Migrant integration statistics

From Statistics Explained

Data from February 2014. Most recent data: Further Eurostat information, Main tables and Database.

This article presents recent European Union (EU) statistics on the integration of migrants, in terms of employment, health, education, social inclusion and active citizenship in the hosting country. In order to achieve better comparability among Member States, the 2010 Zaragoza declaration agreed on a set of common indicators which were further developed in the study ‘Indicators of immigrant integration - a pilot study’ of 2011.

Apart from the existing Zaragoza indicators, this article also discusses new indicators, as proposed by the report ‘Using EU indicators of immigrant integration’ of 2013, with the objective of boosting the monitoring and assessment of migrants' situations, along with the relative outcomes of integration policies.

Table 1: Unemployment rate by groups of country of citizenship and age, 2011 (%)
Source: Eurostat, Employment and unemployment (Labour Force Survey) (employ)
Figure 1: Change of employment rates in the foreign population within the EU-27, between 2009 and 2011 (percentage points)
Source: Eurostat, Employment and unemployment (Labour Force Survey) (employ)
Figure 2: Comparison of employment rates in the foreign female and total female populations, 2011 (%)
Source: Eurostat, Employment and unemployment (Labour Force Survey) (employ)
Table 2: Activity rate by groups of country of citizenship and age groups, 2011 (%)
Source: Eurostat, Employment and unemployment (Labour Force Survey) (employ)
Table 3: Shares in the total and the foreign-born population aged 20-64, perceiving their health status as 'Good', 2009-2011 (%)
Source: Eurostat, Income and living conditions (ilc)
Figure 3: Share of foreign born population aged 20-64 by highest level of educational attainment, 2011 (%)
Source: Eurostat, Employment and unemployment (Labour Force Survey) (employ)
Figure 4: Share of early leavers from education and training aged 18-24, in the total population and in the foreign-born one, 2009-2011 (%)
Source: Eurostat, Employment and unemployment (Labour Force Survey) (employ)
Figure 5: Persons at risk of poverty after social transfers in the total population and in the foreign born-one, 2009-2011 (%)
Source: Eurostat, Income and living conditions (ilc)
Table 4: Median equivalised disposable income of the foreign-born population as a proportion of the median equivalised disposable income of the corresponding total population by groups of country of birth and age groups, 2011 (%)
Source: Eurostat, Income and living conditions (ilc)
Table 5: Share of third-country nationals who have acquired citizenship by age groups, 2009-2011 (%)
Source: Eurostat, Acquisition of citizenship statistics

Main statistical findings

Employment

In 2011 the unemployment rate of EU-foreigners in the EU-27 (16 %) was much higher than for the total population (9 %). The difference was even higher among third-country nationals (20 %).

Considering employment of migrants, the relevant existing Zaragoza indicators are the following:

At the time of writing, the relevant proposed new indicators relate to[1]:

  • temporary employment;
  • part-time employment;
  • long-term unemployment.

The available statistics are based on the existing Zaragoza indicators, collected through the Labour force survey (LFS) for the years 2009, 2010 and 2011. The selected results in this article refer to unemployment rates, employment rates and activity rates. These are strongly interrelated and measure the same aspects of labour market participation.

Unemployment rates

The unemployment rates for the year 2011 (Table 1), appear to demonstrate labour market disadvantages in the migrant population. In particular, for the age group 20-64, the unemployment rate of people with foreign citizenship in the EU-27 is higher than that of the total population (16 % compared to 9 %). The difference is even higher in the population of third-country nationals (20 % unemployment rate).

Employment rates

Data from the LFS show that employment rates in the foreign population (by country of citizenship) aged 20-64 dropped significantly between the years 2009 and 2011 in Hungary, Greece and Denmark but increased in Slovenia and Malta (Figure 1).

In most countries, the foreign female population is under-represented in employment even by comparison with female nationals of the reporting country (Figure 2). The largest differences (above 15 percentage points) are seen in Sweden, Slovenia, Finland, France, Germany and the Netherlands. The opposite situation occurs in Malta, Cyprus, Italy, Luxembourg and Greece, where female migrants have higher employment rates.

