treatment in the host country labour markets in the form of discrimination.

Reference: Akgüç, M., & Beblavý, M. (2016) From South or East? Re-emerging European Migration

Patterns and Labor Market Outcomes STYLE Working Papers, WP6.3. CROME, University of

Brighton, Brighton.

1.4 Labour market outcomes and integration of youth

migrants: comparative view

Recent youth migrants are at a double-disadvantage in the labour market. They face young peoples’

education to employment transition challenges as well as difficulties of foreign labour market entrants.

This task focused on three receiving countries, Germany, Norway and the UK, and investigated the

labour market integration of recent young EU citizen migrants with a specific focus on the comparison

between migrants from Central and Eastern Europe and Southern Europe. The authors investigated

the degree of integration, the relationship with migrants’ country of origin, also given variation in

application of transitional measures across the receiving countries and sending country groups, and

the potential effect of the post-2008 economic crisis.

Using national Labour Force Survey data from 2004/2005-2012/2014, the report finds a relatively high

degree of integration in terms of employment for intra-EU migrants – more so in the UK and Norway

than in Germany though – particularly compared to third country nationals, contrasted by integration

into poor quality jobs, including atypical employment. While there is a surprising similarity in the

labour market integration of young EU migrant citizen across Germany, Norway, and the UK, a

marked stratification by country-of-origin associations exist in terms of working conditions,

qualification-occupation mismatches and wages. In particular, irrespective of transition regimes or EU


or EFTA membership, recent EU youth migrants labour market outcomes are stratified by their region

of origin, with CEE (A8), Bulgarian and Romanian (A2) youth doing worst, EU-South youth taking a

middle position1, and youth from the remaining EU countries doing better than their native peers.

Notably this stratification can be observed for these migrant groups without investigating their more

detailed demographic characteristics.

In terms of employment quality, youth migrants from Northern and Western Europe show similar

outcomes to the respective nationals and thereby fare substantially better than those from CEE (A2

and A8) and EU-South countries and in particular third country nationals. The three case studies also

contain evidence that CEE intra EU migrants fare worse on many employment quality indicators than

EU-South intra EU migrants. No substantial differences pre-/post-crisis seem to exist for the UK. For

Germany some evidence suggests that transitional arrangements had both quantitative and

qualitative impacts on labour market integration. For Norway, the findings suggest a strengthening of

labour market segmentation. Finally, young EU migrant citizens have a lower probability of claiming

unemployment benefits, which potentially suggest a poor secondary labour market integration and

higher vulnerability to employment risks.

Two positive findings of the study are that young EU migrant citizens are rather well integrated in the

respective labour markets when it comes to employment, albeit with the exception of the third country

youth group. The second positive observation is that the economic crisis seems not negatively relate

to young EU migrant citizens’ labour market integration. In the German case the post-2008 period

even saw an improvement of the situation for youth from Central and Eastern Europe in some of the

indicators in line with the German labour market having been relatively resilient to the economic crisis.

Reference: Leschke, J., Seeleib-Kaiser, M., Spreckelsen T., Hyggen, C. & Sandlie, H.C. (2016)

Labour market outcomes and integration of recent youth migrants from Central-Eastern and Southern

Europe in Germany, Norway and Great Britain. STYLE Working Papers, WP6.4. CROME, University

of Brighton, Brighton.

1 The Norwegian data does not include usable information on EU-South migrants.


2. Emerging policy lessons The four research tasks altogether converge on a set of policy themes that we identify below in

greater detail.

2.1 Anti-discriminatory practices and integration tools are

needed for intra-EU mobility as well as for third-country

immigrants

Confirming other research about labour market performance of migrants, this work package finds

further evidence about worse labour market outcomes of intra-EU and third country migrants in

particular (Task 6.3 and 6.4). We contribute with showing internal variation in the performance. For

example, recent EU youth migrants labour market outcomes in the quality of employment and wages

are stratified by their region of origin, with CEE (A8), Bulgarian and Romanian (A2) youth doing worst,

EU-South youth taking a middle position, and youth from the remaining EU countries doing better

than their native peers. This might reflect the fact that policies continue to be designed in a way that

migrant workers have suboptimal social conditions and limited civil rights (transitional arrangements,

temporary working schemes for third-country nationals). We find that labour market intermediaries are

not necessarily neutral and serve interests of employers rather than of migrants. They might

contribute to leaving young migrants in jobs with poor working conditions: low pay for long working

hours, short term contracts etc, rather than counterbalancing this phenomenon.

