eporumb@euro.ubbcluj.ro 1

MIGRATION AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC COHESION IN THE ENLARGED EUROPEAN UNION”: LESSONS FROM

ROMANIAN REGION

PhD. Elena Marilena PorumbFaculty of European StudiesBabes Bolyai University Cluj Napoca Romania

Wiessman Institute Toronto 30th April 1st May 2010

Content:

• Why and where migration take place

In Romania

• What mobility,employment opportunity and external migration

• What to do?

• Best practice for Romanian Inclusion Strategy for Roma People

Why the migration take place (Ciuca, Why the migration take place (Ciuca, Pirciog 2008)Pirciog 2008)

• Year by year, workers, with or without their families, temporary or even definitely choose to move to other more developed regions or countries in order to reduce the gaps between their employment and earnings related opportunities in between origin and destination regions/countries

• This is also the case of Romania which started, at the beginning of this decade, to experience increasing migration flows for other European countries, while internal migration remained insignificant

• Inequalities in terms of employment opportunities, as well as wages and quality of jobs are the most important driving forces of migration.

• At the beginning, migration was considered a “relief” for the national labour market unable to generate new jobs for those affected by restructuring, the recent years came with the first hints on the possible negative effects of unmanaged migration: skill shortages, skill gaps, depopulated areas, etc.

• Considered as a survival strategy at the beginning, now, migration for employment abroad tends to become a “life style” for many Romanians, in the common sense of the word

Context

• Estimated (roughly) migration outflow: 2 million working age people:– this is 10% of population; – this is over 25% of the

labor force.• Affects both unskilled

(mostly) and skilled

• Magnitude of outflows suggests that there are important push factors at work in Romania

Role of various factors vis-à-vis difficulty in hiring people (% of firms)

73

12

42 42 42

13

86

24

35

48

55

17

76

11

33 31

59

11

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Labor forcemigration

Difficult workconditions intheir field ofexpertise

Wage level intheir field of

expertise

Marketcompetition

Training ofgraduates notaccording to

market demand

Other factor

Textile industry

Constructions

Hotels, restaurants

Source: Serban and Toth for Soros Foundation (2007)

Investigating and addressing push factors is important

for sustaining convergence and productivity growth

• Romania converges in income with EU 15

• Most income growth comes from productivity growth

GDP per person employed (EU-27=100, PPS)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Romania Bulgar ia Latvia Li thuania Estonia Poland Slovakia Czech

Republ i c

Hungary Slovenia

2001 2007

EU-27 = 100

Source: EUROSTAT

People move abroad, but much less within Romania, towards meeting labor demand

• low entry into employment, including for young;

• high young discouraged worker effects;

• low reallocation across sectors and occupations;

• high LTU;• low scores in international

education tests (ex. PISA).

Unemployment rates for age group 15 - 24 years (%)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Lithuania Estonia Latvia Slovenia CzechRepublic

EU-27 Hungary Bulgaria Romania Slovakia Poland

(%)

Source: EUROSTAT

Work emigration rate by counties, 2002

(Data source: NIS, 2002 census. Own computations. Data series were segmented by natural brake method). Graph published in Dumitru Sandu, “Community selectivity of temporary emigration from Romania “ in Romanian Journal of Population Studies, 1, 2007

Declining unemployment and increased job vacancy rates, also, gave rise to

worries about labour and skill shortages.

Tabel : Evolution of unemployment and migration for the period 2000-2007

Source : National Institute of Statistics

Therefore, it appears likely that continued labour shortages are going to constrain the functioning of the Romanian economy and nevertheless the reach of

cohesion.

