Supporting the Effective Reintegration of Roma Returnees in the Western Balkans This project is funded by the European Union © 2019 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. This publication was produced with the financial support of the European Union. Its contents are the sole responsibility of World Bank staff and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union. For the European Union, the designation of Kosovo is without prejudice to positions on status and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo Declaration of Independence. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The bound- aries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissem- ination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Cover images: World map: cobalt88/Can Stock Photo Inc.; people: © Seita/Shutterstock.com Cover design: Laura C. Johnson Contents # Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.1 Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 Return Processes and Practices Among EU Member States . . . . . . 4 2.1 Policy Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.2 The Return Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.3 Data Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 3 Return Processes and Practices in the Western Balkans . . . . . . . . 12 3.1 Targeted Policies and Frameworks within Western Balkans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3.2 Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3.3 Nongovernment Stakeholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 4 Profiles of Returnees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 4.1 Push and Pull Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 4.2 Vulnerabilities Upon Return . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 4.3 Intersectional Vulnerabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 4.4 Assets Upon Return . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 5 Main Findings and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 5.1 European Union (EU) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 5.2 EU Member States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 5.3 Western Balkans: Central Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 5.4 Western Balkans: Local Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 6 The Way Forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Appendixes A Mappings, Studies, and Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 B EU–-Western Balkans Returns Process Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 C Snapshots of the Western Balkans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 CONTENTS | iii Boxes 5.1 Management Information System for Marawi Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Program in the Philippines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 5.2 Piloting Psychosocial Support to Conflict-Affected Populations— Community Resilience and Low-Intensity Mental Health Programs in Ukraine . . . . . . . . . 44 Figure 1.1 Non-EU Citizens Returned to Their Homeland, 2016 and 2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Tables 2.1 Asylum Recognition Rates, Return Decisions, and Return Rates in the Western Balkans . . . 6 2.2 Number of People Returned to the Western Balkans from the Top Sending Countries (MS4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.3 Primary Institutions Involved in Return Services in MS4 Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.4 Predeparture Reintegration Assistance in MS4 Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.1 Targeted Policies for the Reintegration of Returnees in the Western Balkans . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3.2 Government Institutions Active in Relation to the Reintegration of Returnees . . . . . . . . . . 14 3.3 Sampling of NGOs Active in the Reintegration of Returnees in the Western Balkans . . . . 18 3.4 Primary Active Donors and International Organizations in Western Balkans . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 4.1 Number of Asylum Applicants and Share of Roma (Germany) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 iv | CONTENTS Acknowledgments This work was led by Valerie Morrica and The team received invaluable guidance Stavros Stavrou (Task Team Leaders). The from Katarina Mathernova Marta Garcia report is based on research in six Western Fidalgo, Enrica Chiozza, and Liselotte Balkans jurisdictions and four European Union Isaksson in Brussels, as well as desk officers (EU) member states. The material reflects dis- and members of the European Commission cussions in consultation anad validation work- delegations for the Western Balkans from the shops conducted in all six of the Western European Commission Directorate-General for Balkans jurisdictions where the team received Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations feedback and inputs from government repre- (DG NEAR) for each jurisdiction. sentatives, multilateral partners, international The team benefited from discussions and donors, academia, civil society organizations, comments from the following colleagues: and key sectoral experts. Moreover, the final Lundrim Aliu, Sabina Espinoza, Bernard report draws on discussions during presen- Harborne, Marijana Jasarevic, Ray Jennings, tations at events in Brussels that were orga- Diego Garrido Martin, Ana Gjokutaj, Natalia nized by the European Commission and the Milan, Jasmina Papa, Shruti