Chapter 7. Integration of young people with a migrant background

How well they integrate children with foreign-born parents can be considered a yardstick of host countries’ success in integration. Because they were schooled in their parents’ host country, the children of immigrants – both those who are native-born and those who arrived at a very young age – should not, in theory, encounter the same difficulties as adults who arrive from a foreign country. Ultimately, their outcomes should be much the same as those of young people with no migrant background. Yet that is not what happens in many host countries, particularly in Europe.

The chapter begins by considering some basic demographic and immigrant-specific pointers that help situate young people with a migrant background (Indicators 7.1 and 7.2). It then describes their access to early childhood education and care (7.3), and to what extent they are concentrated in some schools (7.4). It then goes on to analyse their educational outcomes: their school performance (7.5 and 7.6), their sense of belonging and well-being (7.7), their levels of education (7.8), and their drop-out rates (7.9). The chapter then looks at labour market integration, considering the proportions of immigrant offspring who are NEETs (7.10), their labour market outcomes (7.11 and 7.12) and the quality of the jobs they hold (7.13 and 7.14). The last area of focus, social inclusion and civic engagement, examines child poverty (7.15), voter participation (7.16) and, finally, perceived discrimination (7.17).

    

Key findings

  • OECD-wide, 27% (59 million) of people aged 15-34 have a migrant background (i.e. are either foreign-born or have at least one foreign-born parent). Around 7% of these youth are native-born to immigrant parents and 5% to one native- and one foreign-born parent. A further 5% are foreign-born who arrived as children under the age of 15 and 9% arrived after this age.

  • EU-wide, 21% of this age group have a migrant background (25.5 million), of whom a little over 4% are the native-born offspring of immigrants, with the same number arriving as children under 15; 5% are natives of mixed parentage and a further 8% of the EU youth population immigrated as adults.

  • Main countries of residence of youth with a migrant background are the United States (17.1 million), Germany and France (3.4 million each), the United Kingdom and Canada (2.4 million each).

  • Over the last decade, the steepest increase OECD-wide came in the share of native-born with two foreign-born parents, driven chiefly by the United States. Total numbers of native-born with immigrant parents quadrupled in Italy and doubled in Spain, Hungary and Greece.

  • EU-wide, the reading score of the 15-year-old native-born with foreign-born parents lags behind that of their peers with no migrant background by 25 points – over half a school year. The gap exceeds one year of schooling in the Nordic countries and most longstanding European destinations (save the United Kingdom). In non-European OECD countries, the reverse is true, except in the United States.

  • Reading literacy gaps between 15-year-olds native pupils with and without migrant background shrank in most countries over the last decade. Not, however, in Southern Europe (excluding Portugal), France, Sweden and Switzerland.

  • School performance improves the longer pupils reside in the host country, with the native offspring of foreign-born parentage outperforming immigrants who arrived in childhood.

  • Despite noticeable progress over the last decade, a significant share of pupils with a migrant background lack basic skills at the age of 15. In the EU, 24% of them are low-school performers, against 16% of their peers with native-born parents while native-born immigrant offspring are less likely to lack basic skills than their peers with no migrant background in most non-European countries (except in the United States).

  • The share of resilient students (top performers despite a disadvantaged socio-economic background) among the native-born children of immigrants has risen by 6 percentage points in the OECD over the last decade and by 3 points in the EU, while it remained stable for the children of natives in both regions. As a result, the disadvantage of children of immigrants in this respect that was observed a decade ago has disappeared – in the OECD it even turned into an advantage.

  • OECD-wide, native-born immigrant offspring aged 15 to 34 years old are more likely to be highly educated than their peers of native-born parentage – 46% versus 42%. The reverse is true in the EU, where the respective shares are 35% and 37%. Similarly, in the EU, immigrant offspring are more frequently poorly educated than native-born with native-born parents (20.5% versus 16%), while the low-educated account for about 11% of both groups in the OECD.

  • Over the last decade, the share of highly educated young adults has increased throughout the EU and the OECD by 6 percentage points among both native-born with foreign- and native-born parents. The rise has been greater among immigrant offspring than those with native-born parents in two-fifths of countries.

  • Across the OECD, 7% of native-born pupils with immigrant parents leave the education system prematurely (600 000 young people per year). The proportion in the EU is 9%, or 250 000 pupils. These percentages are similar among young people of native-born parentage. As for foreign-born young people who arrived as children in the OECD, 600 000, or 11%, leave school early, while the share of drop-outs in the EU is 15%, or 240 000 pupils.

  • In the EU, the share of early-school leavers among pupils native-born to non-EU migrants, is higher, in particular in longstanding immigration destinations, save the United Kingdom.

  • In most countries, with the exceptions of Canada and the United Kingdom, drop-out rates have declined more among the native-born of immigrant parentage than among their peers with native-born parents.

  • In three countries in five, native-born immigrant offspring are more likely to be NEET than their peers with native-born parents while the reverse is true in the United States and Southern Europe (except Spain).

  • In all European OECD countries with the exception of Portugal and Lithuania, immigrants and the native-born offspring of immigrants are less likely to be in work than their peers with native-born parents – by 3 percentage points OECD-wide. Across the EU, the employment gap between the native-born of native- and foreign-born parentage is 6 points. As for child-arrival immigrants, they are 8 points less likely to have a job.

  • OECD-wide, the current employment rates of native-born young adults with immigrant parents are comparable to their levels ten years ago, while falling slightly among their peers with native parents. However, in the EU, the situation for native-born youth with immigrant parents has worsened. The greatest deterioration for immigrant offspring has occurred in countries that suffered most from the economic downturn, such as Greece and Italy, as well as in France and the Netherlands.

  • Unemployment rates have increased since the onset of the economic downturn in most OECD and EU countries. And in many of these countries, unemployment has risen more steeply among youth of foreign-born parentage. In the United States, Belgium and Sweden, however, the native-born offspring of immigrants have actually seen a drop in unemployment.

  • EU-wide, 25% of native-born with immigrant parents born outside the EU have a level of education that exceeds the requirements of the job that they hold. That share is slightly higher than among the native-born with native-born parents, but 7 points lower than among the native-born with EU background.

  • In Europe, the share of public sector employment among employed native-born young adults of immigrant parentage has generally increased over the last decade. However, they still remain strongly underrepresented in a number of European OECD countries such as Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, and the Netherlands.

  • Across the OECD, half of all children in immigrant households live below the relative poverty line, compared to over a quarter in native-born households. Although the share is lower in the EU, it is still 40% – twice the level of children in native households. Immigrant offspring in Spain, Greece and the United States are the most at risk of poverty.

  • Over the last decade, the relative child poverty rate in immigrant households has slightly increased by 1 percentage point across the OECD but remained stable across the EU. The steepest rises – over 10 points – are to be found in Spain, Slovenia, Estonia and France.

  • In the EU, discrepancies in relative poverty between children in immigrant and in native-born households have grown further over the last decade. The divergence trend was most pronounced in Spain and a number of other EU countries such as Austria and France.

  • OECD- and EU-wide, close to 58% of native-born with immigrant parents report that they voted in the most recent national elections (10 percentage points less than among their peers with native-born parents, and 5 points below turnout among immigrants who arrived as children in the host country). This compares with about half of immigrants who arrived after the age of 15.

  • In all EU and OECD countries (except in Canada, Sweden and Israel), the native-born with two immigrant parents are markedly more likely to feel discriminated against than immigrants who arrived as children.