Unemployment rate NE Region

05

1015202530

Years

Pe

rce

nta

ge TOTAL

NORTH - EAST

Bacau

Botosani

Iasi

Neamt

Suceava

Vaslui

Regional paradox

Typical temporary emigration composition: source D. Sandu, 2008 men – constructorswomen - housekeepers

2913 12 12 14 19

46 4850

25

56

04

571

63

3342

33 26

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

1990-1995

1996-2001

2002-2006

1990-1995

1996-2001

2002-2006

women men

other

housekeeping

constructions

agriculture

Data source:

Dumitru Sandu (coord.) Locuirea temporara in strainatate, FSD, Bucharest, 2006. For Englih version see http://www.osf.ro/en/program_articol.php?articol=34

Propensity towards mobility in RomaniaPropensity towards mobility in Romania (Pirciog, Ciuca, et a)

• Most Romanians are opened for occupational mobility in order to attain better employment - more than half of the respondents declare that they would change their occupation for a better job, while more than a third of them say that they prefer unsecured jobs with high payment as against secured jobs with low payment

• Also, almost half of the investigated individuals seem to be opened to internal migration and one third to external migration for employment purposes.

Propensity towards mobility in Romania (%)

48,2

46,2

34,9

53,3

34,9

38,8

52,3

29,0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

I would prefer a secured job with low paymentas against an unsecured job with high

payment

I would work in another locality for a better job

I would work in another country for a better job

I would change my occupation for a better job

agreee disagree

Employment opportunities and external Employment opportunities and external

migration (1)migration (1) (Ciuca et a, 2008)

• Insufficient income and lack of jobs represent the most important motivations of the Romanian migrants

• Most migrants left the country due to insufficient earnings for the daily living or for a decent life

• more than 20% of migrants declare that lack of available jobs pushed them to migration. In fact, those migrating for urban areas are those looking for better jobs in terms of wages, while those migrating for rural areas are looking for any kind of jobs

• better working conditions abroad represent the second reason for migration for more than 30% of the migrants. Moreover, Romanian migrants who are currently working abroad left from marginal positions on the Romanian labour market such as: daily worker, unemployed or self employed.

Most important 2 reasons for which Romanian workers migrated

abroad after 1st of January 2002 (%)

36,64

21,12

16,96

8,32

5,6

7,2

4,16

20

10,7

7,2

17,5

9,1

4,6

30,9

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

insufficient earnings fora daily leaving

insufficient earnings fora decent life

I couldn't find availablejobs in Romania

insufficient earnings tobuild a way in life

I joint my spouse/family

others

working conditions arebetter abroad

reason 1 reason 2

Migration still a problem now? ( Ciuca Pirciog 2008)

while employment opportunities motivate Romanians to migrate abroad, they don’t play a key role in driving internal migration

Moreover, rural areas display higher flows of external migration and lower flows of internal migration

Romania needs to develop a better management of its migration flows, including policies for immigration and support for the returning migrants’ integration. It is clear that Romanians’ migration in the years to come will depend to the governments’ capabilities to address development gaps and inequalities while increasing the access of vulnerable groups to employment and other opportunities

Therefore, only economic development and reduction of the development gaps between regions and areas of residence coupled with improving information on employment opportunities will increase internal migration to the detriment of external one

Rates of temporary emigration from Romania by social and demographic characteristics, 2002

54.226.8

24.423.323.0

19.7

17.316.115.8

14.814.2

13.313.3

12.412.1

11.010.910.8

10.39.79.69.59.4

9.3

8.88.78.68.68.5

7.87.6

6.76.6

6.05.7

3.62.92.52.5

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0

Occupation Elementary occupationsOccupation Crafts and related trades workers

age 20-29 y.oldReligion Cahtolic

Ethnicity other ethn.minorityReligion Neoprotestant

age 30-39 y.old.Education Secondary ,technical track compl

Ethnicity HungarianReligion Greek Catholic

Religion ProtestantEducation Secondary ,general track completed

Occupation Service workers ,shop salesMarital stat .Divorced

Sex Male

Education Some college completedEducation University completed

Ethnicity GypsyMarital stat .Single/never married

Residence Urban age 40-49y.old

Marital stat .Married Occupation Plant and machine operators

NATIONAL RATE

Residence RuralEducation Post-secondary technical completed

Occupation ProfessionalsEthnicity Romanian

Occupation Skilled agric .workers

Religion Orthodox age 15-19y.old

Sex FemaleEducation Primary completed

Occupation Legislators , senior officials ,managers Occupation Technicians

Occupation ClerksEducation Less than primary completed

age 50and over y.oldMarital stat .Widowed

high migration propensity

very high migration propensity

upper middle migration propensity

lower middle migration propensity

low migration propensity

Data source: Minnesota Population Center. Integrated Public Use Microdata Series-International: Version 2.0. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2006, http://international.ipums.org, sample of 10% out of the 2002 Population and housing census of Romania. Sample volume 2137967 persons. Migration figures refers to persons that were abroad of less than one year, approximately 200 thou.