Majumdar, Monica European Parliament in 2017 and 2018. Robayo-Abril, and Danielle Zevulun. Research in the Western Balkans was Administrative support was provided conducted by Zoran Drangovski, Eben to the team by Valentina Aleksic, Samra Friedman, Ilir Gedeshi, Jasmin Hasic, Dzeneta Bajramovic, Odeta Bulo, Kozeta Diamanti, Karabegovic, Siminida Karcarska, Olga Gohar Grigorian, Elena Julve Lopez, Nicole Mitrovic, Jovana Obradovic, Nermin Oruc, Kasongo-Kazadi, Bisera Nurkovic, Helena Darko Pekic, and Dragana Radevic. Research Nejedla, and Trishna Rana. Editing and in the EU member states was undertaken by graphic design was carried out by Laura Frans Bastiaens, Anthony Finn, Malte Johann, Johnson and Veronica Suozzi. Sandra Kdolsky, and Valerie Mollina. The This study and report was made possi- research was supplemented by two com- ble due to the generous funding by the DG missioned academic papers by Zana Vathi NEAR and was prepared under the guidance (Edghill University) and Melissa Siegel and of Linda Van Gelder (Country Director for the Katie Kuschminder (Maastricht University). Western Balkans) and Nina Bhatt (Practice Sara Lenehan was a key member of the core Manager, Social Development, Europe and writing team of this synthesis report. Central Asia Region). The team would like to acknowledge This publication was produced with the Timothy Johnston, Marco Mantovanelli, financial support of the European Union. Its Emanuel Salinas Munoz, Stephen Ndegwa, contents are the sole responsibility of the Maryam Salim, and Jamele Rigolini for their authors and do not necessarily reflect the support and advice, as well as Joanna views of the European Union. de Berry, Giorgio Demarchi, and Sergo Mananashvili for their peer reviews. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS | v Abbreviations AVR assisted voluntary return BAMF Federal Office of Migration and Refugees (Germany) EC European Commission EU European Union Fedasil Federal Agency for the Reception of Asylum Seekers (Belgium) FOIA Federal Office for Immigration and Asylum GAMM Global Approach to Migration and Mobility GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für internationale Zusammenarbeit ID identification document IOM International Organization for Migration OFII French Office of Immigration and Integration IOM International Organization for Migration MARRI Migration, Asylum, Refugees Regional Initiative MS4 France, Belgium, Germany, and Austria NGO nongovernmental organization UNDP United Nations Development Programme vi | ABBREVIATIONS Executive Summary region to seek refuge in EU countries. During # The European Commission’s Directorate General for Neighbourhood and the next one and a half decades, irregular Enlargement Negotiations approached the migrants continued to trickle into the EU; World Bank to develop an evidence base although the increase in asylum applications and to deliver policy advice and techni- slowed since 2010, following the gradual cal assistance for supporting the effec- introduction of visa-free travel for citizens tive reintegration of (Roma) returnees in of the Western Balkans. During 2015, over the Western Balkans: Albania, Bosnia and 200,000 people from the Western Balkans Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav Republic of joined the mass migration of asylum seekers Macedonia, Montenegro, Kosovo, and Serbia. from the Middle East and elsewhere to the This synthesis report presents the results of EU, including a high percentage of ethnic that research. It is intended to be a resource minorities, particularly Roma. for the European Commission, European However, EU-wide readmission agree- Union (EU) member states, the governments ments with Western Balkan governments of the Western Balkans, and other stakehold- significantly slowed the rate of out- ers working on the agenda for reintegration migration from the Western Balkans to in the Western Balkans, including nongovern- EU countries. In the early 2010s, when an mental organizations, international nongov- increasingly high number of Western Balkan ernmental organizations, and international citizens overstayed their visa-free period in the donors. Recommendations for future potential EU, readmission agreements were negotiated, technical assistance have been endorsed initially by individual EU states and later by an by the Western Balkan governments, and as EU-wide agreement with all of the Western part of a technical assistance component, the Balkans. Before 2015, the number of returnees World Bank team will be implementing plot to the Western Balkans was low. In late 2015, studies in the region with the potential to the EU deemed Western Balkan countries as be scaled up into a broader engagement on “safe countries of origin,” which made obtain- the socioeconomic inclusion of returnees and ing a positive decision on an asylum applica- marginalized communities. tion in the EU more difficult for migrants from Since the early 1990s, the Western the Western Balkans. At the same time, EU Balkans have experienced high rates of member states stepped up efforts at returning out-migration into the European Union. refugees, failed asylum seekers, and irregular During the 1990s and early 2000s, conflicts migrants1 who had either entered illegally or in the Western Balkans (Albania, Bosnia and had overstayed their visas. Herzegovina, North Macedonia, Kosovo, Montenegro, and Serbia) and their reverber- 1. Irregular migrants are those who move outside the regula- ating impacts led asylum seekers from this tory norms of the sending, transit, and receiving countries. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | vii This report documents the main socio- For vulnerable returnees, like ethnic economic factors that drive migration minorities and Roma for whom socio- from the Western Balkans to the EU. economic problems are more pronounced, Returnees emphasize that they migrate to the reintegration challenge is even greater. escape poverty, lack of housing, unemploy- Roma are at a considerably higher risk of ment, the lack of or insufficient access to socioeconomic marginalization upon their social security, and a consistent struggle and repatriation compared with their already poor inability to provide a basic standard of living circumstances prior to their departure to the for themselves and their families. Poverty, EU. Roma report discrimination throughout the discrimination, and historic marginalization return process. They often return to informal reinforce one another and constitute strong settlements and may lack proof of address or push factors. other identification documents needed to reg- Estimates suggest a substantial ister for social services, including those crucial number of returnees belong to the Roma to reintegration. A lack of formal tenure and minority and that Roma are over- ownership prior to departure, inter alia, can represented in migration and returnee result in Roma not being able to return to their flows. In addition, Roma and ethnic minorities old homes; and discrimination affects their have had to contend with systemic economic access to tenured housing. Roma children who and social exclusion and institutional discrim- have spent substantial periods in the EU often ination. Roma communities lack access to do not speak the local language—they only basic infrastructure and social services, are speak Romani. Returnees also face discrimina- more likely to be underemployed, and have tion in their own communities—problematic limited earning potential due to low incomes given the extent of community reliance among from unskilled jobs in the formal and informal the Roma. sectors. There is no harmonized approach to Repatriation poses enormous chal- the return and reintegration of migrants lenges for individual returnees, as well across the EU, including the special needs as for receiving communities who require of vulnerable groups. Across and within additional resources and capacity to pro- member states, there are various return pro- vide returnees with reintegration services. grams managed by different actors, including Existing frameworks in the Western Balkans central- and local-level governments, nongov- do not offer practical reintegration solutions ernmental organizations (NGOs), and inter- or, for several reasons, do not implement national organizations like the International them effectively. This leaves returnees with Organization for Migration. These programs inadequate and inconsistent support for their have established varying criteria and levels of reintegration; reinforces their economic and return assistance but do not address many of social exclusion; and, in turn, increases the the vulnerabilities specific to Western Balkan risk of secondary migration. migrants, including the Roma. viii | EXECUTIVE SUMMARY There is a dearth of evidence to sup- between them and local- or even central-level port more effective and humane return government institutions. policies, partially due to the EU’s focus Considering the above challenges, on reforming information systems geared the World Bank provides the following toward improving border security rather recommendations to support the effec- than reintegration. There is a deficit of infor- tive reintegration of returnees. These mation regarding the numbers, profiles, and recommendations have been formulated in vulnerabilities of returnees, as well as a lack close conversation with the EU and with the of monitoring and evaluation for return pro- endorsement of governments and key stake- grams in the Western Balkans. In the absence holders in the Western Balkans: of relevant and timely data, it is nearly impos- n The institutional responseto the return sible to draw conclusions about the effective- program needs strengthening. EU mem- ness of return policies and programs. ber states must establish common basic At the central level, gaps remain in principles regarding the return of migrants the design and implementation of return from the Western Balkans, including policies throughout the Western Balkans. minimum standards on returnee assis- Policies for returnees are either not well tance and the definition of a “vulnerable” defined or simply not implemented due to returnee. Further, as part of the institu- budget constraints and lack of coordination tional response to the return program, the among relevant agencies. Even in cases where member states should create a strategic central-level coordinating bodies are specifi- funding line within the EU Asylum and cally tasked with the reintegration of return- Migration Fund and the Instrument for ees from the EU, there is little to no progress Pre-Accession Assistance to launch and in actual implementation. scale up high-priority pilot interventions At the local level, government institu- for Roma and non-Roma returnees, com- tions lack the capacity to deal with return- munities accepting significant numbers of ees. Across the Western Balkans, there