Activity rates

For 2011, the EU-27 activity rate of the foreign population (by country of citizenship) in the 20-64 age group is equivalent to the activity rate of the total population (Table 2). However, an in-depth examination at the country level in the same table reveals that activity rates of the foreign population in Greece (79 %), Spain (83 %), Italy (75 %) and Portugal (87 %), are higher, by 5-8 percentage points, than those of the total population (73 %, 78 %, 67 %, 79 % respectively). By contrast, in Denmark, Germany, France, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Finland and Sweden the activity rates of the foreign population are lower than those of the total population, by 7-10 percentage points.

Health

At the EU-27 level, for the years 2009-2011, the share of the foreign population perceiving their health as ‘good’ was equivalent to that of the total population.

Considering health, the relevant existing Zaragoza indicator is the ‘Self-reported health status’. The proposed new indicators are the following:

With the exception of life expectancy which is calculated from demographic data, all indicators are measured through the EU statistics on income and living conditions (EU-SILC) survey. With regard to the existing Zaragoza indicator most countries could not provide reliable aggregated data for the foreign population or could not provide such data at all (Table 3).

Taking into account only the countries for which the data are reliable for the year 2011 (Bulgaria, Germany, Greece, Spain, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Hungary, Malta, Austria, Portugal and Slovakia), significant differences are observed in the shares of ‘good’ self-perceived health of the foreign-born population by comparison with the share of the total population. The largest difference in favour of the total population is observed in Latvia (55 % of the total population vs. 37 % of the foreign-born population) although low ratings in such self-measurement results should be interpreted with caution. Differences of the order of +10 % in favour of the total population are seen in Bulgaria (+12 %), Austria (+10 %) and Slovakia (+ 9%). Differences of the order of +10 % in favour of the foreign population are seen in Malta (+11 %), Portugal (+10 %) and Hungary (+ 9%). Overall, the differences in the countries seem to balance each other out and result in almost equivalent shares at the EU-27 level.

Education

In 2011, at the EU-27 level, more than one third of the foreign-born population aged 20-64 only had primary education or lower.

Education, as a measure of migrant integration, is currently agreed to be evaluated through the following existing Zaragoza indicators:

These are based on the core (regular) annual LFS data collection, except for the ‘language skills of non-native speakers’ indicator for which data are not yet available.

The proposed new indicators that are currently considered[2] are also based on the LFS:

Young migrants are generally at greater risk of exiting the education and training system without having obtained an upper secondary qualification. On the basis of available LFS data for the year 2011, the share of the foreign-born population at EU level in the 20-64 age group with primary educational attainment or less was 36 %, the share with secondary educational attainment was 38 %, while the share with educational attainment at a higher level was 26 %. The United Kingdom, Ireland, Luxembourg, Estonia, Sweden and Cyprus had the highest shares of the foreign-born population with tertiary educational attainment (35-48 %), while the countries with the lowest shares were Italy (11 %), Greece (13 %), Slovenia (14 %) and Austria (18 %).

In most countries (Figure 3), the highest shares of educational attainment are in the category of secondary education (one third to half of the foreign born population having attained secondary education). The highest shares with low or very low educational level (40-49 % primary education or lower) are observed in Greece, Malta, Italy, France, Portugal, Spain and Belgium.

At the EU level, the share of early leavers from education and training (persons aged 18-24) among the foreign-born population during the years 2009-2011 was 12 percentage points higher than for the total population (Figure 4).

Social inclusion

In Belgium, Greece and Finland, EU-foreigners are more ‘at risk of poverty’ by 15-18 percentage points compared with the total population.

The social inclusion indicators for migrant integration (Zaragoza and new proposed ones) are all based on the SILC survey. These are the existing Zaragoza indicators:

The new proposed indicators are:

Eurostat puts forward two possible additional indicators:

All indicators are available on an annual basis.

Figure 5 presents a comparison between the average percentages of persons at risk of poverty for the years 2009-2011, in the total and the foreign-born populations.

At the EU level, 15 % of the total population aged 20-64 was at risk of poverty after social transfers while the corresponding share in the foreign-born population is 24 %.

In the majority of Member States, the median annual equivalised disposable income for third-country nationals is considerably lower than that for the total population of the Member State (Table 4). When comparing ratios to the total population income the lowest median income of third-country nationals in the 25-54 age group is observed in Spain, Greece, Belgium, Luxembourg and Austria, and varies between 60-69 % of the median disposable income in the total population. Only in Portugal, Latvia, Lithuania and the Czech Republic are third-country nationals in the same income situation as the total population.

On the other hand, in most countries EU-born foreigners share more or less the same income situation as the total population regarding the median equivalised income.

