An Assessment of the Syrian Refugee Resettlement Program from a Multi-level Policy Approach.
Introduction
The influx of Syrian refugees has been thought of as disruptive for many local communities in Canada. The Federal government itself had anticipated that “the number and pace of refugee arrivals… will likely challenge even communities with established settlement/resettlement services and growing labor markets” (IRCC, 2016). Between November 2015 and January 2017, Canada accepted just over 40,000 refugees. The province of Ontario has received 23,055, including 11,330 GARs, 9,080 PSRs and 2, 645 Blended Visa office Referred.
The two main refugee streams (Government Assisted Refugees-GARs, and privately sponsored refugees — PSRs) each bring strengths and weaknesses to the resettlement process. PSRs tend to have better informal support systems compared to GARs. Yet many PSRs (and their sponsors) are not aware of the formal resettlement services available within their communities. On the other hand, GARs have direct access to government-funded resettlement services in their first year, however, GARs often lack the longer-lasting informal support networks of their privately sponsored counterparts.
In Ontario, the signing of the Canadian Ontario Immigration Agreement (COIA) in November 2005, has increased the role municipal government plays in the development of immigration programs (Burr, 2011). The subsequent signing of the Local Immigration Partnerships (LIPs) in Ontario has given local governments and local settlement agencies a lot more leeway when it comes to creating programs for refugees/newcomers.
Burr (2011) argues that there is increased interest from many sectors in the development of a welcoming and inclusive communities. Provinces, territories, municipalities, and neighborhood associations are developing plans to attract and retain newcomers to Canada- while libraries, schools, employers, police services, health centers, and others focus on responding to the unique needs of immigrants and refugees. The value of community-level planning and localized responses is progressively being recognized.
For public policy to have a meaningful impact, it requires local responses or lens. As Bradford (2009:14) stated, “policy interventions must increasingly work from the ground up to generate solutions rooted in the particular concerns of local communities, attuned to the specific needs and capacities of residents”.
Through the LIPs, Citizen and Immigration Canada (CIC) supports a new form of locally based collaboration among multiple stakeholders. These partnerships enable communities to develop strategic plans to address the opportunities and challenges associated with fostering inclusive and responsive environments. They also signify an innovation in multi-level collaborative governance- encouraging co-operation among federal, provincial, and municipal governments.
Local Immigration Partnerships play an essential role in organizing various groups to develop coordinated strategies and target mainstream institutions, with the goal of factoring immigrant settlement and integration into the broader community planning process. LIPs represent a significant opportunity to build welcoming communities (Burr, 2011).
However, one of the major issues has to do with whether the local organizations have adequate capacities to provide services and programs that meet the needs of GARs.
Importance of refugee integration
Refugees and Newcomers have played a major role in the economic development and sustainability of the Canadian workforce and economy. Their contribution to the Canadian economy is so vital that it is estimated that between 60 % of the economic growth in Canada is the result of the labor, income, taxes, and investments that immigrants and refugees contribute to the economy (Ontario Ministry of Finance, 2014).
In 2015, a report by the conference board of Canada highlighted the fact that “the country would have to increase immigration to over 350,000 per year to prevent an economic recession, and the labor provided by refugees will make significant contributions to maintaining economic prosperity in the country”. According to Citizenship and Immigration Canada, 731,000 refugees entered the country between 1990 and 2014, which accounted for 11% and 17% of all newcomers. Moreover, 60% of all new arrivals are under the age of 25, and a large portion of them will have a long-term connection to the labor market. Thus it important to understand their labor market trajectories and how the government can create institutions to help them integrate.
Integration is a two-way process, requiring adjustment on the part of both newcomers and host communities. The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) of 2001 reflects this, stating “that the successful integration of permanent residents into Canada involves mutual obligations for new immigrants and Canadian society” (Burr, 2011). Ultimately, the goal is to support newcomers to become fully engaged in the social, economic, political, and cultural life in Canada.
Based on the principles of acceptance and respect, a welcoming community should: openly receive newcomers and create an inclusive environment; strive to understand the needs of newcomers and provide access to a full range of services and programs; and ensure newcomers can participate fully in all aspects of community life and Canadian society.
Newcomers, in turn, should endeavor to act on opportunities for participation; strive to contribute to community life within the context of Canadian laws and customs, and help others in the community. Research undertaken by Esses et al. (2010) outlined further characteristics that enable communities to attract and retain newcomers. Linkages between the main actors working toward welcoming communities and the presence of newcomer-serving agencies that can successfully meet the needs of newcomers were among the features mentioned in the analysis.