Graph published in Dumitru Sandu, “Community selectivity of temporary emigration from Romania “ in Romanian Journal of Population Studies, 1, 2007

Conclusions

Migration still a problem now? ( Ciuca Pirciog 2008)

while employment opportunities motivate Romanians to migrate abroad, they don’t play a key role in driving internal migration

Moreover, rural areas display higher flows of external migration and lower flows of internal migration

Romania needs to develop a better management of its migration flows, including policies for immigration and support for the returning migrants’ integration. It is clear that Romanians’ migration in the years to come will depend to the governments’ capabilities to address development gaps and inequalities while increasing the access of vulnerable groups to employment and other opportunities

Therefore, only economic development and reduction of the development gaps between regions and areas of residence coupled with improving information on employment opportunities will increase internal migration to the detriment of external one

53

32

23

43

21 18

21

2 6

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

area of low emigrationexperience - Alexandria,

Teleorman (N=127)

area of high emigrationexperience - Focsani,

Vrancea (N=183)

NA

thought not toreturn

thought to stayshorter

thought to staylonger

no, I did notchange my mind

“Did it change your intention to stay abroad during your stay there?” (source D. Sandu 2008

Data source: “Living temporary abroad” survey of Open Society Foundation- Gallup Organisation, August 2006, regional component of the survey. For sample description Dumitru Sandu (coord.) Locuirea temporara in strainatate, FSD, Bucharest 2006,pp.12-15. The interviewees were migrants from Alexandria and Focsani areas during their August 2006 holiday short return in Romania

The migration experience of the origin region counts for the dynamics of the intention to return:

•People from high emigration areas, like Focsani, are more inclined to modify their initial plans as to stay longer abroad

•People fromareas of low emigration experience are more inclined to keep their original plans as to return home

What to do? 1. Continue to improve labor market flexibility to stimulate mobility

source Catalin Pauna WB Romania

Employing workers, 2007 (global rank)

55 57

75 78 81

96

124

145156

CzechRepublic

Bulgaria Slovakia Poland Hungary Latvia Lithuania Romania Estonia

Czech Republic Bulgaria Slovakia Poland Hungary Latvia Lithuania Romania Estonia

Employing workers in Romania, 2005 - 2007

62

33

6

62

33

6

66

31

8

Rigidity of Employment Index Nonwage labor cost (% of salary) Firing costs (weeks of wages)

2005 2006 2007

What to do? 2. Reduce transaction costs for businesses to stimulate innovation and entry

source Catalin Pauna WB Romania

Paying taxes, 2007 (global rank)

20

31

71

88

113122 125 127

134

Latvia Estonia Lithuania Bulgaria CzechRepublic

Slovakia Poland Hungary Romania

Paying taxes in Romania, 2005 - 2007

96

193

49.5

96

193

49.5

96

202

46.9

Payments (number) Time (hours) Total tax rate (% profit)

2005 2006 2007

What to do? 3. Improve infrastructure/ transportation source Catalin Pauna WB Romania

• In the short run, it is important to bring unskilled people from rural to growth poles;

• Infrastructure needs substantial upgrading;• Transport (and housing?) subsidies by rich

municipalities and employers to be considered;• Important role to be played by municipalities.

What to do? 4. Pay substantially more attention to education and skills upgrade

source Catalin Pauna WB Romania

• Low wage competitiveness erodes fast;• Access to education remains a problem in rural;• Quality and relevance of education for labor

demand needs to be addressed;• Link education performance to resources;

• More emphasis on life long training.