Among policy tools to address the existing labour market segmentation of CEE migrants in particular,

we suggest to:

strengthen the role of public labour market intermediaries

increase monitoring and regulation of private intermediaries to secure good working conditions

for young migrants

improve career and training opportunities to help young migrants to develop their skills at work

and to participate to training programmes that support them to get access to jobs that fit to

their skills and interests

consider providing financial support to young migrants (see Box 1 for best practice example)

Box 1: Example of Best Practices: Jobbresan (The job travel)

In response to soaring youth unemployment in some Swedish municipalities an innovative project was launched in

collaboration between the municipality, the public employment service and the social security administration. The project

was coordinated by the Nordic council of ministers. Focusing on the needs of the young unemployed a model called

Söderhamnsmodellen was developed, consisting of three steps aimed at removing the main obstacles faced by young

labour migrants from Sweden to Norway: a lack of capital and work experience, lack of networks in the country of

destination and advice on how to find work and place to live in Norway. The project recruited long-term unemployed living

off unemployment benefits or social assistance in Sweden. The young unemployed were offered some initial courses in

writing CVs, applying for jobs, how to perform in a job interview and general training in Norwegian language and culture.

After a short period of training they were sent by bus to the Norwegian capital Oslo. In Oslo they were offered shared

housing with expenses paid for a month. During the first days they were instructed on practicalities related to bank-

accounts, work permit and job-search and invited to an introductory meeting with local representatives from the labour

union providing information on rights and obligations in the Norwegian labour market. Experiences from the participants

were positive, they enjoyed being together as a group sharing information and experiences, they had readily available

assistance to assess job-offers and contracts etc. As a result, a large share found jobs within a short period of time.


2.2 Gender is a salient factor in migration and return

Youth labour mobility and return is a gendered phenomenon. For example, research about labour

market intermediaries (Task 6.2.) found that young men are somewhat more mobile than young

women. Furthermore, we found the typical gender segregation between different industries with a

larger number of women working in reproductive professions – as 24-hour caregivers in Austria or as

nurses in Norway – and with a large share of men working in technical fields. In the 24-hour care

sector in Austria, there is also an obvious vertical gender segregation: most of the caregivers from

EU8 countries are women while many of the intermediating persons are men.

The analysis of return migration (Task 6.1.) finds that foreign work experience and returns might

contribute to decreasing the gender pay gap in the home labour market as evidenced by the Estonian

case. The benefit of return migration for the Estonian labour market materializes through decreasing

the gender wage disparity particularly among the youth. It might be worth further investigating the

question of temporary intra-EU mobility as a vehicle for decreasing gender inequalities and studying

the conditions under which this effect takes place.

Policies should have these gender issues in mind and adjust policies to acknowledge that gender

might be a further intervening factor in migration process and in returning to home country that

significantly affects choices and alternatives in destination countries and in the country of origin when

returning.

2.3 Public institutions can better facilitate labour market

integration of migrants and returnees

We find that the role of public institutions in improving labour market integration of migrants and

returnees could be enhanced. First, labour market intermediaries, like the local public employment

services or educational institutions, could play a more crucial role as information providers for youth

that is interested in moving abroad to get a job. We suggest to foster international collaboration of the

public employment services, e.g. in form of the network of EURES that was established for this

purpose. Furthermore, social media should be considered as an important communication tool to

reach young people. Second, there is scope for public institutions to provide better assistance upon

return and to facilitate integration. For example, return migrants can become a target category in

labour offices. Importantly, inequalities exist among returnees and not all returnees are on an equal

footing in terms of their abilities. While many returnees circumvent formal institutions, there are still

many who approach them and can be reached by effective policy that they most likely also need. In

particular, returnees disadvantaged in terms of gender, age or ethnicity might be of more need of

assistance from public intermediaries in their re-integration process.