7.1. Youth with a migrant background

Definition

The youth with a migrant background is divided into four categories: a) native-born with two foreign-born parents (also referred to as “immigrant offspring” or native-born with foreign-born parents); b) native-born with mixed background (i.e. one native- and one foreign-born parent); c) foreign-born who immigrated as children (arrived in the host country before the age of 15); d) foreign-born who immigrated as adults (who were 15 or older at the time). The foreign-born who immigrated as adults are not a focus of this chapter, and are only covered in this indicator, unless stated otherwise.

Coverage

Population aged 15 to 34 years old.

OECD-wide, 27% of young people are either foreign-born themselves or have foreign-born parents (59 million). Of those, 7% are native-born to immigrant parents and 5% to one native- and one foreign-born parent. A further 5% are foreign-born who arrived as children under the age of 15 and 9% arrived after this age. Across the EU, shares are lower. Around one in five have a migrant background (25.5 million), of whom a little over 4% are the native-born offspring of immigrants, with the same number arriving as children under 15. A slightly higher share, 5%, are of mixed parentage. A further 8% of the EU youth population immigrated as adults.

Of the 38.9 million young people who came to an OECD country as children or were native-born to at least one immigrant parent, 17.1 million reside in the United States, about 3.4 million in Germany and France each, and 2.4 million in both the United Kingdom and Canada. New Zealand and Southern and Northern Europe host more child-arrivals than young natives with two foreign-born parents. By contrast, in half of countries, especially such longstanding destinations as the United States, Germany, France and Benelux, immigrant offspring outnumber the foreign-born who arrived as children. Young immigrants who arrived as adults (between 15 and 34) in most EU countries and Australia also outnumber those who arrived when children by two to one. And they do so by three to one in the United Kingdom. By contrast, young people of migrant background in Israel and Norway are more likely to have immigrated as children than as young adults.

Unlike the other groups, the native-born of mixed parentage are more numerous in the European Union than the United States. They form a diverse group – which includes persons whose native-born parent has immigrant parents – and account for over half of all young people with a migrant background in most of Eastern Europe. In Israel, Canada, Germany and the United States, by contrast, there are fewer native-born of mixed than of immigrant parentage only.

In the OECD and EU countries for which comparable data are available, the share of young people with a migrant background has increased by 4 percentage points over the last decade. The steepest increase came in the share of native-born with two foreign-born parents – 1.8 percentage points OECD-wide and driven chiefly by the United States where the rise was 3 percentage points, or close to 3 million young people. Total numbers of native-born with immigrant parents quadrupled in Italy and doubled in Spain, Hungary and Greece. However, the largest relative increase in the EU was among native-born youth of mixed parentage.

Figure 7.1. Young people with a migrant background
Percentages, 15- to 34-year-olds, around 2017
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844028

Figure 7.2. How the native-born youth population has evolved
Changes in percentage points, 15- to 34-year-olds, between 2008 and 2017
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844047

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

7.2. Regions of parental origin

Indicator

Countries of origin are grouped as follows: EU-28, other Europe (including Turkey), Africa, Asia, Latin America (including the Caribbean), and United States, Canada and Oceania. The father’s region of birth is considered for those with two foreign-born parents and the immigrant parent’s region of birth for the native-born with mixed background. The share of native-born with an EU background is calculated differently. Every native-born immigrant offspring with an EU-migrant parent (father or mother) is considered as having an EU background.

Coverage

Population aged 15 to 34 years old.

EU-wide, around 45% of native-born with two immigrant parents are of European parentage, 27% African, and 24% Asian. Shares within countries reflect past migration flows which in turn were shaped by migration policies and historic connections to other parts of the world. In Benelux and German-speaking countries, for example, most are born to parents from Europe, in France over two-thirds to parents from Africa, and in the United Kingdom more than three-fifths to parents from Asia. Nearly half of all foreign-born who arrived in an EU country under the age of 15 come from elsewhere in Europe, roughly 30% from Africa, and 15% from Asia. While only 3% of the native-born of immigrants EU-wide are of Latin American or Caribbean origin, four times that share (13%) arrived from the sub-continent as children.

Throughout the EU and in Norway, most immigrant parents of native-born offspring were themselves born outside the EU, as were the youth who arrived before they were 15 years old. The foreign-born parent of the native offspring of mixed native-born and immigrant parentage, by contrast, is most likely to be EU-born. In some longstanding immigration countries with core immigrant regions of non-EU origin – like France and Africa, the United Kingdom and South Asia, and the Baltic States and Russia – the shares of immigrant offspring native-born to at least one EU-born parent are below 20%.

In the United States, the parents of 66% of immigrant offspring come from Latin America and the Caribbean and 26% from Asia. As for migrants entered before 15, 57% arrived from Latin America, 23% from Asia, and 20% from other parts of the world.

When it comes to regions of parental origin, there have been great changes over the last decade among the native-born children of immigrants in the EU. Relatively more children are now native-born to parents who immigrated from Asia, fewer to parents from Europe, and much the same to those who originate from the rest of the world (Africa and Americas). Overall, the share of native-born with two immigrant parents of whom at least one was born in the EU decreased from 26 to 21% of the immigrant offspring population. By contrast, the share of native offspring of mixed native-born and EU parentage has increased by 3 percentage points to nearly half of the offspring of mixed background.

As for the United States, the parental origins of the native-born children of immigrants have also changed, with a slight rise of 3 percentage points in the proportion of parents of Latin American origin, and a decline of 4 percentage points in those from Europe.

Figure 7.3. Regions of birth of the father of young people with a migrant background
Percentages, 15- to 34-year-olds, inner circle 2008 and outer circle around 2016
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844598

Figure 7.4. Youth with an EU background
Percentages among the youth with a migrant background, 15- to 34-year-olds, around 2016
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844066

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

7.3. Early childhood education and care

Definition

Attendance rates in formal childcare and pre-school services, defined as paid care services provided either through organised structures or through direct arrangements between the parents and care provider, even for a few hours per week. This includes centre-based services (e.g. nursery or childcare centres and pre-schools, both public and private), organised family day care, and 'unstructured' care services provided by private childminders.

Coverage

Children aged 2 to 5 years old.

Across the EU, 77% of all children in immigrant households attend some type of preschool education and care against 81% among children in native households. Shares are similar among native households in the OECD (82%), where attendance among immigrant offspring is lower at 70%. Attendance rates among the children of immigrants are highest in Portugal, Belgium and Luxembourg at over 90%. By contrast, in Australia and the United States they are only 47% and 59%, respectively. In all five countries, however, rates among children from immigrant and native households vary by less than 5 percentage points. Gaps are much wider in the United Kingdom, Slovenia and France, where the children of immigrants are at least 10 points less likely to attend early education. Finland stands out as the only country where they are in fact more likely – by a full 10 percentage points – to go to preschool than the children of the native-born.

Attendance rates across the OECD remained on average at similar levels over the ensuing 10 years among children from native households, while increasing by 5 percentage points among their peers in immigrant households. However, they fell particularly steeply in the United Kingdom – by 4 percentage points among the children with native-born parents and by twice as much among those with immigrant parents. Rates climbed around 20 percentage points, by contrast, among children from immigrant households in Ireland and Luxembourg, and by 15 points in Austria. While the increases in Ireland and Austria were of equal magnitude among the children of the foreign- and native-born, it was greater among the former in Luxembourg.

Children of immigrants especially profit from attending formal childcare and pre-school services and continue to reap the benefits far beyond early childhood. Comparisons of the PISA reading scores of 15-year-old students with immigrant parents and similar socio-economic backgrounds show that those who attended preschool consistently achieve higher scores. Across the EU, the benefit of preschool is 55 points among the native-born children of immigrants – roughly equivalent to 1.5 school years. The corresponding benefit among native-born children of natives is 23 points (half a year of schooling). In Germany, it is as high as two years among children of immigrants and 1.5 school years among their peers with native-born parents. Preschool generally yields less pronounced advantages among the native-born children of immigrants in non-European OECD countries. In the United States, Israel and Australia, for example, the difference between those who attend early childhood school and those who do not is less than 10 points.