Active citizenship

In the years 2009-2011, Ireland had the highest share of citizenship acquisition by third-country nationals.

There are two Zaragoza indicators concerning active citizenship:

Naturalisation of the foreign population is considered an important integration factor since naturalised foreigners are better integrated in the labour market and society in general. However, the shares of citizenship acquisitions are very low in all European countries (Table 5). The situation seems slightly better for children than for other age groups. In 2011, in 15 out of 26 Member States, the share of citizenship acquisition was higher for third-country nationals in the 0-14 age category, than for the other age categories (15-39 and 40+). A notable counter-example was observed in Ireland (4 % of the foreign population aged 0-14 acquired citizenship in 2011, 14 % in the 15-39 age category and almost 29 % in the 40+ age category).

Ireland is also the country with the highest share of citizenship acquisitions by third-country nationals in total in 2009, 2010 and 2011. The country with the lowest share of citizenship acquisitions during the same period was the Czech Republic.

Countries with high shares (8 % and over) of third-country nationals aged 0-14 having acquired citizenship in 2011 were Estonia, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Sweden and the United Kingdom, whilst Ireland, Malta and Poland had over 9 % of third-country nationals aged 15-39 having acquired citizenship in the same year.

Data sources and availability

Data used for the indicators on migrant integration come mainly from the EU labour force survey or LFS (e.g. employment and education indicators) and the EU statistics on income and living conditions survey (for social inclusion and health), complemented by administrative data sources such as population registers, registers of foreigners, and registers of residence or work permits (for naturalisation rates). Migrant indicators are calculated for two broad groups of the migrant population. One is the foreign population by country of birth and the other is the foreign population by country of citizenship.

Foreign population by country of birth is the population most commonly described as migrants, as these persons have migrated to their current country of residence at some stage during their lives. It includes persons with foreign citizenship as well as persons with the citizenship of their country of residence, either from birth or acquired later in life.

Foreign population by country of citizenship are foreign citizens residing in the EU Member States and EFTA countries. As citizens of another country, the members of this group are in a different situation than nationals with regard to their legal rights. This is particularly the case for non-EU citizens (third-country nationals). Persons in this group may have migrated into their country of current residence or may have been born there. The data analysis in this article is performed either by country of birth or country of citizenship, based on data availability and reliability per case. The data are generally presented for the following age categories:

  • 20-64: this group has been selected because it is relevant to the first Europe 2020 target (employment of 75 % of this population by 2020);
  • 25-54: this is considered as the most appropriate group for the analysis of the situation of migrants of working age, as it minimises the effect of migration for non-economic reasons (e.g. study or retirement) and forms a more homogeneous group, large enough to produce reliable results;
  • 55-64: this age group focuses on the older migrants - caution is however needed for the interpretation of the results, due to small sample sizes.

Eurostat produces statistics on a range of issues of migrant integration concerning the domains of health, education, active citizenship, social inclusion and employment.

Migration statistics

EU migration statistics are collected on an annual basis and are supplied to Eurostat by the national statistical authorities of the EU Member States. Since 2008 the collection of data has been based on Regulation 862/2007. This defines a core set of statistics on international migration flows, population stocks of foreigners, the acquisition of citizenship, residence permits, asylum and measures against illegal entry and stay. Although EU Member States may continue to use any appropriate data according to national availability and practice, the statistics collected under the Regulation must be based on common definitions and concepts.

Most EU Member States base their statistics on administrative data sources such as population registers, registers of foreigners, registers of residence or work permits. Some countries use sample surveys or estimation methods to produce migration statistics.

More specifically, the data on the acquisition of citizenship are produced from administrative systems and provided to Eurostat by the Member States on an annual basis through the Joint Annual Migration Data Questionnaire. Residence permits data are also collected annually from administrative sources.

As regards the dimensions of employment and education, the data are based on the results of the EU Labour force survey (LFS). The EU-SILC covers topics relevant to social inclusion: people at risk of poverty or social exclusion, income distribution and monetary poverty, living conditions and material deprivation. The EU-SILC also provides data on the health status of the foreign population, in the form of ‘self-perceived health status’. However, the available data are limited and in many cases unreliable, due to the various practices followed at the national level for the inclusion of foreign population in the survey.