are returnees, and local governments respon- either very few or no local-level government sible for reinsertion and reintegration. strategies or plans for returnee reintegration. n Western Balkan governments need to In addition to budget constraints at the local develop evidence-based and realistic level, there is limited coordination between reintegration strategies that clearly the central and local levels of government on identify the roles and responsibilities key issues such as returnee registration, infor- of central- and local-level government mation exchange, and administration of ser- actors. Such strategies should be struc- vices. Although NGOs, international donors, tured as multiyear programs, with bud- and volunteer organizations have addressed gets commensurate with the number of some of the service delivery gaps for return- returnees and their needs and adequate ees, there is little horizontal coordination EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | ix funding to support targeted programs for citizens. Municipalities absorbing large the integration of returnees. numbers of returnees are challenged by n EU members and Western Balkan their limited capacity to develop local- governments need to prioritize data level action plans for the reintegration collection, exchange, and monitoring. of returnees in a transparent and partici- The current data-collection mechanisms patory manner and which involve service of EU countries should be expanded or providers and community representatives. revised to include assisted voluntary Integral to improving the return and rein- returns and to help the Western Balkans tegration process is capacity building for build the necessary capacity for devel- the municipalities as well as for intersec- oping management information systems toral teams and civil society partners to for registering returnees at various ports implement such action plans. of entry. In turn, Western Balkan gov- n Communities experiencing high levels ernments should avail themselves of of out-migration could benefit from such systems to facilitate access and assistance in developing livelihood information exchange among the central- projects to address this push factor. and local-level government institutions Cooperative social enterprise programs to mandated with returnee reintegration, enhance livelihood and income-generating enabling them to track the number of opportunities for returnees and other vul- returnees—including those belonging to nerable community members could help vulnerable groups—and monitor if return- tackle some immediate reintegration chal- ees can access reintegration-related. lenges and improve economic conditions Finally, an information exchange frame- and social cohesion over the medium work needs to be established between term. Such initiatives might include the the EU and the Western Balkans that creation of self-help groups for (Roma) allows for proper tracking, monitoring, and women returnees and vulnerable (Roma) evaluation. non-migrants, which could provide them n Programs to support local-level capac- with better access to financial institutions ity building are crucial, particularly for and markets, leadership and entrepre- Western Balkan municipalities receiv- neurial skills, and business incubation and ing many returnees, including Roma entrepreneurship opportunities. SUPPORTING x | EXECUTIVE THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS SUMMARY 1 Introduction Rates of irregular migration from the Western The push factors giving rise to migration Balkans to the European Union (EU) are 1 from the Western Balkans are ongoing. Most high—as are rates of return. Since 2015, other migrants leave to escape socioeconomic than Montenegro, the Western Balkans were hardships, such as unemployment, low wages, featured among the top 20 nationalities to a lack of social security, and poor living be returned to their homelands from the EU. conditions. Data suggest that the Roma, a (figure 1.1). socially marginalized group, account for a majority share of migrants from and returnees 1. The Western Balkans include Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia, Montenegro, Kosovo, and Serbia. FIGURE 1.1. Non-EU Citizens Returned to Their Homeland, 2016 and 2017 45 40 2016 35 2017 30 thousands 25 20 15 10 5 0 Albania Ukraine Morocco Iraq Serbia Pakistan Russia Kosovoa India North Macedonia Algeria Georgia Afghanistan Moldova Chinab Tunisia Nigeria Brazil Bosnia and Herzegovina Iran Source: Eurostat 2018. a. This designation is without prejudice on status and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the International Court of Justice opin- ion on the Kosovo declaration of independence. b. Including Hong Kong. INTRODUCTION | 1 to Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia, Addressing the reintegration challenge is Montenegro, and Serbia; and they represent central to the EU’s external migration policy a significant share from Albania and Kosovo and to the accession agenda. In February (EASO 2013, 2015; EC 2011a, 2011b; European 2018, the EC reaffirmed its commitment to a Stability Initiative 2015; MUP 2016b; Ministry “firm, merit-based prospect of EU membership of Human Rights and Refugees 2015). For for the Western Balkans.” Accordingly, the EC Roma, historic exclusion, discrimination, and included in its “credible enlargement perspec- lack of social capital compound socioeco- tive” an action plan for reinforcing engage- nomic