Figure 7.5. Early childhood education attendance rates, by place of birth of parents or guardians
Percentages, 2- to 5-year-olds, 2016
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844085

Figure 7.6. How attendance rates in early childhood education have evolved
Changes in percentage points, 2- to 5-year-olds, between 2006 and 2016
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844104

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

7.4. Concentration of students with a migrant background in schools

Definition

This section considers the overall share of students with one or two foreign-born parents in schools where at least 25%, 50%, and 75% of pupils are from such backgrounds.

Coverage

Students aged 15 years old at the time of the survey (with three-month margin).

OECD-wide, almost three in four 15-year-old students with migrant backgrounds go to schools where at least a quarter of their classmates also have a migrant background, and more than one in five where over three-quarters do. Across the EU, concentrations are less marked than in non-European OECD countries. Nevertheless, 66% of students of foreign-born parentage attend schools where at least one-quarter of students are also of immigrant parentage and a further 13% where they make up more than three-quarters of pupils. In the settlement countries, more than one in two pupils with a migrant background go to schools where the majority of their classmates also have immigrant parents. In Luxembourg, the proportion rises to 93% in line with the overall large proportion of the population with a migrant background. Among pupils with foreign-born parentage in Ireland, Israel and Belgium, over 80% find themselves in schools where more than a quarter of their classmates also have immigrant parents. In the United Kingdom and Belgium, they are more likely to be schooled in establishments where over three-quarters of students have some migrant background than in ones where less than a quarter do.

In more than half of OECD countries, students who have migrant parentage are more likely than they were 10 years ago to attend schools where at least a quarter of their classmates also do. However, this is partly driven by an increase in overall numbers of pupils with migrant backgrounds. In fact, the steepest rises in numbers of pupils in schools where at least 25% of their schoolmates are of migrant parentage have come in Southern Europe and Ireland, where significant immigration is a recent development. However, in the United Kingdom, the United States and New Zealand – all countries of longstanding immigration – there has been more than a two-fold increase in proportions of pupils with migrant backgrounds attending schools where over three-quarters of their fellow pupils have similar backgrounds.

Figure 7.7. Concentration of pupils with a migrant background in schools
Percentages of 15-year-old pupils with at least one immigrant parent in schools, by overall share of pupils with at least one immigrant parent in schools, 2015
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844123

Figure 7.8. How the concentration of pupils with a migrant background in schools has evolved
Percentages of 15-year-old pupils with foreign-born parents in schools where more than 75% of pupils have at least one immigrant parent, 2006 and 2015
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844142

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

7.5. Reading literacy

Definition

Reading literacy results are drawn from the OECD Programmes of International Student Assessment (PISA) tests. A 40-point gap is equivalent to roughly a year of school.

Coverage

Pupils aged 15 years old at the time of the survey (with three-month margin).

The OECD-wide level of reading literacy among the native-born children of immigrants is similar to that of their peers with native-born parents. However, that overall similarity obscures the fact that the European and non-European OECD countries paint two different pictures. EU-wide, the reading score of the native-born with foreign-born parents lags behind that of their peers with no migrant background by 25 points – over half a school year. The gap exceeds one year of schooling in the Nordic countries and most longstanding European destinations (save the United Kingdom). In most non-European OECD countries, the reverse is true. In the settlement countries and Turkey, for example, the native-born children of immigrants outperform their peers with native-born parents. Not, though, in the United States, where reading scores are 15 points lower among native-born immigrant offspring than among their peers with native-born parents. When it comes to 15-year-olds born abroad, they lag behind those with no migrant background in both the OECD and EU. The EU-wide gap, however, is 46 points, much wider than the 27 points across the OECD, where Turkey and the settlement countries (except Israel) show no disparity.

Over the last decade, the reading literacy scores of the native-born children of immigrants have improved in four OECD countries out of five. Indeed, their scores increased by over 20 points OECD- and EU-wide – more so than among the native-born with native-born parents. In the settlement countries and Turkey, Belgium and the Netherlands, literacy improved among children with a migrant background while dropping among their peers with none. As a result, performance gaps between those with and without migrant backgrounds shrank in most countries – particularly in some longstanding European countries such as Austria, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands as well as in Norway. Not, however, in Southern Europe (excluding Portugal), France, Sweden and Switzerland, where the gap widened.

Families’ socioeconomic backgrounds are a key element in school performance. Given the same socioeconomic background, the gap between the native-born children of foreign and native parents narrows in virtually all countries, albeit unevenly from one to another. While it vanishes after controlling for socioeconomic backgrounds in the United States and Norway, it is only partly reduced across the EU, where it still stands at 19 points. Literacy gaps also remain wide between foreign-born pupils and their native-born peers with native-born parents – 41 points across the EU and 32 points OECD-wide.

Across the OECD, students rated as most disadvantaged by the PISA index of Economic, Social, and Cultural Status (ESCS) perform worse than their privileged peers, irrespective of migrant background. OECD-wide, they lag two years behind. Although the gap is slightly narrower among native-born pupils with immigrant parents, it is still 1.5 years. A deprived social and economic background thus seems to affect the literacy skills of the foreign-born and the native-born with no migrant background somewhat more than the native-born with immigrant parents.

Figure 7.9. Mean PISA reading scores
15-year-old pupils, 2015
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844161

Figure 7.10. How mean PISA reading scores have evolved
Changes in PISA points, 15-year-old pupils, between 2006 and 2015
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844180

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

7.6. Proportions of pupils who lack basic reading skills at 15

Definition

Pupils who lack basic reading skills at 15 years old (i.e. low-school performers) are those who score no higher than Level 1 (or 407 points) in PISA assessments of reading proficiency. Also considered is the share of resilient students – those from backgrounds rated as most deprived by the PISA index of Economic, Social and Cultural Status (ESCS), but whose reading scores are in the top quartile of pupils in their host countries.

Coverage

Pupils aged 15 years old at the time of the survey (with three-month margin).

Across the OECD, 20% of native-born 15-year-olds lack basic reading skills, whether or not they have a migrant background. Among their foreign-born peers, the share is 30%. While native-born immigrant offspring are less likely to lack basic reading skills than their peers with no migrant background in most non-European countries, they are more likely to do so in Europe and the United States. In the EU, 24% of them are low-school performers, against 16% of their peers with native-born parents. Furthermore, foreign-born students are more likely to perform poorly in school than the native-born children of immigrants in virtually all countries.

The share of native-born children of foreign-born parents who perform poorly at school has dropped by 6 percentage points OECD-wide over the past decade and 8 points across the EU. In two-thirds of countries, the fall has been greater among immigrant offspring than among their peers with native-born parents. Whatever the migrant background, the share of low-school performers is higher among boys in all OECD and EU countries. This gender gap is widest among the native-born with immigrant parents in virtually all European countries (except the Netherlands) and among those with no migrant background in Australia, Canada and the United States.

Across the OECD, 15% of the most underprivileged native-born children of immigrants are in the top quartile of reading scores in their host country against 12% of their peers with no migrant background. Underprivileged children of migrants are especially better off than their peers with native-born parents in Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom. However, in the EU, there is no difference in the resilience rates of pupils with foreign-born parents compared with their peers with no migrant background – it is even 6 points lower in Switzerland and Denmark. The share of resilient students among the native-born children of immigrants has risen by 6 percentage points in the OECD over the last decade and by 3 points in the EU, while it remained stable for the children of native-born in both areas.