Labour force survey (LFS)

The EU labour force survey (LFS) is a large quarterly sample survey that covers the resident population aged 15 and above in private households in the EU, EFTA (except Liechtenstein) and Candidate countries. It provides detailed quarterly data on employment and unemployment, broken down along many dimensions, including age, gender and educational attainment. Regulations set by the European Council, the European Parliament and the European Commission define how the LFS is carried out, whereas some countries have their own national legislation for the implementation of this survey. The LFS is an important source of information on the structure and trends of the EU labour market.

EU statistics on income and living conditions (EU-SILC)

The EU statistics on income and living conditions (EU-SILC) survey is the main source for the compilation of statistics on income, social inclusion and living conditions. It provides comparable microdata on income, poverty, social exclusion, housing, labour, education and health. EU-SILC is implemented in the EU Member States, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey. It provides two types of annual data: cross-sectional data pertaining to a given time or a certain time period with variables on income, poverty, social exclusion and other living conditions and longitudinal data pertaining to individual-level changes over time, observed periodically over a four-year period.

The LFS 2014 ad hoc module on the labour market situation of migrants and their immediate descendants

The LFS 2014 ad hoc module on the labour market situation of migrants and their immediate descendants is an improvement of the LFS 2008 ad hoc module on the labour market situation of migrants, aiming at boosting the quality of the data, and in particular the cross-country comparability and implementability of the module. The target population of the LFS 2014 ad hoc module consists of all persons aged 15-64 years. The ad hoc module variables will be collected for all persons in the household in the target group age. The collection of data on the country of birth of the father and the mother will enable the identification of second-generation migrants. Other variables of the LFS 2014 ad hoc module relevant to the migrant integration indicators are:

  • level of educational attainment of the parents;
  • over-qualification information;
  • obstacles to getting suitable jobs;
  • language skills in the host country language and participation in language courses.

Data sources: advantages and limitations

As mentioned, the production of migrant integration indicators is generally based on sample surveys or on population registers/ registers of resident foreign citizens. A key advantage is the exploitation of data from the LFS and the EU-SILC. Both surveys are highly harmonised and optimised for comparability. However, for both types of data sources (administrative and survey data) there are certain limitations.

With regard to survey data, limitations arise with respect to the coverage of migrant populations. By design, both the LFS and the EU-SILC target the whole resident population and not specifically the migrants. Coverage issues of survey data arise in the following cases.

  • Recently arrived migrants: this group of migrants is missing from the sampling frame in every hosting country resulting in under-coverage of the actual migrant population in the LFS and the EU-SILC;
  • Collective households: the EU-SILC survey only covers private households, persons living in collective households and in institutions for asylum seekers and migrant workers are excluded from the target population; this also results in under-coverage of migrants in the survey.
  • Non-response of migrant population: a significant disadvantage of the surveys is the high percentage of non-response among the migrant population, due to language difficulties, misunderstanding of the purpose of each survey, arduousness in communicating with the interviewer, and fear on behalf of migrants of a possible negative impact on their authorisation to remain in the country in case of participation.
  • Sample size: given the nature of the LFS and EU-SILC as sample surveys, these cannot fully capture the characteristics of migrants in Member States with very low migrant populations.
  • Information on country of citizenship and country of birth: this information is asked from all persons in private households sampled in the LFS, whilst in EU-SILC this information is collected only for those aged 16 and over, resulting in an under-estimation of the number of migrants by country of citizenship and country of birth.

With regard to administrative data, one main problem refers to the comparability of the data used to estimate migrant integration indicators. The administrative data sources are not harmonised and there are also variations in methods and definitions. For example, some countries produce estimates for the migrant population to account for non-response, while others leave this problem untreated. Coverage gaps are reported by certain Member States with regard to some types of excluded international migrants (e.g. asylum seekers). In other cases, there are significant numbers of departed migrants uncovered by the registration systems.

Context

Policy background

The continued development and integration of the European migration policy remains a key priority in order to meet the challenges and harness the opportunities that migration represents globally. The integration of third-country nationals legally living in the EU Member States has gained increasing importance in the European agenda in recent years.

The origins of the integration of the European migration policy can be traced back to the Tampere Programme (1999) focusing, among other issues, on the closely related topic of asylum and migration. In 2002, following a request from the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Council to establish National Contact Points on Integration, the European Council of June 2003 invited the European Commission to publish ‘Annual reports on migration and integration’. The Brussels European Council conclusions of November 2004 on The Hague Programme and the Thessaloniki European Council conclusions of June 2003 called upon the importance to establish ‘Common basic principles’ for the immigrant integration policy.