2.4 Skill matching continues to be a challenge

Over-qualification of intra-EU migrants and poor matching continues to be a challenge. We find that

the implications of skill mismatch are important. For returnees it matters what type of experience

migrants gain abroad, whether it is relevant to the field and whether it results in a demonstrable set of

hard and soft skills. From this perspective, tools facilitating the matching of migrants to jobs, such as

EURES, employment agencies or well-designed job portals can be very useful. Matching should be

encouraged by decreasing information asymmetries in intra-EU mobility.


A further focus to enhance matching should be given to improving language skills of migrants.

Insufficient languages skills make it difficult to get in contact with people in the country of destination

in order to have better access to housing. Programmes that help to improve language skills and to

foster transnational networks are helpful to overcome obstacles in this stage. An increased focus on

intra-EU exchange during education may be one way, subsidised language courses or increased

opportunities for financial support for participating in language training are further forms of facilitating

language skill development.

The non-recognition of foreign qualification and experience and the above mentioned insufficient

language skills may force young migrant to take-up jobs below their skill level. This may negatively

affect matching quality as well as work contracts and working conditions for the young migrants. Here

again, public (or private) labour market intermediaries or labour unions could be mediators that stand

between employers and employees that negotiate working contracts and working conditions. These

services could be set up as a web-based service or as an actual contact point for migrants. Continued

efforts to standardise educational criteria and to develop a European dictionary of education and

grades may be another strategy to help migrants to get adequate positions and employers to get

employees and workers with the right qualifications and motivation.

At the same time, the research findings indicate that intra-EU wage differentials may present an

obstacle for young people from Eastern Europe to develop professional careers. For instance, young

women from Slovakia working as 24-hour caregivers in private households in Austria receive

comparatively high wages, but these jobs do not offer long-term career development opportunities.

Thus, it might be important that young people have opportunities to put less emphasis on current

income but to invest into professional training opening up long-term career prospects instead.

2.5 Methodological implications

Our research has several methodological implications. First, across research tasks we faced

difficulties with the suitability and quality of representative datasets for migration research: samples

are often small and representative datasets and data bases might not capture the large variety of

existing migration patterns: e.g. commuting, seasonal working, student working, short-term

employment, posting etc. For example, 24-hours care workers usually work in two-week cycles with

the primary residence in their home country. Thus, they might not appear in official statistics of the

receiving country even if their number is considerably high. Furthermore, the analysis of integration

patterns of young migrants most likely included a ‘better integrated’ group of recent migrants and

those with sufficiently good language skills to participate in the survey. There is therefore a great

need for better data about migration.

Second, given the limitations of representative datasets (LFS, ESS), we showed that new sources of

data, such as online data (online CVs, web surveys) can be used to analyse labour mobility from

perspectives that representative dataset do not allow. Third, our research has shown that

comparative frameworks both from the sending and receiving country perspective can help us

understand the role of institutional or macroeconomic factors, or find important differences across

countries and over time that help us to better understand underlying causes and consequences of

intra-EU mobility. Fourth, because of the diversity of migration patterns the combination of qualitative

and quantitative methods is very useful and it enables to capture a more holistic picture of youth

migration in Europe.


3. Bibliography

Akgüç, M., & Beblavý, M. (2016) From South or East? Re-emerging European Migration Patterns and

Labor Market Outcomes STYLE Working Papers, WP6.3. CROME, University of Brighton,

Brighton.

Hyggen, C., Ortlieb, R., Sandlie, H.C. & Weiss, S. (2016) East-West and North-North Migrating Youth

and the Role of Labour Market Intermediaries. The Case of Austria and Norway, STYLE

Working Papers, WP6.2. CROME, University of Brighton, Brighton.