Socioeconomic background of the families in schools that pupils attend, whatever their origin, influences reading literacy. In a school whose socioeconomic intake is homogeneous, native-born pupils with a migrant background and those with none show similar levels of literacy in virtually all countries. In fact, the children of immigrants in schools that serve disadvantaged areas slightly outperform those with native-born parents in the United States, the United Kingdom, Ireland and Greece.

Across both the OECD and the EU, native-born pupils with immigrant parents who speak a foreign language at home lag half a year behind their peers whose immigrant parents speak the host-country language at home. And the foreign-born who speak a foreign language at home trail by a whole year. Arriving young also improves reading scores. In two-thirds of countries, the foreign-born who come to the host country before they are 6 years old read at least as well as the native-born children of immigrants. However, those who arrive between the ages of 11 and 16 lag one school year behind young arrivals.

Figure 7.11. Low reading performance
Percentages, 15-year-old pupils, 2015
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844199

Figure 7.12. How shares of low reading performance have evolved
Changes in percentage points, 15-year-old pupils, between 2006 and 2015
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844218

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

7.7. Sense of belonging and well-being at school

Definition

Share of pupils who, at least a few times a month, report any of the following statements: “Teachers disciplined me more harshly than other students”; “Teachers ridiculed me in front of others”; or “Teachers said something insulting to me in front of others”. Also considered is the share of pupils who report having been bullied by other students (see Notes on figures and tables) and those who feel awkward and out of place at school.

Coverage

Pupils aged 15 years old at the time of the survey (with three-month margin).

Across Europe, the native-born children of immigrants are more likely to feel unfairly treated by teachers than their peers who have native-born parents. The reverse is true in many non-European countries, where relatively more children with no migrant background share the sentiment. EU-wide, 29% of native-born pupils with a migrant background report unfair treatment from their teachers, against 24% among their foreign-born peers and 20% among those whose parents are native-born. Shares are especially high in long-standing immigration destinations with large intakes of poorly educated foreign-born parents and in some Central European countries.

Responses to questions about relationships with other pupils paint a more diverse picture. Again, greater proportions of native-born pupils with native-born parents experience bullying in non-European countries, while in six EU countries in ten, native-born pupils with a migrant background report more frequently to be victims. Furthermore, the perceived bullying of foreign-born pupils seems to be more widespread in European than non-European countries.

OECD-wide, over 20% of native-born pupils with immigrant parents feel awkward and out of place at school. In most European countries, too, pupils with a migrant background are slightly more likely than their peers with native-born parents to feel that way – by as much as 9 percentage points in Estonia and Italy. By contrast, in the settlement countries and the United Kingdom, the sentiment is more widespread among pupils with no migrant background than among those native-born to immigrant parents. However, in virtually all countries, foreign-born pupils who arrived as children are even more prone to feeling awkward and out of place at school: more than 25% report a sense of not belonging in Portugal, Sweden and the United States.

Socioeconomic intake of school influences well-being. In schools that serve deprived areas, feelings of unfair treatment and not belonging are generally more widespread among pupils. In such schools, the native-born with native-born parents are more likely to be affected than those with immigrant parents in non-European countries and Denmark, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. The weaker sense of belonging that prevails overall among pupils with a migrant background in the EU is not significant, neither in schools that serve disadvantaged areas (save in Estonia and Luxembourg) nor in those that serve better-off districts (except in Estonia and Italy). Controlling for the socioeconomic levels of schools’ pupil intakes, the reported frequency of being bullied is not significantly different between children of immigrants and those with native-born parents in most countries. However, the native-born with foreign-born parents are less likely to be bullied in schools with disadvantaged pupil intakes in non-European countries, Belgium and the Netherlands. For such pupils in the EU, however, perceived unfair treatment by other students is much more of an issue. It appears worst in schools in deprived areas in Estonia, Switzerland and France, in schools with socioeconomically advantaged intakes in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, and in both kinds of schools in Germany.

Figure 7.13. Pupils who feel unfairly treated by their teacher
Percentages, 15-year-olds, 2015
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844237

Figure 7.14. Pupils who feel awkward and out of place at school
Percentages, 15-year-olds, 2015
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844256

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

7.8. Young adults’ educational attainment levels

Definition

This section measures educational attainment against the International Standard Classification of Educational Degrees (ISCED). It considers three levels: i) low, no higher than lower secondary education (ISCED Levels 0-2); ii) very low, no higher than completed primary education (ISCED Levels 0-1); iii) high, tertiary education (ISCED Levels 5-8).

Coverage

People aged 25-34 years old who are not in education.

There are over 600 000 highly educated native-born 25- to 34-year-olds with foreign-born parents in the EU, and 2.4 million in the OECD. As for those who are low-educated, the figures are respectively 370 000 and 600 000. OECD-wide, native-born immigrant offspring are more likely to be highly educated than their peers of native-born parentage – 46% versus 42%. The reverse is true in the EU, where the respective shares are 35% and 37%. Similarly, immigrant offspring are more frequently poorly educated than native-born with native-born parents in the EU (20.5% versus 16%), while the low-educated account for about 11% of both groups in the OECD. Differences are particularly large in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Germany and Greece. Native-born young adults of immigrant parentage have higher levels of education than their peers with native-born parents in the settlement countries, the United Kingdom and the Baltic countries, bar Estonia. They are, however, underrepresented among the highly educated in all other countries, particularly so in Belgium, Greece and Luxembourg.

When it comes to young adult immigrants who arrived as children, their levels of education are generally lower than those of the native-born with native-born parents – except in the settlement countries, the United Kingdom and Portugal. They are also lower than those of immigrant offspring, except in countries like Luxembourg and Belgium, where the native-born children with immigrant parents are particularly underrepresented in higher education.

Across the EU, native-born 25- to 34-year-olds with foreign-born parents from outside the EU generally boast similar levels of educational attainment to their peers with an EU background. In France, Germany and (in particular) Spain, however, they lag behind, while in the United Kingdom they perform better.

Over the last decade, the share of highly educated young adults has increased throughout the EU and the OECD by 6 percentage points among both native-born with foreign- and native-born parents. The rise has been greater among immigrant offspring than among those with native-born parents in two-fifths of countries.

Women aged 25 to 34 are more likely than men to be highly educated in all OECD and EU countries, with the exception of Switzerland. Women who are native-born to immigrant parents are no exception. The gender gap in educational attainment is narrower among young adults with a migrant background than among their native-born peers with native-born parents in all countries bar Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Immigrant women who arrived as children are again more likely to be highly educated than immigrant men in all countries but Switzerland. Unlike their male peers, they appear to enjoy a higher chance of going on to higher education if they attend school in the host country.

Figure 7.15. Low- and highly educated, by migrant background
Percentages, 25- to 34-year-olds not in education, around 2017
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844636

Figure 7.16. Gender differences in the rates of highly educated, by migrant background
Difference in percentage points between women and men, 25- to 34-year-olds not in education, around 2017
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844275

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

7.9. Early school leaving

Definition

The proportion of young people who are neither in education nor training and have gone no further than lower-secondary school.

Coverage

Young people aged 15 to 24 years old.

Across the OECD, 7% of native-born pupils with immigrant parents leave the education system prematurely. That percentage translates into 600 000 young people. The proportion in the EU is 9%, or 250 000 pupils. OECD- and EU-wide, drop-out levels of immigrant offspring are similar to that of young people of native-born parentage. As for foreign-born young people who arrived as children in the OECD, 600 000, or 11%, leave school early, while the share of drop-outs in the EU is 15%, or 240 000 pupils.