2.2. Characteristics of GARs and their specific integration challenges
Government Assisted Refugees (GARs) are members of the Convention Refugees Abroad Class, and in a few instances also members of the Country of Asylum Class who have been identified as refugees with special needs (Wilkinson and Garcea, 2017). In terms of resettlement, the Government of Canada is responsible for providing the required support. GARs have different distinctive needs in comparison to Private Sponsor Refugees (PSR) and Blended Visa Refugees (BVR). GARs have a much more difficult time integrating into Canada for various reasons.
PSRs tend to have a better education and are much more economically established than GARs, who are selected because they might be facing challenges that make them vulnerable. In contrast, PSRs are usually selected for their professional skills and their ability to speak English. The huge gap in language skills and education level impact the GARs ability to integrate socially and economically. Unemployment is also much higher amongst GARs in comparison to PSRs. A study conducted by Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) reveals that PSRs are much likely to obtain employment and be earning a decent wage after their first 3 years in Canada. In contrast, GARs have a much more difficult time obtaining employment. GARs are usually left to maneuver the complicated bureaucracy with minimum language skills and a limited support system.
An Evaluation study by Immigration and Citizenship Canada comparing the characteristics of Government Assisted Refugees who were resettled between 2010–2014 to Private Sponsor Refugee (PSR) and Blended Visa Refugees (BVR) discovered that average PSRs knew at least one of the official languages than either GARs or BVR refugees. Moreover, PSR’s are much more likely to arrive as singles in comparison to GARS, for example only 11.7% of Syrian GARs are single in comparison to 48.9% of PSR and 20.6 % BVRs. “Moreover, there were no PSR cases with family sizes higher than nine, compared to 40 GAR cases and 11 BVR cases. Another reason why it is important to create distinctive programs for GARs is they have less education than their counterparts. Only 5.3 % of adult Syrian GARs have some form of university education in comparison to 31.6 % of adult PSRs and 3.1% of BVR.
Furthermore, a higher proportion of adult Syrian GARs (81.3%) had secondary education or less, compared to adult Syrian PSR and adult Syrian BVR refugees (52.7% and 48.3%, respectively). Adul t Syrian PSRs also had more knowledge of Canada’s official languages, 18.2% of adult PSRs do not have any knowledge of Canada’s official language in comparison to 83.6% of adult Syrian GARs and 50% of adult BVR. The report also compared adult GARs to the adult GARs who settled between 2010–2014 and found that Syrian GARs tended to be less educated and had less understanding of both Canada’s official language. However, the adult Syrian PSRs are much more educated and have more knowledge of both Canada’s official language compared to the resettled PSRs admitted between 2010–2014.
Beiser and Hou (2000) use data from the Refugee Resettlement Project (RRP)-a decade-long investigation of the resettlement of Southeast Asian (SEA) refugees in western Canada, to “examined gender differences in English language acquisition and male-female differences in the employment consequences of language proficiency of refugees” (Beiser and Hou, 2000: 300). Using a longitudinal research method, the researchers were able to determine the factors that affect English language acquisition as “well as the sequencing of relationships between variables such as participation in the labor market and language proficiency” (Beiser and Hou, 2010: 314).
The result of the study revealed that language proficiency played an integral role in southeast Asian women refugees in attaining employment.
Similarly, Wilkson argues that language proficiency plays an integral role in determining successful economic integration. However, less than 40% of refugees who come to Canada have a good understanding of English or French before their arrival. Wilson suggests the Government of Canada should provide additional funding to settlement agencies to help cut the waitlist for ESL classes. The authors noted that in British Columbia there are “over 5,000 people on its waiting list for English language classes (Wilkson, p.92). Lack of proficiency in English and French is often cited by refugees “as the main problem preventing them from finding suitable employment” (Wilson, p. 96).
The literature reviewed so far offers an overview of the struggles and possibilities refugees face. We have seen how the conditions of their country of origin shape their journey in terms of socio-political characteristics and pre-arrival experiences — refugee-like situations, displacement and protracted camp experience. Once in Canada, refugees continue to face challenges. The literature shows how housing, employment, health, and education needs can be sources of distress for the newly arrived refugees. On many occasions, refugees also face different types of discrimination based on multiple aspects of their identity such as race, color, age, gender, sexual orientation, and family composition among others.