hardships.2 ment with the Western Balkans regarding While these issues persist, so too do security and migration (EC 2018b: 65). incentives for migration and remigration. The World Bank has ongoing global Further, without appropriate mechanisms to engagements in the fields of returnee support returnees’ reintegration, returnees are reintegration and inclusion, in addition to at risk of faring worse upon return than when other vulnerable groups, including eth- they migrated. The effects of poor reintegra- nic minorities. The EC Directorate General tion can be long-term, multigenerational, and for Neighbourhood and Enlargement to the detriment of returnees as well as local Negotiations (DG NEAR) approached the communities. Successful return, on the other World Bank to develop an evidence base, hand, promotes the inclusion of returnees, offer policy advice, and deliver technical protects their dignity, and lifts up local com- assistance to support the effective reintegra- munities (World Bank 2017). tion of (Roma) returnees to Western Balkans. Supporting the effective reintegration This synthesis report presents the results of returnees to the Western Balkans is thus of that effort. It brings together original a distinct policy challenge for the European research conducted by the World Bank under Commission (EC), for EU member states, and the framework of its Supporting the Effective for the governments of the Western Balkans. Reintegration of Roma Returnees in the Comprehensive, development-led solutions Western Balkans project,3 including 45 pieces that account for the vulnerabilities of return- of analytical work organized around three key ees as well as broader local- and region- areas of investigation—or mappings—con- al-level socioeconomic dimensions are needed ducted throughout the Western Balkans: (1) in addition to and to complement immediate institutional and policy frameworks regarding humanitarian-based responses. returnees, (2) governmental and nongovern- mental stakeholders involved in the return 2. The term Roma is used here to refer to a number of different process, and (3) vulnerabilities of returnees. groups (e.g., Roma, Sinti, Kale, Gypsies, Romanichels, Boyash, The return processes of the four EU member Ashkali, Egyptians, Yenish, Dom, Lom, Rom, and Abdal), includ- ing travelers, without denying the specificities of these groups. These groups are all considered under the wider “Roma” 3. This report focuses on the Roma, but many of its findings are umbrella term under the EU Framework for National Roma applicable to all returnees to the Western Balkans. Findings Integration Strategies. applicable only to the Roma are noted as such. 2 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS states sending the most people back to the 1.1. STRUCTURE Western Balkans—Austria, Belgium, France, and Germany are examined. The mappings This report is organized as five chapters. involve a combination of desk research, focus Chapter 2, which follows this one, reviews groups, and structured interviews; and the current EU policies and practices for the World Bank also commissioned specialists return and reintegration of irregular migrants to conduct additional academic research. to the Western Balkans. Two problem areas Appendix A lists and briefly describes these are highlighted: (1) a lack of coordination reports. Appendixes C and D provide sum- regarding return practices, and (2) insufficient maries of findings gleaned from the mapping reliable data to inform the policy agenda. exercises for EU member states and the Chapter 3 examines the current integration Western Balkans, respectively. Together, the frameworks and practices in the Western reports are intended as a resource for prac- Balkans and reveals promising trends as well titioners in the EC, EU member states, the as the considerable remaining gaps in poli- governments of the Western Balkans, and cies and implementation, particularly around other stakeholders working on the agenda for budgeting, institutional and stakeholder coor- reintegration in the Western Balkans, includ- dination, registration, monitoring, and evalua- ing nongovernmental organizations, interna- tion. Chapter 4 describes vulnerabilities faced tional nongovernmental organizations, and by returnees in the Western Balkans, focusing international donors. on the Roma. Chapter 5 summarizes the main Currently, the EU and member states findings from the research and offers recom- largely focus their engagement in aspects mendations to address the major challenges of the return agenda relating to countries faced by returnees to the Western Balkans outside the Western Balkans. The focus here and to improve the reintegration and coordi- is on returns to the Western Balkans, but its nation frameworks of the EU and its member findings encourage broader consideration of states as well as within the Western Balkans the EU’s return practices and the coordination at the central and local levels. around reintegration between the EC, EU member states, and third countries of origin outside the Western Balkans. 