The native-born children of immigrants are more likely than their peers with no migrant background to drop out early in two-fifths of countries, particularly in longstanding European destinations and the Nordic countries. Shares exceed 13% in Sweden, Austria and Spain. The widest gaps in drop-out rates between pupils of foreign- and native-born parents are in Austria and Slovenia – at least 8 percentage points. In Switzerland, Italy and the United States, however, rates are similar in the two groups. They are actually lower among immigrant offspring and the foreign-born who arrived as children in the settlement countries, the Baltic States, the United Kingdom and Portugal. By contrast, foreign-born pupils who arrived in the host country before they were 15 are more likely than any other group to leave school early in all other countries. More than 12% dropped out in the Nordic countries, Spain, Austria and Switzerland, and almost 20% in Germany.

At 10% in the EU, the share of early-school leavers among pupils native-born to non-EU migrants is particularly high. It is more than 50% higher than among their peers with native-born parents in all longstanding immigration destinations, save the United Kingdom. In Switzerland, Austria and Slovenia, young people with a non-EU background are more than twice as likely to drop out as their peers of native-born parentage. By contrast, the drop-out rate of native-born with an EU background is lower than any other group in virtually all countries. Non-EU migrants who arrived as children are also more likely to drop out than their EU migrant peers in six countries in ten. In Norway and Portugal, their drop-out rates are at least twice as high as those of natives with an EU background. In contrast, rates of EU migrants arrived as children in the United Kingdom and Greece are at least 10 percentage points higher than those from their peers born outside the EU.

Proportions of early-school leavers among native-born young people of immigrant parents have dropped over the last decade – by 5 percentage points in the EU and by 3 points in Canada and the United States. They have also fallen in Southern Europe. In most countries, with the exceptions of Canada and the United Kingdom, the decline was steeper among the native-born of immigrant parentage than among their peers with native-born parents.

Figure 7.17. Early school leavers
Percentages, 15- to 24-year-olds, around 2016
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844294

Figure 7.18. Early school leavers, by migrant background
Percentages, 15- to 24-year-olds, around 2016
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844313

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

7.10. Not in employment, education or training

Definition

Proportions of young adults who are not in employment, formal education or training (NEET).

Coverage

The young adult population aged 15 to 34 years old.

In the OECD, over 2 million native-born 15- to 34-year-olds of immigrant parentage are NEETs – a 14% NEET rate. In the EU, they number almost 850 000 – a 17% rate. In three OECD countries in five, native-born immigrant offspring are more likely to be NEET than their peers with native-born parents. Their NEET rates are twice as high in Slovenia, Austria, Belgium, France and the Netherlands, where immigrant parents tend to be poorly educated. However, young adults with no migrant background are more likely to be NEET in the settlement countries, the United States and Southern Europe (except for Spain). When it comes to the foreign-born who arrived as children, they are even more estranged from the labour market – 1.9 million of whom are NEET in the OECD and almost 1 million in the EU. NEET rates are higher among the foreign-born who arrived as children than among native-born with two immigrant parents in virtually all EU countries, but not in the United States or the settlement countries.

Overall NEET rates have risen slightly over the last decade OECD- and EU-wide. Among native-born immigrant offspring, however, they have dropped a little. Gaps in NEET rates between the native-born with native- and foreign-born parents have significantly narrowed in two-thirds of countries with available data.

Some population groups are more prone to be NEET than others. Young women are more at risk than young men OECD-wide, regardless of migrant background, although the gender gap is narrower among native-born with foreign-born parents in two-thirds of countries. However, in all countries where overall NEET rates are higher among young people with a migrant background, both male and female immigrants and immigrant offspring are more likely to be NEET than their counterparts with no migrant background. The only exception is Spain, where young men with foreign-born parents are in fact less likely to be NEET than their peers of native parentage, while the reverse is true among women.

In two-thirds of countries, native-born with foreign-born parents are more likely than their peers with native parentage to be both NEET and low-educated. This is especially true in Spain, Denmark, and most European longstanding destinations. Indeed, the poorly educated are another group at high risk of being NEET. Among all native-born young adults in the OECD and EU, NEET rates are higher among the low-educated than the highly educated, particularly among those with no migrant background. Indeed, among the low-educated, NEET rates of youth with native parentage are 5 percentage points higher than those of the native-born with foreign-born parents, both OECD- and EU-wide. The countries where poorly educated immigrant offspring are more likely to be NEET are Slovenia and the long-standing European immigration destinations (with the exceptions of the United Kingdom and Germany). In particular, they are up to 10 points more likely to be NEET in France and Belgium. Finally, parents’ country of birth also influences the likelihood of being NEET. EU-wide, the native-born with non-EU background show a slightly higher NEET rate than those with EU background. At the country level, differences are greatest in Spain, Austria and France.

Figure 7.19. NEET rates
Percentages, 15- to 34-year-olds, around 2017
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844332

Figure 7.20. NEET rates among low-educated
Percentages, 15- to 34-year-olds, around 2017
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844351

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

7.11. Employment

Definition

The employment rate denotes people in employment as a percentage of the young adult population, aged between 15 and 34 years old. The International Labour Organization (ILO) defines an employed person as one who, in the course of the reference week, worked at least one hour or who had a job but was absent from work.

Coverage

The population aged 15 to 34 years old not in education.

Almost 7.3 million native-born 15- to 34-year-olds with foreign-born parents are employed in the OECD and 1.9 million EU-wide. Those numbers respectively represent employment rates of 72% and 69% in the 15-34 age group (excluding students). A further 5.9 million immigrants who arrived in the OECD as children also have jobs – a 73% employment rate. The corresponding figures for the EU are 2.1 million and 66%. In most countries, immigrants and the native-born offspring of immigrants are less likely to be in work than their peers with native-born parents – by 3 percentage points OECD-wide. Across the EU, the employment gap between the native-born of native- and foreign-born parentage is higher, at 6 percentage points. As for child-arrival immigrants, they are 8 points less likely to have a job. In the EU, young adults of non-EU origin generally struggle more to find work than their counterparts with EU background. In Italy and Spain, less than one-third of the native-born with parents born outside the EU are in employment.

In all OECD and EU countries, young men are generally more likely to be in employment than young women, though such is not always the case among native-born young adults of immigrant parentage. In Italy and Portugal, native-born men with immigrant parents lag far behind their female peers, while the same gender gap (albeit narrower) is also observed in Switzerland, Norway and Canada. Conversely, native-born women with immigrant parents are particularly disadvantaged with regard to their male peers in the Baltic countries and Spain. As for child-arrival immigrants, women are over 10 points less likely to be employed than their male peers in France, Germany, the Netherlands and the United States.

Being highly educated helps when it comes to getting a job. In OECD settlement countries, highly educated native-born young adults with immigrant parents are as likely as their peers with native-born parents to be employed. That pattern is not, however, true of most EU countries. Even when native-born of immigrant parentage are highly educated, they are still less likely to have work than their peers with native parents, by 2 percentage points EU-wide, and over 10 percentage points in most EU longstanding destination countries (4 points only in Germany). As regards the low-educated, native-born of immigrant parentage are 3 percentage points less likely than their peers of native parentage to be in work EU-wide. The employment gap is over 15 percentage points in Southern European countries, Sweden and the Netherlands, far worse than the gap among the highly educated. The employment gap among low-educated is also wide in the OECD at 7 points. The only two exceptions are Australia and Israel, where low-educated native-born with immigrant parents are more likely to be at work than their peers with no migrant background.

OECD-wide, the employment rates of native-born young adults with immigrant parents have remained stable over the last decade, while falling by 1 percentage point among their peers with native parents. The situation has worsened across the EU, however, with both groups showing 5-point declines in employment. The greatest deterioration for immigrant offspring has come in countries that suffered most from the economic downturn, such as Greece and Italy, as well as France and the Netherlands. By contrast, Israel, Sweden, the United States, the Czech Republic and Belgium have seen significant increases in their employment rates for immigrant offspring.