In addition, in 2005 the European Commission adopted the Communication ‘A common agenda for integration - Framework for the integration of third-country nationals in the European Union’ (COM(2005) 389 final) with the aim of providing its first response to the European Council’s request of establishing a coherent European framework for integration. The cornerstones of the framework are proposals for concrete measures with a view of putting in place the ‘Common basic principles’ through a series of supportive EU mechanisms.

Furthermore, the Commission Communication of 3 March 2010 entitled ‘Europe 2020, a strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’ emphasised the need for establishing a new agenda for migrant integration in order to enable them to take full advantage of their potential.

Finally, in July 2011, the Commission proposed a ‘European agenda for the integration of third-country nationals’, focusing on actions to increase economic, social, cultural and political participation by migrants and emphasising local action. This new agenda highlights challenges that need to be addressed if the EU is willing to fully benefit from the potential offered by migration and the value of diversity. It also explores the role of countries of origin in the integration process. A Commission Staff Working Paper (SEC(2011)957) is annexed to the Communication and contains a list of EU initiatives supporting the integration of third-country nationals.

Measuring migrant integration

With regard to the measurement of migrant integration, the Stockholm Programme for the period 2010-2014 (2009) embraced the development of core indicators in a limited number of relevant policy areas (e.g. employment, education and social inclusion) for the monitoring of the results of integration policies, in order to increase the comparability of national experiences and reinforce the European learning process.

The 2010 European Ministerial Conference on Integration which took place in Zaragoza, resulted in the Zaragoza Declaration which called upon the Commission to undertake a pilot study examining proposals for common integration indicators and reporting on the availability and quality of the data from agreed harmonised sources necessary for the calculation of these indicators. The proposals in the pilot study were further examined, developed and elaborated in a project which delivered the recently published report ‘Using EU indicators of immigrant integration’. The existing and proposed indicators are largely based on this report.

Legislative background

There is a strong link between integration and migration policies since successful integration is necessary for maximising the economic and social benefits of immigration for individuals as well as societies. EU legislation provides a common legal framework regarding the conditions of entry and stay and a common set of rights for certain categories of migrants. So far, six Directives have been adopted:

  • Directive 2011/98/EU on a single application procedure for a single permit to reside and work in the EU and on a common set of rights for third-country workers;

Finally, the Commission has also presented three proposals for new directives:

  • Proposal COM/2013/151 final for a Directive on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purposes of research, studies, pupil exchange, remunerated and unremunerated training, voluntary service and au pairing.
  • Proposal COM/2010/0379 final for a Directive on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purposes of seasonal employment.
  • Proposal COM/2010/0378 final for a Directive defining conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals in the framework of an intra-corporate transfer.

EU instruments to promote integration

The EU has targeted the promotion of immigrant integration and for this reason has established actors, institutions and instruments to promote such integration: the Committee of the Regions and the European Economic and Social Committee, Ministerial Conferences, National Contact Points on Integration, the European Fund for the Integration of Third-Country Nationals, the European Integration Forum, the European website on integration, handbooks on integration, European integration modules, etc.

Definitions

Citizenship is a particular legal bond between an individual and his or her State, acquired by birth or naturalisation, whether by declaration, choice, marriage or other means according to the national legislation.

Usual residence means the place at which a person normally spends the daily period of rest, regardless of temporary absences for purposes of recreation, holiday, visits to friends and relatives, business, medical treatment or religious pilgrimage or, by default, the place of legal or registered residence.

Foreign-born is a person whose place of birth (or usual residence of the mother at the time of birth), is outside the country of his/her usual residence.

Foreigners (non-nationals) are persons who are not citizens of the country in which they reside, including persons of unknown citizenship and stateless persons.

Non-national EU citizens are persons who have citizenship of an EU-28 Member State and who are usually resident in another EU-28 Member State.

Non-EU nationals or third-country nationals are persons who are usually resident in the EU-28 and who do not have the citizenship of an EU-28 Member State.

Employed persons are persons who, during the reference week, performed work, even for just one hour per week, for pay, profit or family gain or were not at work but had a job or business from which they were temporarily absent because of, e.g., illness, holidays, industrial dispute, education or training.

Unemployed persons are persons who were without work during the reference week, were currently available for work and were either actively seeking work in the past four weeks or had already found a job to start within the next three months.

The economically active population (labour force) comprises both employed and unemployed persons.