Romania’s Current Account Deficits, Remittances and FDIs2005 - 2008 (LAzea, 2008)

0

5

10

15

2004 2005 2006 2007

5.099 6.883 10.156 16.950

2.972

4.845

3.593

4.900

Years

EUR billion

5.1275.237

8.723

7.185

Legend: : CA deficits : current transfers (remittances), net : FDIs, net

a) - the altruistic model (Becker, 1974; Stark, 1995): the emigrant cares about the

well-being of family members left behind, but education has no effect once we

control for the heigher incomes it allows;

b) - the exchange theory (Bernheim, Shleifer Summers, 1985; Cox, 1987): the

emigrant makes transfers in return for (education) services, but remittances are a

decreasing function of education;

c) - the family loan arrangement model (Cox and Jimenez, 1992; Poirine, 1997):

remittances represent an implicit loan repayment; more educated migrants remit

more, even after controlling for the positive correlation of income and education.

Can the brain drain be compensated by larger remittancesfrom skilled emigrants (Lazea 2008)

How are the migrants sending their remittances to Romania Lazea 2008

• The modern channels (e-transfer) are gaining ground. A system devised by Societe Generale for its clients, covering emigration countries (15 from Europe, 11 from Africa) + 4 French “DomTom“. Migrants can send money home using a fix or mobile phone.

• Transfers are secured (through a number of codes), can be made from account to account or from account to cash, and execution takes 2 days + (depending on country).

• A study by Dana Diminescu et. al. (2008) covers e-transfers done in this way by migrants from Romania, Algeria, Morocco and Senegal, for 2004 - 2007, implying 7224 transfers done by 1383 persons.

Results Romania Algeria Morocco Senegal

Average number of transfers 6.8 2.9 5.0 6.4

Average volume of transfers

sent by a person (euros)

7262 2632 6447 5054

Average value of a transfer

(euros)

1073 898 1218 787

Source: David Bounie, Dana Diminescu, Christian Licoppe - “A socio-economic analysis of the e-transfer service provided by Societe Generale“, 2008

PA: Public authority with highest centrality score

CS: Civil society actor with highest centrality score

Policy networks in comparisonSouce Achim Lang (SOCCOH)

density: mediumcentrality PA: mediumcentrality CS: medium

density: lowcentrality PA: mediumcentrality CS: low

density: highcentrality PA: lowcentrality CS: medium

density: highcentrality PA: mediumcentrality CS: medium

density: lowcentrality PA: highcentrality CS: low

Policy networks in cohesion policy: conclusions

Participation profiles

National patterns and structure still dominate

Country clusters:

Central government dominance in new member states (“creeping decentralization”)

Decentralized governance prevails in Spain and Germany (“no change”)

Public authority

Civil society

density

cent

ralit

y

Policy networks:

Many different network configurations

Centrality of public authorities increases at low levels of density

Centrality of civil society increases at higher levels of density

SNA Analysis

Figure 12: Visualizing NE Region Fig 13. NE Region pattern

Romanian Inclusion Strategy for Roma People

Romania has the largest Roma population in Europe 2.5 millionpeople

April 2001

Was adopted

Romanian Government Strategy for Roma Condition Improvement

Applied in: EducationEmploymentHealth & HousingDiscriminationPoverty

It is the first governmental initiative to take a comprehensive approach to addressing the problems facing the Roma minority in Romania, undertaken as part of the EU accession process and fulfillment of the political criteria established by the Copenhagen declaration (1993)

The Strategy

National Office for Roma

Department for the Protection of National Minorities in

the Ministry of Public Information

Implemented by:

Part of:Roma Organizations

Offered in

put

Positive Development

By Government Decision

3 years later

Low level ofimplementation

The Strategy’s Objectiveshave not been successfully accomplished

The result:

November 2002

EUMAP report on minorityprotection in Romania

Published:

• monitoring the implementation of the Strategy at the local level; • developing the capacity of the Roma organizations to monitor and report on The implementation of public policies towards Roma.