Figure 7.21. Employment rates, by migrant background
Percentages, 15- to 34-year-olds not in education, around 2017
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844370

Figure 7.22. Employment rates of native-born with foreign-born parents, by level of education
Differences in percentage points with native-born with native-born parents, 15- to 34-year-olds not in education, around 2017
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844389

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

7.12. Unemployment

Definition

The International Labour Organization (ILO) defines the unemployed as people without, but available for, work, and who have been seeking work in the course of the reference week. The unemployment rate is the percentage of unemployed people in the labour force (the sum of employed and unemployed individuals).

Coverage

The labour force (whether employed or unemployed) aged 15 to 34 years old and not in education.

While the unemployment rates of 15- to 34-year-olds who are native-born to immigrant parents are similar to those of their peers with native-born parents in non-European countries, they are higher in virtually all European countries. In the EU as a whole, 17.5% are unemployed, against 14% among the native-born with no migrant background. OECD- and EU-wide, young immigrants who arrived as children are worst affected by unemployment – 12% are jobless in the OECD and 20% in the EU.

More than 40% of native-born of immigrant parentage are unemployed in Southern European countries (save Portugal). In most Nordic and longstanding immigration countries, unemployment rates are at least twice as high among the native-born with migrant backgrounds as among those without. By contrast, gaps in youth unemployment rates between the two groups are narrower in countries with low unemployment rates (bar Switzerland and Denmark) as well as in Portugal and Lithuania. It is worth noting, though, that in most rather recent immigrant destinations – such as those in Northern and Southern Europe – significant shares of young people of migrant parentage are still in education.

Lack of work experience partly explains why the young are proportionally worse affected by unemployment. And native-born 15- to 24-year-olds with immigrant parents are even harder hit than their older peers: their EU-wide unemployment rate is three times that of their 25- to 34-year-old peers and more than twice as high in the OECD. Although unemployment among 15- to 24-year-olds is high in absolute and relative terms in Sweden, Luxembourg, the United Kingdom and France, it should again be taken into account that considerable proportions of young people of migrant background in that age group are still in education. Among native-born youth with immigrant parents, those with non-EU origin are worst affected by unemployment. Over half are unemployed in Italy and Spain and more than a quarter in Sweden and France, a rate which substantially exceeds that of their peers with EU background.

Wide gender differences are observed in unemployment rates of native-born with foreign-born parents, while gender gaps are small among those with no migrant background in virtually all countries. In half of EU countries, native-born women with foreign-born parents are more likely to be unemployed than men, especially in Greece, Spain and the Baltic countries. The opposite, though, is true in Italy, the United Kingdom, Austria and France. Gender gaps are not generally as large among immigrants who arrived as children. Exceptions are Sweden and Switzerland, where unemployment rates of foreign-born men who arrived as children are twice those of their female peers.

Unemployment rates have increased since the onset of the economic downturn in almost all OECD and EU countries. In most countries, unemployment has risen among the native-born with native-born parents, but more steeply among their peers of foreign-born parentage. In the United States, Belgium and Sweden, however, the native-born offspring of immigrants have actually seen a drop in unemployment.

Figure 7.23. Unemployment rates, by migrant background
Percentages, 15- to 34-year-olds not in education, around 2017
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844408

Figure 7.24. Gender differences in unemployment rates, by migrant background
Difference in percentage points between women and men, 15- to 34-year-olds not in education, around 2017
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844427

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

7.13. Over-qualification

Definition

The over-qualification rate is the share of the highly educated, i.e. educated to ISCED Levels 5-8 (see Indicator 7.8), who work in a job that is ISCO-classified as low- or medium-skilled, i.e. ISCO Levels 4-9 (see Indicator 3.9).

Coverage

Young adults in employment aged between 25 and 34 years old who are highly educated (excluding those in the armed forces [ISCO 0]).

OECD-wide, 30% of highly educated employed native-born 25- to 34-year-olds of immigrant parentage (a total of 700 000 individuals) are formally over-qualified for the jobs they hold. In the EU, the share is 23%, corresponding to 125 000 young people. OECD- and EU-wide, the native-born with foreign-born parents are not more likely than their peers with native-born parents to be over-qualified. From country to country, however, the situation varies widely. In Estonia, Belgium and Germany, they are more likely to be over-qualified (up to twice as likely in Estonia), but less so in Switzerland, Israel and Canada. As for highly educated child-arrival immigrants, their over-qualification rates are higher than those of the native-born in Sweden, the Netherlands and, by over 11 points, in Belgium and France. However, they are broadly similar in most other countries.

The proportion of women who are not in jobs that match their levels of education is higher than that of men in the EU and Australia, regardless of migrant background. The gender gap to the detriment of women is as wide as 9 percentage points in the EU among the native-born with migrant backgrounds against only 2 points among those without. In the United States and Canada, however, young men are more likely than women to be over-qualified in all groups, with the gender gap widest among those with no migrant background. Finally, over-qualification is a slightly bigger issue for the native-born with immigrant parents born outside the EU. EU-wide, 25% are in low- or medium-skilled jobs despite high levels of education. That share is slightly higher than among the native-born with native-born parents, but 7 points lower than among the native-born with EU background.

Figure 7.25. Over-qualification rates, by migrant background
Percentages of employed highly educated, 25- to 34-year-olds, around 2016
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844446

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

7.14. Employment in the public service sector

Definition

Share of the employed population working in the public service sector. This sector encompasses public administration, healthcare, the social services, and education.

Coverage

Population in employment aged 15 to 34 years old.

Almost 23% of native-born young adults with immigrant parents are employed in the public service sector OECD-wide. That corresponds to 1.8 million workers in the OECD – and almost 1.1 million in the United States alone. The share of immigrant offspring working in the public service sector is similar to that of other native-born, whether they are of native-born or mixed parentage. In the EU, 400 000 native-born young adults of migrant parentage are public service employees. In other words, 18% of them work in the public sector, compared with 20% of the native-born with native-born parents and 23% of the native-born with mixed background.

In fact, the native-born of immigrant parentage are over-represented in the public services only in the United Kingdom and Latvia. In all non-European and Nordic countries, though, they are as likely as their peers with no migrant background to be public service employees. But they are less likely in longstanding European immigration destinations and Southern Europe (by at least 10 percentage points in Spain, Portugal and Greece). In Germany and Luxembourg they are 9 and 20 points less likely to work in public service. The proportions of child-arrival immigrants employed in the public sector (some of whom have not naturalised), are even lower in all countries, save the United Kingdom, Australia and Sweden. In total, they number 1.2 million in the OECD and 350 000 in the EU.

In the United Kingdom, Sweden and Belgium, native-born young people with non-EU immigrant parents are more likely than those with EU backgrounds to have a job in public service. By contrast, they are less likely in Austria, France and the Netherlands. In the vast majority of countries, the share of the public sector among the total employment of native-born young adults of immigrant parentage has increased over the last decade, thereby partly compensating for the decline observed in private sector employment over that period. The increase has generally been more noticeable than for their peers with no migrant background, especially in Luxembourg, Belgium, the United Kingdom and Italy.

Figure 7.26. Shares working in the public service sector
Percentages of employed, 15- to 34-year-olds, around 2016
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844484

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

7.15. Relative child poverty

Definition

The relative child poverty rate, in accordance with the Eurostat definition, is the share of children living in a household whose equivalent annual income lies below the poverty threshold which is set at 60% of a country’s median equivalised disposable income.

Coverage

Any person aged less than 16 years old living in a household with at least one head over 15. The household’s annual equivalised income is attributed to each child.