1. INTRODUCTION | 3 2 Return Processes and Practices Among EU Member States 2.1. POLICY CONTEXT in 2007. Kosovo has concluded 22 bilateral readmission agreements with 18 EU member Return and readmission is a central compo- states.4 As of 2010, visa liberalization has nent of the European Agenda on Migration. been in force for all of the Western Balkans, The European Union (EU) approach to returns except Kosovo.5 Consequently, anyone in pos- is part of its Global Approach to Migration session of biometric passport is now able to and Mobility (GAMM), which has been the travel to and throughout the Schengen area overarching framework of the EU external without a visa, but only for short stays.6 migration and asylum policy since 2005. The EU’s return directive governs the Under GAMM, the EU has established instru- return and removal of irregular migrants from ments that provide non-EU citizens with the EU.7 People returning to the Western opportunities for mobility while mitigating Balkans from EU member states can be irregular migration, such as readmission separated into two main categories: (1) agreements, which set out obligations of EU irregular migrants who have illegally entered member states and non-EU countries around taking persons back who have been residing 4. Kosovo has signed agreements with 24 countries in total: irregularly in the EU. Visa-facilitation agree- Albania; France; Switzerland; Germany; Denmark; Austria; Norway; Slovenia; the Benelux Union countries of Belgium, the ments allow for limited visa-free travel for Netherlands, and Luxembourg; Czech Republic; Montenegro; non-EU country nationals. For the Western Sweden; Finland; Hungary; Bulgaria; Malta; Estonia; Lichtenstein; Croatia; Italy; Turkey; and North Macedonia Balkans, GAMM is also linked to the acces- (EC 2018a). sion policies that manage the pathway to EU 5. Visa liberalization follows European Commission (EC) decisions to amend regulation 539/2001. Visa liberalization membership. Candidates for accession enter came into force for North Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia a committed process to adapt their national in 2009 (15521/09); and Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2010 (PE-CONS 50/10). The EC confirmed in July 2018 that policies and legislative frameworks to those Kosovo had fulfilled the remaining benchmarks for visa liberal- of the EU (also known as EU acquis). ization, with a vote to amend regulation 539/2001 to follow. 6. Holders of passports from the Western Balkans are granted In line with this agenda, all of the visa-free travel within the Schengen area for 90 days in any Western Balkans, except Kosovo, has con- 180-day period. 7. Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and cluded readmission agreements with the EU: of the Council of 16 December 2008 on Common Standards Albania in 2005; and Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Procedures in Member States for Returning Illegally Staying Third-country Nationals. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/ North Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32008L0115&from=EN 4 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS or overstayed in the Schengen area, and (2) All of the Western Balkans are on this list. asylum seekers who have received a negative Most of the EU member states that maintain decision on an asylum application. Regarding similar lists also designates all of the Western the first, while it is now easier than it used Balkans as safe.10 to be for people from the Western Balkans Like many non-EU areas, applications to make short trips to the EU, their oppor- by people from the Western Balkans rose tunities to migrate and work legally there sharply in 2015. However, applications from remain limited. Work visas to EU member the Western Balkans to the EU have been states typically require a minimum set of successively increasing since 2010, partly skills, which excludes many migrants and due to visa liberalization (see for example would-be migrants from the Western Balkans. Alscher, Obergfell, and Roos 2015: 23ff). Table As an exception, in 2015, Germany adopted 2.1 presents asylum recognition rates in the the “Western Balkans regulation,” which Western Balkans for 2015 and 2016. Over 1 in eliminated the minimum skills requirement for 20 asylum applications from Kosovo received labor migrants from the Western Balkans.8 a positive decision in both 2015 and 2016, From 2016 to 2017, over 110,000 work con- while fewer than 1 in 100 asylum seekers from tracts were submitted and approved by the North Macedonia received a positive decision Federal Employment Agency. The renewal 9 in 2016. of this skills elimination scheme is currently The percentage of people returned rela- under discussion in Germany. tive to the number of return decisions issued The likelihood that a person from the increased for each of the MS4 countries in Western Balkans will receive a positive 2015 and 2016 (table 2.2). Many EU member decision on an asylum application is low. states their return policy a priority due to The European Commission (EC), which main- the surge of asylum applications during that tains a “safe countries of origin” list based period, including the top destinations for on the Geneva Convention and the Asylum irregular migration from the Western Balkans: Procedures Directive, considers a country to France, Belgium, Germany, and Austria be safe if it is a democracy and if there is no (referred to hereafter as MS4). general or consistent persecution, torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punish- ment, threat of violence, or armed conflict. 