OIM - Directrices Sobre la Integración de la Migración en la Planificación del Desarrollo Local

Financed by UN Joint Migration and Development Initiative Guidelines on mainstreaming migration into local development planning Implemented by This publication has been produced with the assistance of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation through the UN Joint Migration and Development Initiative (JMDI). The JMDI is an inter-agency initiative led by the UNDP in collaboration with the IOM, ITC-ILO, UNCHR, UNFPA, UNITAR and UN Women. The contents of this publication can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation or the United Nations. Moreover, the designations employed and the presentation of material throughout the report do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation and the United Nations, concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning its frontiers or boundaries. The JMDI is committed to maximising the potential of migration for local development. The JMDI does this by scaling-up selected locally-led migration and development initiatives by providing financial assistance, technical assistance and capacity building to local actors. Moreover, the JMDI also collects and shares the good practices and lessons learnt from the initiatives for mutual support among local actors and feeds this into national and international dialogue in order to promote the key role of local authorities in managing migration for local development.

Cover Photos: © IOM, Island of Lesbos, Greek

© IOM, Muse Mohammed, Istanbul, Turkey © IOM, Zhytomyr, Northern Ukraine Contributors These guidelines were prepared by Melissa Siegel (Professor of Migration Studies), Elaine McGregor and Sarah Langley (Researchers) from the Maastricht Graduate School of Governance and UNU-MERIT in Maastricht, Netherlands in coordination with Cécile Riallant and Joanne Irvine from the Programme Management Unit of the UN Joint Migration and Development Initiative (JMDI). In addition, key input was provided by an established JMDI Technical Committee, JMDI Focal

Points, and a group of resource persons through their participation in interviews, identification of resources and by providing timely and insightful comments throughout the drafting process. Thus, special thanks goes to the JMDI Technical Committee members: Veronika Burget (UNHCR), Geertrui Lanneau (IOM), Andrea Milan (UN Women), Colleen Thouez (UNITAR), Begoña Trénor (IOM), as well as Mauro Martini (IFAD) and Dasha Mokhnacheva (IOM); JMDI Focal Points: Yvain Bon (IOM), Lou Zaid Chavanne (IOM), Hind Aissaoui Bennani (IOM), Golda Myra Roma (UNDP), Maria Antonia Gasperini (IOM), Prasuna Saakha (IOM), and the following individuals and organisations: Alicia Chavez (ADEL Morazan); Valeria Bello (UNU-GCM); Mario Walter Chavarria; Olivier Ferrari (University of Lausanne); Jessica Hagen-Zanker (ODI); David Khoudour (OECD Development Centre); Anna Knoll (ECPDM); Olivier Le Masson (GRDR); Daniel Naujoks (Columbia University/The New School); Jorge Noboa (Provincial Government of Imbabura); and Giovanna Tipan (Provincial Government of Pichincha), and Inkeri von Hase (UN Women). Helpful research assistance was also provided by Amy Hong, Julia Reinold, Tamta Gelashvili, Amber Khan and Catherine Hutchison. Foreword .............................................................................................6 Part 1: Introduction ..............................................................................7 Part 2: Key Concepts ...........................................................................13 — 2.1 A shared understanding of geographic, migration and gender-related terminology ........................................................................15 — 2.2 A shared understanding of policy coherence for migration and development ...................................................................17 Part 3: Methodology and how to use the Guidelines ...............................21 Part 4: Indicators for mainstreaming migration

into local policy planning ...................................................................29 Institutional Arrangements .....................................................................31

1. Mapping the Local Context .........................................................................33 — 1A. Data and Evidence ...............................................................................34 — 1B. Needs Assessment ..............................................................................36 — 1C. Institutional Mapping ..........................................................................38

2. Engagement and Coordination .....................................................................41 — 2A. Multi-stakeholder Engagement ............................................................42 — 2B. Civic Engagement ...............................................................................44 — 2C. Coordination .......................................................................................46

3. Implementation and Sustainability ..............................................................49 — 3A. Sustainability ......................................................................................50 — 3B. Capacity Assessment ..........................................................................52 — 3C. Preparedness ......................................................................................54

Policy and Practice .................................................................................57

4. Migrants and Society ..................................................................................59 — 4A. Migrant Rights.....................................................................................60 — 4B. Social Cohesion and Xenophobia .........................................................64 — 4C. Diaspora Engagement .........................................................................68