Across the OECD, almost half of all children in immigrant households live below the relative poverty line, compared to over a quarter in native-born households. Although the share is lower in the EU, it is still 40% – twice the level of children in native households. The countries with the highest shares of immigrant offspring living in relative poverty are Spain, Greece and the United States. Over half do so in Greece and Spain, compared with a quarter among children in native households. Proportionately, the fewest immigrants’ children in poverty are to be found in Latvia, Germany, and Israel, where levels are nevertheless still around 20%. The poverty gap between children in native and foreign-born households is generally wide, reaching almost 40 points in Spain and the Netherlands and around 30 in Belgium and France. It is comparatively narrower at close to 10 points in Portugal, the United Kingdom, Croatia and Estonia, and only 4 points in Germany. The only countries in which children in native-born households are more likely than immigrant offspring to live in relative poverty are Latvia and Israel.

Over the last decade, the relative child poverty rate in immigrant households has only slightly increased by 1 percentage point across the OECD. In the EU, the rate stayed roughly the same among both the foreign- and the native-born households. The steepest rises – over 10 points – have come in Iceland, Spain, Slovenia, Estonia and France. In all these countries, the rise was also much stronger than for the native-born who generally experienced little increase or even a slight decline. In only one-third of countries has relative poverty among the children of immigrants declined rather than grown. The sharpest falls have been in the Czech Republic, the United Kingdom, Germany and Denmark, where poverty rates among children in native-born households have, at the same time, changed only marginally.

Comparisons of the poverty rates of immigrants aged 16 or older with those of children living in immigrant households show that children are clearly more likely to be poor – by 11 points in the EU. In the United States, the poverty gap is 23 points, with 56% of children in immigrant households living in poverty. After the United States, gaps are widest in France, Spain and the Netherlands. In the Baltic countries, by contrast, whose foreign-born populations are shaped by national minorities and border changes, adult immigrants are more likely to live in poverty than children in immigrant households.

Figure 7.27. Relative child poverty rates, by migrant background
Percentages, children up to 16 years old, 2015
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844522

Figure 7.28. How relative child poverty rates have evolved, by migrant background
Changes in percentage points, children up to 16 years old, between 2007 and 2015
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844617

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

7.16. Voter participation

Definition

Self-reported voter participation is measured here through public polls in which respondents are asked if they voted in the last national parliamentary elections in their country of residence.

Coverage

All 18-34-year-olds entitled to vote in national elections. Apart from few exceptions for certain nationalities in countries such as the United Kingdom and Portugal, foreigners do not have the right to vote in national parliamentary elections. This indicator therefore applies only to people with the nationality of the country in which they live.

Across the OECD and the EU, close to 60% of native-born with immigrant parents report that they voted in the most recent national elections. That turnout is almost 10 percentage points lower than among their peers with native-born parents, and 5 points below turnout among immigrants who arrived as children in the host country. However, it is 10 points higher than among immigrants with host-country nationality who arrived after the age of 15.

The children of native-born parents are generally more likely to vote than those born to immigrant parents. The gap is particularly wide in Switzerland, where turnout is very low among the eligible native-born of immigrants who are almost two times less likely than the offspring of the native-born to report that they voted in the most recent national election. Similarly, the Netherlands, Germany and Sweden also show wide disparities in excess of 15 percentage points. In Estonia, Israel and Belgium, by contrast, there is little or no turnout gap between native-born with of foreign- and native-born parents. As for Belgium, where voting is compulsory, high voter turnout comes as no surprise.

In both the EU and OECD, young adults of mixed parentage and those who arrived as children in the host country are generally more likely to participate in elections than the native-born with two foreign-born parents. Their participation in voting is similar to that of the bulk of the population.

In Germany, EU-born young people who arrived before they were 15 years old are 14 percentage points more likely to vote in elections than their peers born outside the EU. In fact, their 77% turnout is very much the same as among the native-born children of native parents.

Figure 7.29. Self-reported participation in most recent election, by migrant background
Percentages, 18- to 34-year-olds, 2008-16
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844541

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

7.17. Perceived discrimination

Definition

This section considers shares of immigrants who report having experienced discrimination (refer to Indicator 5.7 for definitions).

Coverage

Foreign-born 15 to 34-year-olds and people born in the host country to two immigrant parents.

Among young people born to immigrants in EU countries, almost one in five feels part of a group that is discriminated against on the grounds of ethnicity, nationality or race. One in seven experience discrimination because of their ethnicity, culture, race, or colour in Canada. In the United States, one native-born with immigrant parents in ten reports discrimination in the workplace. Perceived discrimination is most widespread in the Netherlands, where 38% of children of immigrants say they experience it, France (29%) and Norway (23%). By contrast, less than 10% report discrimination in Ireland, Israel, Switzerland and Austria. In most countries, the native-born children of two immigrant parents are markedly more likely to feel discriminated against than immigrants who arrived as children in the host country. However, in Canada, Sweden, Israel and the United States, the opposite applies and child-arrival immigrants report discrimination more frequently. Comparisons between the periods 2006-10 and 2012-16 in the EU point to an overall slight decline in perceptions of discrimination. The EU-wide share of the native-born children of immigrants who felt discriminated against went down from 24% to 20%. That drop occurred in every subcategory of the population –e.g. among men and women and at all levels of education. It was especially marked, at 10 percentage points, among the native-born children of immigrants who spoke the host country language and were host-country nationals. Only young people of immigrant parentage with foreign nationality experienced a sizeable increase in perceived discrimination, of 11 points.

In the EU, highly educated young people born to immigrants claim discrimination in proportionately greater numbers than the less well educated. Similarly, those whose first language is the host-country language are more than twice as likely to report discrimination as those whose first language is foreign. Immigrant offspring who are host-country nationals are equally more prone to perceptions of discrimination than those having a foreign nationality, as are those with non-EU backgrounds (against their peers with EU origins). Factors like education, language proficiency and citizenship may foster a sense of belonging and identity that prompt people to speak out more readily and harbour greater expectations of the host country. They become more keenly aware of social structures and thus more likely to perceive certain situations as discriminatory. By contrast, neither employment status nor gender significantly affect perceived discrimination in the EU. In Canada and the United States, however, gender is a determinant in reports of discrimination, which are at least 7 percentage points more widespread among men than women.

The second wave of the EU-MIDIS survey which focused on experiences of discrimination of certain key groups found that almost half of respondents with both parents born in a north African country encountered discrimination because of skin colour, ethnic origin or religion in the past 12 months, as did three in ten of those with sub-Saharan parents. As for those with Asian parents, they reported generally low levels of discrimination, except when seeking a job. Native-born young people with sub-Saharan parents felt less commonly discriminated against at work than other ethnic groups. Instances of discrimination were most widespread when respondents sought to use certain public services and private amenities – e.g. when interacting with civil servants or entering bars and restaurants. They also encountered it, albeit to a lesser extent, on the labour market, both when looking for jobs and in the workplace. Instances of discrimination were fewest in health and housing services.

Figure 7.30. Self-reported discrimination, by migrant background
Percentages, 15- to 34-year-olds, 2008-16
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844560

Figure 7.31. Native-born youth with immigrant parents who say they belong to a discriminated group
Percentages, 15- to 34-year-olds, 2012-16
picture

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844579

Notes and sources are to be found at the end of the chapter.

Notes and sources

Notes on Cyprus

  1. 1. Note by Turkey: The information in this document with reference to “Cyprus” relates to the southern part of the Island. There is no single authority representing both Turkish and Greek Cypriot people on the Island. Turkey recognises the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC). Until a lasting and equitable solution is found within the context of the United Nations, Turkey shall preserve its position concerning the “Cyprus issue”.