Activity rate represents economically active persons as a percentage of the total population.

Unemployment rate is the number of people unemployed as a percentage of the labour force.

Employment rate is computed as the ratio between the employed population and the total population.

Overqualification rate is calculated as the share of the population with a high educational level (i.e. having completed tertiary education, ISCED 5 or 6), and having low or medium skilled jobs (ISCO occupation levels 4 to 9) among employed persons having attained a high educational level.

Self-employed are persons who work in their own business, professional practice or farm for the purpose of earning a profit, and who either work on their own or employ at least one other person.

The level of education is defined in accordance with the 1997 International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED 1997) and is often aggregated into three levels:

  • Low: below the second cycle of secondary education (up to ISCED level 3c short);
  • Medium: second cycle of secondary education (ISCED levels 3–4 other than 3c short);
  • High: tertiary education (ISCED levels 5–6).

Early school leavers are persons aged 18 to 24 whose highest level of education or training attained is ISCED 0, 1, 2 or 3c short, and who declared not having received any education or training in the four weeks preceding the survey.

The EU-SILC definition of household disposable income includes: (1) income from work, comprising employee income and self-employment income, (2) property income, including interests, dividends, profits from capital investment in an unincorporated business, (3) income from rental of a property or land, (4) pensions from individual private plans, (5) income from social benefits, taking into account unemployment benefits, old-age benefits, survivors benefits, sickness and disability benefits, education-related allowances, family/children related benefits, social exclusion allowances and housing allowances, and (6) regular inter-household cash transfers received.

Equivalised income is defined as the household's total income divided by its ‘equivalent size’, to take account of the size and composition of the household, and is attributed to each household member: the total household income is divided by its equivalent size using the so called ‘modified OECD’ equivalence scale (this scale gives a weight of 1.0 to the first adult, 0.5 to any other household member aged 14 and over and 0.3 to each child under 14 years).

The at-risk-of-poverty or social exclusion rate describes the number of persons who are at risk-of-poverty or social exclusion according to at least one of the three following dimensions: at-risk-of-poverty after social transfers; severe material deprivation; living in a very low work intensity household.

The at-risk-of-poverty rate after social transfers is measured as the share of persons with an equivalised disposable income below the at-risk-of-poverty threshold. The threshold has been set at 60% of the national median equivalised disposable income.

The property owner is a person who possesses a title deed, independently of whether the house is fully paid or not.

The share of foreigners that have acquired citizenship is the ratio between the number of residents who acquired citizenship in a country during a calendar year and the total number of resident foreigners in that country at the beginning of the year. This indicator is commonly referred to as ‘naturalisation rate’, even if this terminology may be misleading since the acquisitions considered are all modes of acquisitions in force in each country, and not only naturalisations (residence-based acquisitions requiring an application by the person concerned).

Residence permit is defined as any authorisation valid for at least 3 months issued by the authorities of a Member State allowing a third-country national to stay legally on its territory. According to Article 6.2 of the Council Regulation (CE) No 862/2007 of 11 July 2007, when national laws and administrative practices of a Member State allow for specific categories of long-term visa or immigration status to be granted instead of residence permits, such visas and grants of statuses are also included in the relevant statistics.

Long-term resident status refers to permits issued under Council Directive 2003/109/EC. This is based on a total duration of legal residence of 5 years or longer, combined with a series of other conditions that must be met to qualify for this status.

See also

Further Eurostat information

Publications

Database

People at risk of poverty or social exclusion (Europe 2020 strategy) (ilc_pe)
Main indicator - Europe 2020 target on poverty and social exclusion (ilc_peps)
Income distribution and monetary poverty (ilc_ip)
Monetary poverty (ilc_li)
Distribution of income (ilc_di)
Living conditions (ilc_lv)
Population structure (ilc_lvps)
Activity and activity rates - LFS series (lfsa_act)
Employment rates - LFS series (lfsa_emprt)
Self- employed - LFS series (lfsa_empself)
Total unemployment - LFS series (lfsa_unemp)

Dedicated section

Methodology / Metadata

Source data for tables, figures and maps (MS Excel)

Other information

External links

Notes

  1. A subset of the proposed new indicators in the report ‘Using EU Indicators of Immigrant Integration’ (2013).
  2. The report ‘Using EU indicators of immigrant integration’ (2013) also includes other indicators based on the PISA survey which focuses on the 15-year-old student population.


Views