5. Mainstreaming Migration and Displacement ..................................................73 — 5A. Mainstreaming Migration and Displacement .........................................74 — 5B. Inclusive Education .............................................................................76 — 5C. Inclusive Healthcare ...........................................................................80 — 5D. Inclusive Employment .........................................................................84 — 5E. Inclusive Infrastructure .......................................................................88 — 5F. Inclusive Agriculture and Food Security ................................................90 — 5G. Inclusive Investment ..........................................................................94 — 5H. Environment and Climate Change ........................................................98

Annexes ............................................................................................102 Annex 1: Glossary of key terms ..........................................................................102 Annex 2: Glossary of acronyms ..........................................................................106 Bibliography ......................................................................................108 Foreword The positive contributions of migration to development have now duly been recognised in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the good governance of migration will be a key success factor for the international community to ensure that truly no-one is left behind. Indeed, migration affects and is affected by all areas of governance and should therefore be

an integral component to consider across efforts to achieve all of the 17 SDGs. The multi-sectoral nature of migration and how it links to the SDGs necessitate a focused attempt to ensure policy coherence in migration and development. If we do not consider how other policies like housing, health or agriculture affect and are affected by migration, inconsistencies can and do limit the effectiveness of migration and development efforts. A mechanism to mitigate this and which has been tried and tested is to mainstream migration across all relevant policies for enhanced development outcomes. While mainstreaming for policy coherence in relation to migration and development has been well explored at the national levels, evidence from the UN Joint Migration and Development Initiative (JMDI) shows that such efforts are also crucial at the local level for enhanced development impact. This is increasingly important given that cities and local and regional authorities are recognised and depended upon as the first responders to migration and displacement. Thus, they are finding themselves at the forefront of managing migration dynamics for inclusive growth and local development. The evidence and good practices from the JMDI’s efforts have been consolidated into these guidelines which is the first tool of its kind aimed at the local level. We believe these guidelines are strategic as they will serve to support cities and local and regional authorities undertake their own mainstreaming efforts as well as map and enhance the implementation of the SDGs in relation to migration. Moreover, it will help pave the way towards the necessary multi-level approach to policy coherence in migration and development whereby local and regional authorities can feed their expertise and knowledge into national policy making for more responsive and pertinent national policies. Barbara Pesce-Monteiro UN/UNDP Director UN/UNDP Representation Office in Brussels Markus Reisle Head of Global Programme Migration and Development Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) Introduction A beneficiary of the JMDI-supported project “Impact of migration on economic development in the municipalities of Conchagua, Intipucá and El Carmen, in the department of La Unión” producing and selling handcrafted goods in El Carmen, El Salvador. Source: JMDI.

Quite often we analyse migration flows and their impact on development through the lens of country to country dynamics. However, a more refined approach is needed that considers the sub-national, territorial level. Indeed, migrants from one territory tend to migrate to the same host country. As such, the local level – where the development impact of migration is most profoundly felt – is crucial for comprehensively addressing the challenges and opportunities related to migration. These dynamics are mediated by cities and local and regional actors (LRAs) on the ground, who find themselves at the forefront of managing the link between migration and development. Moreover, as there are persisting development inequalities and distinct migration patterns within countries themselves, a territorial approach allows us to better acknowledge the realities experienced within a specific local context. To implement services and programmes that reflect this reality, the role of cities and LRAs is pivotal. Cities and LRAs are uniquely positioned because of their close proximity to the local population, which thereby allows them to form partnerships, achieve trust, and have an informed understanding of the local realities. Such a relationship aids in the cities’ and LRAs’ ability to create and implement inventive and pioneering policy responses.1 Also, cities and LRAs have direct experience in policy implementation, development planning, and service provision, and are conduits between local realities and national priorities, implementing national-level migration and development-related policies. However, despite being on the frontlines, experiencing and influencing the impacts of migration in localities across the world, there is a limited acknowledgement of the vital role of cities and LRAs in global discussions on migration and development. Nevertheless, this acknowledgment is slowly improving, and cities and LRAs were recently recognised in the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants as first responders to migration, who should be supported in their role. Indeed, there is a growing recognition that cities and LRAs are key stakeholders to consult and involve in the process of developing the Global Compact on