Objectives:

Central Government Bodies:

The Ministry of Public Information Agency forGovernmental Strategies

The National Office for Roma The Office for Roma Issues Re-named

Transformed in:

Moved under:

The Department forInterethnic Relations

The Government General Secretariat

part of:

Funding the Strategy:

EU

The most importantfunding: €16 million

Came from:

Had been allocated throughthe following programs:

• Support to the national strategy to improve Roma conditions, Phare 2002 – €6million + €1.6 million from the Romanian government

• Improving access to education of disadvantaged groups, with a special focus on Roma, Phare 2001 – €7 million plus €1.33 million from the Romanian Government;

• Fund for Improving the Roma Situation, Phare 2000 – €1.15 million

The Strategy and new international initiatives:

Open Society Institute (OSI), World Bank

the European Union

and:

in cooperation with:

supported by:

Government Civil societyand

Started in 2003:

A Decade of Roma Inclusion and a Roma Educational Fund (REF)

were launched in on June 30–July 1 2003

The international conference “Roma in an Expanding Europe. Breaking the Poverty Cycle”in Budapest

County offices for Roma (BJR)

were the first structures created in all 41 counties and remain the most important public institutional contact point for Roma issues at the local level

the targets and tasks in the Master Plan of Measures for the Implementation of the Strategy.

BJRMain responsibilities: Organizing

PlanningCoordinating

For implementing at local level

Romanian National Council for Combating Discrimination

RNCCD staring in 2005WEAKNESSES:

1. Excessive length of the investigations; 2. Inability of the RNCCD staff to recognize clear instances of discrimination; 3. Lack of transparency of the investigations undertaken by the NCCD; 4. Inability to provide meaningful redress to victims of discrimination.

RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. The RNCCD should be granted real independence from other state bodies;

2. Appointment of members of the board should reflect the independent mandate of the RNCCD;

3. The RNCCD should be given the power to apply a wider range of sanctions aimed at achieving, ‘restitutio in integrum’ for victims of discrimination;

4. Legal aid should be provided to victims of discrimination, in conformity with Article 13(2) of the Race Equality Directive and Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights;

5. The six months time that the RNCCD has at its disposal for investigating and sanctioning the complaints brought to its attention should be extended;

6. Sufficient staffing and adequate resources should be allocated to the RNCCD under parliamentary supervision so that it is able to fulfil its mandate. Regionally based branches of the RNCCD should be established, to ensure greater efficacy in undertaking its work.

• http://www.errc.org/cikk.php?cikk=1844&archiv=1

Responsibilities:

evaluating the situation of Roma in their area of responsibility;

identifying solutions to the needs of the local communities;

mobilizing communityresources in order toaccomplish the objectives of theStrategy;

ensuring continuous communication with local administration authorities;

highlighting problems for which the local authorities are responsible in order to resolve them;

initiating partnerships between members of Roma communities and localauthorities;

collaborating with decentralized institutions;

mediating any interethnic or inter-community conflicts;

regular reporting to the General Directorate for Relations withPrefectures

Local experts on Roma affairs

Improve the situation of Roma at the local level

Mayor’s offices

County Offices on Roma (BJR)

Stakeholders:

Local Joint Working Groups

Public institutions

NGOs

Agency for Training and Occupation of Labor Force;The Agency for Housing;The Directorate for Labor and Social Solidarity; The Directorate for Public Health; The House for Health Insurance; The Police Inspectorate; The School Inspectorate; The Directorate for Youth and Sports;The Directorate for Culture and Denominations; The Directorate for the Protection of Children’s Rights.Local Roma NGOs alsoparticipate in the Committees

Ministry ofLabor and Social Solidarity

National Agency for Child Protection and Adoptions

The Cluj County:

Population: 703,269 Area: 6,674 square kilometers Roma population: 2.9 per cent of the county’s total population

Unofficial there are between 35,000 and 45,000 Roma living in theperimeter of Cluj county.

The main Stakeholders in Cluj County are:

County Office for Roma

Local Joint Working Groups

Prefecture

Roma non-governmental organisations

County School Inspectorate

County Office for Roma

In the implementation of the Strategy

At county level

identified somedifficulties

-the low involvement of local authorities

-the insufficient allocation of funds from the local budget

The Mayors’ offices,

substantial interaction with the Roma communities.

At local level

The achievements

- developing a relationship based on trust with the Roma;

-organizing of the Roma community at the local level so that there are one or more leaders who can represent the community in relations with local authorities;

-persuading Roma groups to work -the necessary number of hours in order to receive minimum guaranteed income;

-paving an access road to one of the Roma communities, with the directparticipation of the Roma themselves.