The theory of Multi-level governance
The academic debates on governance in multilevel settings define various ways of configuring relations between government levels. Scholten (2013) brings these different ways together in a typology that distinguishes between four ideal type configurations of relations between government levels: centralist (top-down), localist (bottom-up), multilevel, and decoupled. First, the centralist ideal type exhibits a clear hierarchy and division of labor between government levels.
In a multilevel setting, this involves a top-down relationship between the different levels of government, such as a clear central codification of the division of labor between levels and control mechanisms to ensure that policy implementation at the local level follows central rules and reflects the central policy frame.
This implies a strong institutional structure for policy coordination. Second, the localist and bottom-up perspective states that policy competencies follow the principle of subsidiarity; that is, what can be done locally should be done locally. Local governments do more than just implement policy; they formulate policies, respond to local policy agendas, and exchange knowledge and information horizontally with other local governments.
The localist type may lead to greater policy divergence between the national and the local level. It speaks to what some scholars describe as “the local dimension of migrant integration policies” (Alexander, 2007; Caponio and Borkert, 2010; Penninx et al, 2004), which stresses that local governments are often confronted with integration problems in different ways than the national level of government.
Third, multilevel governance refers to the interaction and joint coordination of relations between the various levels of government without a clear dominance of one level. This means that “vertical venues” are needed where governments from different levels jointly engage in meaningful policy coordination. These might involve forums or networks in which organizations from different government levels meet. The fourth type is decoupled relations between government levels. Such a situation is characterized by the absence of any meaningful policy coordination between levels. Thus, in any single policy domain, policies at different levels are dissociated and may even be contradictory. This type can lead to policy conflicts between government levels.
The role of municipal governments is somewhat different, at least in the initial settlement period, which falls primarily under the jurisdiction of the federal and provincial governments. Municipalities are service providers. Gunn (2012:3) notes that multi-level governance has become critical that certain Canadian municipalities have even developed formalized intergovernmental partnerships in which the municipal level of government assumes an equal status to its federal and provincial counterparts regarding settlement/integration policy formation and service delivery. In the new era of intergovernmental agreement, municipal government plays an important role in the development of settlement programs because of the knowledge and information they know about their local communities. Young (2013) et al note “municipal governments have a lot of information about the locality.
Similarly, provincial and federal agencies also have much information. In Ontario, for example, where immigrant settlement is concerned, the federal department, Citizenship and Immigration Canada, and the provincial Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration possess localized information about immigrant flows, settlement agencies, language needs, and so on. However, this information is not integrated with other knowledge about the community that is relevant to immigrant settlement-such as housing, libraries, recreation, local businesses, and so on. Integrated local information is the specialty of the municipal government.
In managing the response to migrants and refugee flows, cities have shown great dynamism and have multiplied innovative approaches. One way in which local action has increased in response to migrations is through cities’ role in delivering public services. Many experts estimate that local governments are best placed to respond to the needs of migrants and refugees, given their proximity to their populations, their knowledge of the local context and their ability to develop policies and programs, mobilize partnerships and evaluate impact.
In practice, local governments have also been at the forefront of public service delivery including but not limited to public housing, health, language, education, vocational training, and social, economic, political and cultural integration overall.
One of the key reasons why there is been a persistent trend towards multi-level governance on immigration policy is because of how diverse cities have become. Multi-level governance can address this by leveraging diverse ideas, coordinates shared resources and use new tools and techniques to animate and steer decision-making. Leo and August (2009: 500) examined the factors that contributed to the success of Manitoba’s immigration and settlement programs.
Their research revealed the “provincial government’s early and continuing consultation with community stakeholders, and close relations with the community service providers made it possible for the programs to achieve adaptation to local circumstances/ context. In addition, they argue that multilevel governance made it possible and laid the basis for community collaboration in achieving effective and economical operation of the settlement program.
What were some of the key lessons learned from the Syrian refugee resettlement initiative?
In a recent report by Citizenship Immigration and Refugee Canada noted that some of the lessons learned were that they did not anticipate the GARs refugee having such higher needs. the reported stated, “in retrospect, the government-assisted refugees we resettled had higher than anticipated needs, but that information was not available until the refugees were interviewed and began arriving in Canada”.
However, as I noted earlier IRCC conducted research comparing 2010 and 2014 refugees to determine what made one group more successful than the other. One of the findings from the study was GARs had a harder time integrating because they had higher needs. Thus, the government failed to identify and put measures in place to address this issue is a lack of coordination and communication between different levels of government and agencies.