Safe, Regular and Orderly Migration and the Global Compact on Refugees. Cities and LRAs themselves have also been establishing their own space within the Migration and Development Agenda through the Global Mayoral Forum on Human Mobility, Migration and Development (Mayoral Forum) that was launched in 2014. At the Mayoral Forum in 2015, mayors from around the world joined together to release of the Quito Local Agenda on Mobility and Development which outlines how cities and LRAs can and are implementing the migration-related targets of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).2 Indeed, to reach the global SDGs, local actors have an important role to play. With the localisation of SDGs, cities and LRAs are specifically responsible for working towards SDG objectives through setting goals and targets, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. In fact, the success of the SDGs is in part dependent upon cities and LRAs being involved in global agenda setting and linking global level goals to local stakeholders and community members. 1 JMDI, Mapping Local Authorities’ Practices in the Area of Migration and Development: A Territorial Approach to Local Strategies, Initiatives, and Needs (2013). Available from http://www.migration4development.org/ 2 For more information on the Global Mayoral Forum on Human Mobility, Migration and Development see http://www.migration4development.org/ INTRODUCTION | 9 Furthermore, since migration affects and is affected by all areas of “Working at the local level governance, it should therefore be a represents an additional key point to consider across efforts layer of political complexity; to achieve the SDGs. In this endeavour to achieve policy coherence, it is tense working relationships crucial to consider the diverse conbetween local and national texts and pre-existing, innovative authorities may exist due to approaches at the local level which the different realities they reflect the complex relationship beface in implementing policy” tween migration and development. Yet, mainstreaming for policy coherInterviewee ence in relation to migration and development has been mostly explored at the national levels, instead of the local level. Thus, while significant efforts have been made to develop tools for national level actors in the area of migration such as the IOM Migration Governance Index and the OECD-KNOMADUNDP Dashboard on Policy and Institutional Coherence for Migration and Development, the Guidelines on Mainstreaming Migration into Local Development Planning (hereafter, the Guidelines) are the first of their kind to be targeted at policy coherence in migration and development at the local level. As such, these Guidelines emerge as a timely tool, supporting local authorities in understanding how migration and development-related policies interact across a variety of sectors. This support is intended to help local policy makers and practitioners strengthen their efforts to mainstream migration into all governance areas for enhanced policy coherence in migration and development, and thereby contribute to the implementation of migration-related SDG targets. The Guidelines have been designed as a user-friendly and simple tool featuring straightforward questions that practitioners can diagnostically answer to identify institutional, policy and intervention gaps or weaknesses in mainstreaming migration and development in their local context. Consisting of 20 indicators, the Guidelines can be applied to a variety of contexts and ways in which migration is defined or understood and to all types and directionalities of migration. The Guidelines also link specific topics with good practice examples and useful tools, handbooks and training materials. Above all, the purpose of these Guidelines is to facilitate discussion, spark ideas, and encourage creative thinking on how local governments can best address migration, displacement and development issues around the world. Building on the plethora of related materials and tools for local actors, the Guidelines:

1. Connect local policies to the SDGs and, in doing so, offer concrete ways in which the role of migration – as a driver of development – can be promoted at the local level;

2. Are coherent with existing national levels tools, such as the IOM Migration

Governance Index and the OECD-KNOMAD-UNDP Dashboard on Policy and Institutional Coherence for Migration and Development;

3. Draw attention to a range of practical examples from around the world, where cities and LRAs have implemented innovative approaches to respond to the opportunities and challenges that migration brings; 10 | INTRODUCTION

4. Can be applied to a range of migratory contexts, capturing different types of human mobility (including internal movements);

5. Apply a policy coherence lens to draw attention to the importance of institutional configurations and policy sectors.

Following this introduction (Part 1), the remainder of the report is structured in four parts. Part 2 provides an overview of the key concepts and definitions used throughout the report. This is complemented by a Glossary of Key Terms which can be located in Annex 1. Part 3 offers an overview of the methodology used to develop the Guidelines, introduces the indicators, and provides practical guidance on how to use the Guidelines. Part 4 presents each indicator and is complemented with an explanation as to why it is relevant, providing relevant examples and information on further resources.

INTRODUCTION | 11

Key Concepts A community meeting with migrants and their families in the Kailai District, Nepal, under the JMDI-supported project “Safer Remittances for Improved Livelihoods.” Source: JMDI.