Local joint working group

Local Institutions

RomaNGOs

The activity of the Working Group has developed withoutspecific funds from the budget

Evaluation of the most importantneeds of the Roma community

Responsabilities:

HousingStrategyat local level

Roma persons, can live under legal conditions with rent contracts.

NGOs lack the necessaryfinancial resources for building houses

Social protection

increase the Romacommunity’s access to local services

Strategyat local level

Health care

The identification of solutions for including all Roma in the health insurance system,for registering with the family doctor and for compensatory medicines, is probably themost important issue of the healthcare area of the Strategy

Strategyat local level

Economic initiatives

tailoring, PC operation, waiting tables, bartending, and hairdressingtraining qualification courses

Strategyat local level

Job Fair for Roma250 jobs were allocated

Justice and public order

legal education and delinquency prevention carried out instate institutions or by NGOs

Strategyat local level

counseling project

hiring a local monitor on human rights

Child protection No significant developing programs and strategies

Education

Roma pupils were registered in public schools and Romani language was introduced as an optional component at the request of parents.

combating illiteracy among Roma children and the integration of Roma children in kindergartens

Phare Financing

Culture and denominations

Positive image of Roma

Combating discrimination

Strategyat local level

Strategyat local level

European Union supports the improvement of the situation of the Roma

The Delegation of the European Commission in Romania, the Projects Implementation Unit under the National Agency for the Roma and the

Central Finance and Contracts Unit under the Ministry of Public Finance today announced the 65 projects selected for financing worth 4.3 million

Euro under the EUROPEAN UNION’s Phare Programme „Support for National Strategy for Improvement of the Condition of Roma”.

The overall objective of the programme is to enhance and facilitate the active participation of Roma communities in the economic, social, educational and political life of the Romanian society and to improve their access to health

services.Out of the 531 projects submitted within the established delays, 201 projects

(38%) fulfilled the administrative and eligibility criteria. At the end of the evaluation process and as a result of site pre-contracting visits, 65 projects were

selected, as follows:

Health– 17 projects worth 647.196 Euro;Vocational training and Income Generating Activities – 34 projects worth

1.482.908 Euro;Small Infrastructure and Housing – 14 projects worth 2.189.834,28 Euro.

Phare RO 2002/000-586.01.02Support to the National Strategy for Improvement of the Condition of Roma

Vocational Training and Income Generating Activities

Health

Small Infrastructure and Housing

Conclusions:

The activity of local affairs could be improved if the following was made available:

►office space exclusively for meeting with Roma communities ►employment of community representatives as local experts on Roma affairs► assuring a closer relation with the community, and better understanding of the relevant issues;► additional employment of personnel or reducing the other responsibilities oflocal experts as the volume of work;► developing a cooperative atmosphere among Roma, ► the involvement of other local structures and their own involvement is essential;► fostering the participation and election of Roma representatives within thedecision-making structures at the local level.► the clarification of each partner’s responsibilities is essential ► the real partnership between public institutions and civil society must betransformed from an abstract concept into a common reality.

ReferencesCiuca Vasilica, Pîrciog Speranţa, Zamfir Ana-Maria, Mocanu Cristina, “Migration Flow for Work – The Romanian Case”, 2008 Bucharest Diminescu Dana et. al. (2008) covers e-transfers done in this way by migrants from Romania, Algeria, Morocco and Senegal, for 2004 - 2007, implying 7224 transfers done by 1383 persons. Lazea Valentin, Impact of Remittances on Romania’s Balance of PaymentsCatalin Pauna, Migration and the sustainability of growth in Romania. European Migration: Main Challenges ... People move abroad, but much less within Romania, towards meeting labor demand ...www.ipe.ro/papers/Migration_conference.ppt Porumb Elena Marilena, Munteanu Oana, SCSNP FP6 Project report, 2007Porumb Elena, Todoran Horea, SNA, SOCOH Project, 2008Sandu Dumitru, Why to return to, why not to leave from Romania of the current time? European Migration: comparative advantage versus cherry-picking policies, Organised by Institute for Economic Forecasting , Bucharest, June 2008http://www.romacenter.ro/noutati/brosura_sprjin_strategia_imbunatatire_situatie_romi_phare_2002.pdf