Masso, J., Kureková, L. M., Tverdostup, M., and Žilinčíková, Z. (2016) Return migration patterns of

young return migrants after the crises in the CEE countries: Estonia and Slovakia, STYLE

Working Papers, STYLE-WP 6.1. CROME, University of Brighton, Brighton.

Leschke, J., Seeleib-Kaiser, M., Spreckelsen T., Hyggen, C. & Sandlie, H.C. (2016) Labour market

outcomes and integration of recent youth migrants from Central-Eastern and Southern Europe

in Germany, Norway and Great Britain. STYLE Working Papers, WP6.4. CROME, University

of Brighton, Brighton.


4. Recent titles in this series Available at: http://www.style-research.eu/publications/working-papers

WP3 POLICY PERFORMANCE

Key Indicators and Drivers of Youth Unemployment

Hadjivassiliou, Kirchner Sala and Speckesser (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP3.1 Indicators and Drivers of Youth Unemployment

The Effectiveness of Policies to combat Youth Unemployment

Gonzalez Carreras, Kirchner Sala and Speckesser (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP3.2 Policies to combat Youth Unemployment

Policy Performance and Evaluation: Qualitative Country Case Studies

Eichhorst, Hadjivassiliou and Wozny (eds.)(2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP3.3 Policy Performance and Evaluation – Synthesis Report

Country Reports

Policy Performance and Evaluation: Germany

Eichhorst, Wozny and Cox (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP3.3 Performance Germany

Policy Performance and Evaluation: Estonia

Eamets and Humal (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP3.3 Performance Estonia

Policy Performance and Evaluation: Spain

González-Menendez, Mato, Gutierrez, Guillen, Cueto and Tejero (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP3.3 Performance Spain

Policy Performance and Evaluation: Netherlands

Bekker, van de Meer, Muffels and Wilthagen (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP3.3 Performance Netherlands

Policy Performance and Evaluation: Poland

Ślezak and Szopa (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP3.3 Performance Poland

Policy Performance and Evaluation: Sweden

Wadensjö (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP3.3 Performance Sweden

Policy Performance and Evaluation: Turkey

Gökşen, Yükseker, Kuz and Öker (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP3.3 Performance Turkey


Policy Performance and Evaluation: United Kingdom

Hadjivassiliou, Tassinari, Speckesser, Swift and Bertram (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP3.3 Performance UK

WP4 POLICY TRANSFER

Barriers to and triggers of innovation and knowledge transfer

Petmesidou and González-Menéndez (eds.)(2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP4.1 Barriers to and triggers of policy innovation and knowledge transfer

Country Reports

Barriers to and triggers for innovation and knowledge transfer in Belgium

Martellucci and Marconi (2015)

STYLE-D4.1 Country Report Belgium

Barriers to and triggers of policy innovation and knowledge transfer in Denmark

Carstensen and Ibsen (2015)

STYLE-D4.1 Country Report Denmark

Barriers to and triggers for innovation and knowledge transfer in Spain

González-Menéndez, Guillén, Cueto, Gutiérrez, Mato and Tejero (2015)

STYLE-D4.1 Country Report Spain

Barriers to and triggers for innovation and knowledge transfer in France

Smith, Toraldo and Pasquier (2015)

STYLE-D4.1 Country Report France

Barriers to and triggers for innovation and knowledge transfer in Greece

Petmesidou and Polyzoidis (2015)

STYLE-D4.1 Country Report Greece

Barriers to and triggers for innovation and knowledge transfer in the Netherlands

Bekker, van der Meer and Muffels (2015)

STYLE-D4.1 Country Report Netherlands

Barriers to and triggers of policy innovation and knowledge transfer in Slovakia

Veselkova (2015)

STYLE-D4.1 Country Report Slovakia

Barriers to and Triggers for Innovation and Knowledge Transfer in Turkey

Gökşen, Yükseker, Kuz and Öker (2015)