Before further elaborating on the development of the Guidelines (Part 3), it is worth pausing to reflect briefly on some key definitional issues. 2.1. A shared understanding of geographic, migration and gender-related terminology The first relates to the definition of what is meant by local. Local can be used to describe “any relevant level of sub-national governance that is in charge of or has established and implements initiatives aimed at integrating migration into policy planning.”3 What this means in practice will vary from context to context, signalling the importance of ensuring that, when developing the Guidelines, different levels and experiences of decentralisation are taken into account. The second relates to what is meant by migration. A migrant is “any person who is moving or has moved across an international border or within a State away from his/her habitual place of residence, regardless of (1) the person’s legal status; (2) whether the movement is voluntary or involuntary; (3) what the causes for the movement are; or (4) what the length of the stay is.”4 This is broader than the usual definition of migrants, which is often delimited by whether a person has crossed an international border for a specific amount of time and or for a specific purpose (remunerated activities). In local contexts, it makes sense to consider any form of human mobility, including internal mobility, and how this might impact – and be impacted by – local communities and how they function. It is also useful to discuss what types of mobility localities are likely to encounter. Migration can be categorised and divided along many lines, including the driver(s) of migration and whether movement is forced or voluntary. It is now widely accepted that a simple binary categorisation of forced versus voluntary migration is unrealistic. Instead, drivers of migration can be better imagined as falling somewhere on a spectrum. While all migrants have agency and need a certain amount of resources and ambition to decide to move, this decision will be more constrained for some more than others. This is due to various factors, such as persecution and violence. Migrants who are traditionally classified as having a higher degree of

choice are those that move primarily for work, education or family reasons. These migrants are often not classified as asylum seekers or refugees and may be in the country of destination regularly or irregularly.5 They may face exploitation or vulnerability in the country of destination due to a possible lack of documentation, limited social networks or language barriers, among other factors. On the other side of the spectrum, some individuals face violence or persecution and decide to flee to another locality or to cross an international boundary to escape such persecution. Internally displaced persons, or IDPs, are individuals who have been forcibly displaced from 3 IOM and JMDI, White Paper: Mainstreaming Migration into Local Development Planning and Beyond (Geneva, Switzerland, IOM, 2015). Available from https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/whitepaper_mainstreaming.pdf 4 IOM, “Key Migration Terms: Migration,” 2017. Available from https://www.iom.int/key-migrationterms#Migrant 5 Khalid Koser, International Migration: a Very Short Introduction (Oxford University Press, 2007).

Available from http: //lms.hse.ru/content/lessons/35035/Koser%20International%20Migration.pdf KEY CONCEPTS | 15 their homes due to conflict, persecution, natural disasters, or other reasons, but have remained in their country. They may face a lack of shelter, food insecurity, loss of livelihood, family separation, sexual or gender-based violence, marginalisation and discrimination.6

When migrants are forcibly displaced from their homes and cross an international border, they may then become asylum seekers or refugees. An asylum seeker is an individual whose application for international protection has not yet been processed,7 while a refugee is a person who has been granted international protection in another country due to a well-founded fear of persecution.8 Today, more than 60 per cent of the world’s refugees live in an urban environment outside of a camp. Such a living environment offers refugees a better chance at integration and earning a living, but also presents dangers such as exploitation, arrest or

detention,9 making the issue especially relevant for local governments. Further definitions on migration and development terminology used in the Guidelines can be found in Annex 1. In addition to the reasoning for their move or their administrative status, migrants may also face heightened vulnerabilities and exploitation due to their gender. While migrant women are often the first responders in crises and play a pivotal role in community sustainment and rebuilding, their needs and concerns are often poorly represented in policy and humanitarian aid. In the labour market, women often fill specific niches in sectors, such as care and domestic work, that are sometimes excluded from the protections granted to other migrant labourers. At home, migrant women face increased healthcare risks due to child-birth and are often confronted with a lack of comprehensive sexual and reproductive healthcare. Male migrants can also face increased vulnerabilities while working in certain sectors, such as seafaring, which are male-dominated and sometimes exempt from national labour law.10 In designing and implementing migration, displacement and development strategies and interventions, public officials must take into account the varying experiences of men and women and work proactively towards gender equality. 6 Global Protection Cluster (GPC), Handbook for the Protection of Internally Displaced Persons (2010).