  2. 2. Note by all the European Union Member States of the OECD and the European Union: The Republic of Cyprus is recognised by all members of the United Nations with the exception of Turkey. The information in this document relates to the area under the effective control of the Government of the Republic of Cyprus.

Note on Israel

The statistical data for Israel are supplied by and under the responsibility of the relevant Israeli authorities. The use of such data by the OECD is without prejudice to the status of the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and Israeli settlements in the West Bank under the terms of international law.

Notes on figures and tables

Lithuania was not an OECD Member at the time of preparation of this publication. Accordingly, Lithuania does not appear in the list of OECD Members and is not included in the zone aggregates.

Indicator 7.1, 7.2 and Indicators 7.8 to 7.14: In Germany, the parental origin is based on the country of birth of parents for the native-born still living with their parents, but is based on own citizenship or the citizenship at birth of the parents for those who do not live anymore with their parents. Therefore, the so-called native-born with foreign-born parents may also include native-born with one foreign- and one native-born parent (the latter being an offspring of foreign-born parents), as well as native-born with two native-born parents who are both themselves offspring of foreign-born parents.

Indicator 7.3: Age range covered in the United States is 3 to 5 years

Indicator 7.7: Instances of bullying by other students include the following statements: “they left me out of things on purpose”, “made fun of me”, “took away or destroyed things that belonged to me”, “spread nasty rumours about me”; “I was threatened by them”, or “I got hit or pushed around by them”.

Indicator 7.17: Data on European countries refer to the sense of belonging to a group that is discriminated against on the grounds of race, ethnicity, or nationality. Canadian data refer to immigrants who have experienced discrimination or have been treated unfairly in the past five years because of their ethnicity, culture, race, or colour. The United States data (for the year 2014 and before) refers to respondents in employment who feel, in one way or another, discriminated against at work because of their race or ethnicity.

Averages factor in rates that cannot be published individually because sample sizes are too small.

For further detailed data, see Annexes C.1, C.2, D.2 and E.

Table 7.1. Sources by indicator

7.1 Youth with a migrant background

7.2 Regions of parental origin

7.3 Early Childhood Education and Care

7.4 Concentration in schools

7.5, 7.6, 7.7 Reading literacy, lack of basic skills, belonging

7.8 Young adults' educational attainment levels

7.9 Early school leaving

7.10, 7.11, 7.12 NEET, employment, unemployment

7.13, 7.14 Over-qualification, public sector

7.15 Relative child poverty

7.16 Voter participation

7.17 Perceived discrimination

OECD/EU

Australia

Census 2006 & 2016

Census 2016

SIH 2015-16

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

Census 2006 & 2016

Census 2006 & 2016

Census 2006 & 2016

Census 2006 & 2016

SIH 2015-16

..

..

Austria

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & LFS 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & LFS 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & LFS 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2014-16

ESS 2002-06 & 2014-16

Belgium

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-16

ESS 2008-16, 2002-08 & 2010-16

Bulgaria

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

..

..

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-12

ESS 2008-12

Canada

Census 2006 & 2016

Census 2006 & 2016

..

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

Census 2006 & 2016

Census 2006 & 2016

Census 2006 & 2016

Census 2006 & 2016

Census 2006 & 2016

GSS 2014

GSS 2004 & 2014

Chile

..

..

..

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

Croatia

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2016

ESS 2008-10

ESS 2008-10

Cyprus1,2

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

..

..

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-12

ESS 2008-12, 2006-08 & 2010-12

Czech Republic

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-16

ESS 2008-16, 2002-04+2008 & 2010-16

Denmark

Population register 2009 & 2017

Population register 2017

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

Population register 2009 & 2017

Population register 2009 & 2017

Population register 2009 & 2016

..

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-14

ESS 2008-14, 2002-08 & 2010-14

Estonia

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & LFS 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & LFS 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & LFS 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-16

ESS 2008-16, 2004-08 & 2010-16

Finland

Population register 2016

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

Population register 2016

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-16

ESS 2008-16, 2002-08 & 2010-16

France

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & LFS 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & LFS 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & LFS 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-16

ESS 2008-16, 2002-08 & 2010-16

Germany

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & Mikrozensus 2017

Mikrozensus 2017

..

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & Mikrozensus 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & Mikrozensus 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & Mikrozensus 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & Mikrozensus 2017

EU-SILC 2007 & 2017

ESS 2008-16

ESS 2008-16, 2002-08 & 2010-16

Greece

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-10

ESS 2008-10

Hungary

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-14

ESS 2008-14, 2002-08 & 2010-14

Iceland

..

..

EU-SILC 2015

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

..

..

..

..

EU-SILC 2015

ESS 2012+2016

ESS 2012+2016

Ireland

..

..

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

..

..

..

..

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-16

ESS 2008-16, 2002-08 & 2010-16

Israel*

LFS 2008 & 2016

..

..

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

LFS 2016

LFS 2016

LFS 2016

LFS 2016

..

ESS 2008-16

ESS 2008-16, 2002+2008 & 2010-16

Italy

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

..

..

Japan

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

Korea

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

Latvia

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

..

..

Lithuania

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2010-14

ESS 2010-14

Luxembourg

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

..

..

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

..

..

Malta

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

..

..

Mexico

..

..

..

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

Netherlands

LFS 2008 & 2016

LFS 2016

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

LFS 2008 & 2016

LFS 2008 & 2016

LFS 2008 & 2016

LFS 2008 & 2016

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-16

ESS 2008-16, 2002-08 & 2010-16

New Zealand

GSS 2016

..

..

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

Norway

Population register 2016

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

Population register 2016

EU-LFS AHM 2014

Population register 2016

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-16

ESS 2008-16, 2002-08 & 2010-16

Poland

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

..

..

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-16

ESS 2008-16, 2002-08 & 2010-16

Portugal

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-14

ESS 2008-14, 2002-08 & 2010-14

Romania

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

..

..

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

..

..

Slovak Republic

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-12

ESS 2008-12, 2004-08 & 2010-12

Slovenia

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-16

ESS 2008-16, 2002-08 & 2010-16

Spain

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-14

ESS 2008-14, 2002-08 & 2010-14

Sweden

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & LFS 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2014

..

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & LFS 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & LFS 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

..

ESS 2008-16

ESS 2008-16, 2002-08 & 2010-16

Switzerland

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & LFS 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2014

..

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & LFS 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & LFS 2017

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2016

ESS 2008-16

ESS 2008-16, 2002-08 & 2010-16

Turkey

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

7.1

7.2

7.3

7.4

7.5-7.7

7.8

7.9

7.10-7.12

7.13, 7.14

7.15

7.16

7.17

United Kingdom

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-LFS AHM 2008 & 2014

EU-SILC 2007 & 2016

ESS 2008-16

ESS 2008-16, 2002-08 & 2010-16

United States

CPS 2008 & 2017

CPS 2017

CPS 2007 & 2017

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

CPS 2008 & 2017

CPS 2008 & 2017

CPS 2008 & 2017

CPS 2008 & 2017

CPS 2007 & 2017

USGSS 2012-14 (employed)

USGSS 2006-10 & 2012-14 (employed)

Partner/ G20 countries

Argentina

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

Brazil

..

..

..

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

Colombia

..

..

..

..

PISA 2015

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

Costa Rica

..

..

..

PISA 2015

PISA 2015

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

Indonesia

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

Russia

..

..

..

..

PISA 2015

..

..

..

..

..

ESS 2008-12+2016

ESS 2008-12+2016, 2006-08 & 2010-12+2016

Saudi Arabia

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

South Africa

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

 StatLink http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933844655

End of the section – Back to iLibrary publication page