STYLE-D4.1 Country Report Turkey


Barriers to and Triggers for Innovation and Knowledge Transfer in the UK

Hadjivassiliou, Tassinari and Swift (2015)

STYLE-D4.1 Country Report UK

Policy learning and innovation processes Petmesidou and González-Menéndez (2016) STYLE Working Paper WP4.2 Policy learning and innovation processes drawing on EU and national policy frameworks on youth – Synthesis Report

Vulnerable Youth and Gender Mainstreaming Gökşen, Filiztekin, Smith, Çelik, Öker and Kuz (2016) STYLE Working Paper WP4.3 Vulnerable Youth & Gender in Europe

WP5 MISMATCH: SKILLS AND EDUCATION

A Comparative Time Series Analysis of Overeducation in Europe: Is there a common policy

approach?

McGuinness, Bergin and Whelan (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP5.1 Overeducation in Europe

Transitions and labour market flows – who moves and how? Flek et al. (2016) STYLE Working Paper WP5.2 Youth Transitions and Labour Market Flows

Are student workers crowding out low-skilled youth?

Beblavý, Fabo, Mýtna Kureková, and Žilinčíková (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP5.3 Are student workers crowding out the low skilled youth

Recruitment Methods & Educational Provision effects on Graduate Over-Education and Over-

Skilling

McGuinness, Bergin and Whelan (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP 5.4 Report Recruitment Methods

WP6 MISMATCH: MIGRATION

Return Migration after the crisis Slovakia and Estonia Masso, Mýtna Kureková, Tverdostup and Žilinčíková (2016) STYLE Working Paper WP6.1 Return migration patterns of young return migrants after the crisis in the CEE countries: Estonia and Slovakia

Working Conditions and labour market intermediaries in Norway and Austria Hyggen, Ortlieb, Sandlie and Weiss (2016) Style Working Paper WP6.2 Working conditions and labour market intermediaries Norway and Austria


Re-emerging migration patterns: structures and policy lessons. Akgüç and Beblavý (2015) STYLE Working Paper WP6.3 Re-emerging Migration Patterns: Structures and Policy Lessons

Comparing Labour Market outcomes and integration of youth migrants Leschke et al. (2016) STYLE Working Paper WP6.4 Labour market outcomes and integration of recent youth migrants from Central-Eastern and Southern Europe in Germany, Norway and Great Britain

WP7 SELF-EMPLOYMENT AND BUSINESS START UPS

Business Start-Ups and Youth Self-Employment: A Policy Literature Overview

Sheehan and McNamara (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP7.1 Business Start-Ups Youth Self-Employment Policy Literature Review

Country Reports

Business Start-Ups and Youth Self-Employment in Germany

Ortlieb and Weiss (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP7.1 Germany

Business Start-Ups and Youth Self-Employment in Estonia

Masso and Paes (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP7.1 Estonia

Business Start-Ups and Youth Self-Employment in Spain

González Menéndez and Cueto (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP7.1 Spain

Business Start-Ups and Youth Self-Employment in Ireland

Sheehan and Mc Namara (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP7.1 Ireland

Business Start-Ups and Youth Self-Employment in Poland

Pocztowski, Buchelt and Pauli (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP7.1 Poland

Business Start-Ups and Youth Self-Employment in the UK

Hinks, Fohrbeck and Meager (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP7.1 UK

Mapping patterns of self-employment

Masso, Tverdostup, Sheehan, McNamara, Ortlieb, Weiss, Pocztowski, Buchelt, Pauli, González,

Cueto, Hinks, Meager and Fohrbeck (2016)

STYLE Working Paper WP7.2 Mapping Patterns for Self Employment


WP8 FAMILY DRIVERS

Work-poor and work-rich families: Influence on youth labour market outcomes

Berloffa, Filandri, Matteazzi, Nazio, O’Reilly, Villa and Zuccotti (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP8.1 Work-poor and work-rich families

Family Strategies to cope with poor labour market outcomes Nazio et al. (2016) STYLE Working Paper WP8.2 Family strategies to cope with poor labour market outcomes

Leaving and returning to the parental home during the economic crisis

Gökşen, Yükseker, Filiztekin, Öker, Kuz, Mazzotta and Parisi (2016)

STYLE Working Paper WP8.3 Leaving and returning to the parental home during the economic crisis

WP9 ATTITUDES AND VALUES

Value system shared by young generations towards work and family

Hajdu and Sik (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP9.1 Searching for gaps: are work values of the younger generations

changing?