Available from http: //www.refworld.org/docid/4790cbc02.html 7 UNHCR, “Asylum Seekers,” 2017. Available from http://www.unhcr.org/asylum-seekers.html 8 UNHCR, “What is a Refugee,” 2017. Available from http://www.unrefugees.org/what-is-a-refugee/ 9 UNHCR, “Urban Refugees,” 2017. Available from http://www.unhcr.org/urban-refugees.html 10 UN Women, “Women Refugees and Migrants,” 2017. Available from http://www.unwomen.org/en/news/ in-focus/women-refugees-and-migrants 16 | KEY CONCEPTS 2.2 A shared understanding of policy coherence for migration and development In its most basic form, policy coherence can be defined as the non-occurrence of policy effects that undermine their original objectives.11 Incoherence is not completely avoidable in the sense that all policies reflect negotiations of different interests and objectives. However, efforts to promote policy coherence can focus their energies on addressing unnecessary and unintended incoherence.12 This can occur when there is either a lack of awareness of how a policy fits into the existing portfolio of policies, or when there is a lack of understanding of the causal relations leading to faulty assumptions regarding what the policy can achieve.

When coupled with the concept of development, the notion of policy coherence for development implies that policies do not undermine development objectives. Development objectives may be those established in local development plans, but could also relate to national or even internationally agreed upon goals and strategies. While territories are expected to follow national-level legislation, they need the support, resources and specific competencies to do so, which may not be provided by the national government. Thus, this is the value of vertical coherence. Horizontal coherence, on the other hand, concerns different policy areas within one administrative level. The ultimate goal is a combination of the two to create multi-level coherence through which cities and territories input their knowledge and experience into national development planning. This in turn creates more applicable and responsive national policies that can be more successfully implemented at the local level. Understanding the connections between migration and development “Mainstreaming is not a forms the next conceptual question of binary outcome, but rather relevance. It is well understood that a participatory process that the relationship between migration and development is complex and bi-direcresults in positioning upon tional. Migration can have both positive a continuum, with some and negative (human) development migration and development outcomes at the micro, meso and macissues being more ro levels. However, development (or mainstreamed than others” the absence of development) can also lead to migration. This is further complicated by the fact that migration is Interviewee

affected by and affects different policy areas and, within governments, tends to be a portfolio that is distributed amongst several ministries with competing views and different levels of power, influence and resources. 11 Paul Hoebink, Marleen Deuss, Hein De Haas and Gertrud Wagemans, The Coherence of EU Policies: Perspectives from the North and the South, Commissioned Study of the European Union’s Poverty Reduction Effectiveness Programme (REF:RO2CS, Centre for International Development Issues, Nijmegen, 2005). 12 Robert Picciotto, “The Evaluation of Policy Coherence for Development,” in Evaluation, vol.11, p. 311330 (2005).

KEY CONCEPTS | 17

Within this context, the concept of “mainstreaming” migration can be understood as a process aimed at inserting migration as a parameter across different policy areas, through multi-stakeholder and multi-level mechanisms.13 In regard to migration and development, policy coherence for development can be broadly defined as migration and development policies, spanning a variety of policy areas, which collaboratively work towards shared objectives and seek to mitigate negative policy consequences or side-effects.14 Evidence of the need for policy coherence for migration and development can be found within the upcoming Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration and the Global Compact on Refugees, which will be adopted in 2018 and are expected to broadly call for an enhancement of global migration governance and coordination efforts. The objective is to achieve a framework for inclusive and wide-ranging international cooperation on human mobility.15 The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development also highlights the need for policy coherence for migration and development, as it directs countries to “pursue policy coherence and an enabling environment for sustainable development at all levels and by all actors.”16 The SDGs both directly and indirectly reference the need for policy coherence; SDG 17.14

calls on countries to “enhance policy coherence for sustainable development”, while SDG 17.9 calls on countries to “enhance international support for implementing effective and targeted capacity-building in developing countries to support national plans to implement all the Sustainable Development Goals, including through North-South, South-South and triangular cooperation.” These specific goals fit within the broader SDG 10.7 which aims to “facilitate orderly, safe regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies.” While the three SDGs mentioned here directly reference the subjects of policy coherence or migration and development, other sector-specific SDGs, such as those dealing with education, employment, health, and sustainable cities, are also of critical relevance to achieving policy coherence for migration and development. As IOM notes, policy coherence is bilateral in nature; for it to be achieved, development concerns must be considered within migration policies, and development policies must also consider migration.17 13 IOM and JMDI, White Paper: Mainstreaming Migration into Local Development Planning and Beyond (Geneva, Switzerland, IOM, 2015). Available from htt