The impact of youth unemployment on social capital

O’Higgins and Stimolo (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP9.2 Youth unemployment and social capital: An experimental approach

Aspirations of vulnerable young people in foster care

Hart, Stubbs, Plexousakis, Georgiadi and Kourkoutas (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP9.3 Aspirations of vulnerable youth in foster care

WP 10 FLEXICURITY

Mapping Flexicurity Performance in the Face of the Crisis: Key Indicators and Drivers of Youth

Unemployment

Eamets, Beblavý, Bheemaiah, Finn, Humal, Leschke, Maselli and Smith (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP10.1 Mapping flexibility and security performance in the face of the crisis

Tracing the interface between numerical flexibility and income security for European youth

during the economic crisis

Leschke and Finn (2016)

STYLE Working Paper WP10.1a Tracing the interface between numerical flexibility and income

security for European youth during the economic crisis


Youth School-To-Work Transitions: from Entry Jobs to Career Employment

Berloffa, Matteazzi, Mazzolini, Sandor and Villa (2015)

STYLE Working Paper WP10.2 Youth School-To-Work Transitions: from Entry Jobs to Career

Employment

Balancing Flexibility and Security in Europe: the Impact on Young People’s Insecurity and Subjective Well-being Russell, Leschke and Smith (2015) STYLE Working Paper WP10.3 Balancing Flexibility and Security in Europe: the Impact on Young People’s Insecurity and Subjective Well-being

Flexicurity Policies to integrate youth before and after the crisis Smith and Villa (2016) STYLE Working Paper WP10.4 Flexicurity Policies to integrate youth before and after the crisis


5. Research Partners

1. University of Brighton – BBS CROME – United Kingdom

2. Institute for Employment Studies – United Kingdom

3. Institute for the Study of Labor – Germany

4. Centre for European Policy Studies – Belgium

5. TARKI Social Research Institute – Hungary

6. University of Trento – Italy

7. National University of Ireland Galway – Republic of Ireland

8. Democritus University of Thrace – Greece

9. University of Oxford – United Kingdom

10. Economic & Social Research Institute – Republic of Ireland

11. University of Salerno – Italy

12. University of Oviedo – Spain

13. University of Tartu – Estonia

14. Cracow University of Economics – Poland

15. Slovak Governance Institute – Slovakia

16. Metropolitan University Prague – Czech Republic

17. Grenoble School of Management – France

18. University of Tilburg – Netherlands

19. University of Graz – Austria

20. Copenhagen Business School – Denmark

21. Norwegian Social Research – Norway

22. Swedish Institute for Social Research – Sweden

23. Koç University Social Policy Centre – Turkey

24. University of Turin – Italy

25. EurActiv – Belgium

http://www.style-research.eu/research-organisations


6. Advisory Groups

Consortium Advisory Network

Business Europe

www.businesseurope.eu

ETUI: European Trade Union Institute

www.etui.org

European Youth Forum

www.youthforum.org

European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions

www.eurofound.europa.eu

ILO: International Labour Office

www.ilo.org

OECD: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development

www.oecd.org

OSE: Observatoire Sociale Européen

www.ose.be

SOLIDAR: European network of NGOs working to advance social justice in Europe

www.solidar.org

EurActiv

www.euractiv.com

European Commission, DG Employment, Social Affairs & Inclusion

http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=1036

Local Advisory Boards

including employers, unions, policy makers and non-government organisations

www.style-research.eu/project-advisors/local-advisory-boards/

d 6.5- policy synthesis and integrative report on mismatch ... · d 6.5 3– policy synthesis and...

Documents