8. Section 26.2 (§26.2) of the employment regulation 10. Among the EU countries maintaining their own list of safe (Beschäftigungsverordnung). countries of origin are several of the top destinations for 9. Bundesagentur für Arbeit (2017). Zustimmungen u. asylum-seekers from the Western Balkans, including Austria, Ablehnungen zur Arbeitsaufnahme von Drittstaatsangehörigen Belgium, France, and Germany. See https://ec.europa.eu/ – Deutschland, Länder und Regionaldirektionen (Jahreszahlen home-affairs/sites/ homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/poli- und Zeitreihen) – Dezember 2017. https://bit.ly/2L8NhLP. See cies/european-agenda-migration/background-information/ also Bither and Ziebarth 2018. docs/2_eu_safe_countries_of_origin_en.pdf. 2. RETURN PROCESS AND PRACTICES OF EU MEMBER STATES | 5 TABLE 2.1. Asylum Recognition Rates, Return Decisions, and Return Rates in the Western Balkans Asylum Recognition Rate (%) Return Decisions Return Rate (%) Area 2015 2016 2015 2016 2015 2016 Albania 1.84 2.61 39,310 31,975 95 129 Bosnia and Herzegovina 3.50 4.20 5,675 5,080 71 73 Kosovo 2.60 5.20 21,320 13,545 80 96 North Macedonia 1.34 0.80 5,700 6,085 101 127 Montenegro 1.63 1.75 1,565 1,500 77 160 Serbia 1.86 1.95 14,985 13,870 87 89 Sources: EC 2017b (recognition rates); Eurostat (return decisions and return rates, accessed June 18, 2018); Migration Policy Institute 2018. TABLE 2.2 Number of People Returned to the Western Balkans from the Top Sending Countries (MS4) Member State 2015 Ordered 2016 Returned 2015 Ordered 2016 Returned Austria 4,765 2,620 5,200 1,625 Belgium 3,680 1,245 3,155 1,305 France 9,675 3,560 7,885 3,280 Germany 35,920 47,255 30,750 54,380 Source: Eurostat (as of May 2, 2018). 2.2. THE RETURN PROCESS EU countries, including the MS4, tend to adopt the approach prioritized by the The response to return migration calls for a EC (EC 2017a), which emphasizes voluntary unified set of policy concerns, but harmoni- return but reserves the right to use incentives zation among the EU member states’ return and increasingly punitive disincentives as a policies remains absent. To determine the pathway to forced removal. Return assistance reasons behind this, we first look at how is intended to incent voluntary return and the EU’s directive on returns distinguishes promote sustainable return, which in the con- between three types of return: (1) voluntary text of EU policy means that returnees do not return of legally staying third-country nation- remigrate and, more recently, that they have als; (2) voluntary departure of illegally staying a positive impact on the development of their third-country nationals; and (3) removal/ communities of origin (EPRS 2017). forced return of illegally staying third-country Member states provide return assistance nationals. directly or in cooperation with international 6 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS organizations, such as the International except in France, where the process is exclu- Organization for Migration (IOM). Civil society sively managed by the Office of Immigration organizations operating in the member states and Integration (OFII) (table 2.3). also provide return assistance. The efforts of Return assistance programs vary signifi- member states, international organizations, cantly across and within EU member states. and civil society organization apply to all Eligibility for and levels of assistance can vary types of return. based on legal status: whether the returnee is Consistent data on the type of rein- an irregular migrant or an asylum applicant, or tegration support offered by EU member if a deportation order has already been issued. states have not been forthcoming. However, Aid can vary according to a person’s homeland: it appears that return migration processes targeted return assistance to people from the in the EU are highly heterogeneous. Reliable Western Balkans is inconsistent across the EU data from 2014 show that 96 reintegration and, in some cases, they are excluded com- assistance programs were delivered by the pletely. Eligibility and support can also differ 27-member states (EMN 2014; Matrix Insight, based on who is deemed “vulnerable,” with no ICMPD, and ECRE 2012) were implemented commonly accepted definition in the EU and by the IOM, domestic nongovernmental orga- no requirements for systematic screening or nizations (NGOs), and national authorities, identification in the MS4, except in relation to TABLE 2.3. Primary Institutions Involved in Return Services in MS4 Countries Country Institutional Set-up Actors Austria Centralized; government, with FOIA, Human Rights Association, Caritas some services delivered via Internationalis, IOM, Verein Menschen Leben, LEFÖ, international and domestic and ORS Service GmbH Belgium NGOs Fedasil, CGRS, IOM, Caritas Internationalis, CALL, Myria, Vluchtelingenwerk Vlaanderen, and CIRÉ France Centralized; government- OFII executed Germany Centralized and regional IBMI, BAMF, ZUR, IOM, Caritas Internationalis, policies; government and large Heimatgarten, BAG, AWO, Solwodi, VIA, several number of international and state projects, and municipal offices domestic NGOs, private service providers, and regional and municipal institutions Source: Stakeholder mappings (see appendix A). BAG = Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft Familienbildung und Beratung e.V. AWO = Arbeiterwohlfahrt; ; BAMF = Federal Office of Migration and Refugees; CGRS = Center for Gender and Refugee Studies; Fedasil = Federal Agency for the Reception of Asylum Seekers; FOIA = Federal Office for Immigration and Asylum; BMI = Federal Ministry of the Interior; IOM = International Organization for Migration; NGO = nongovernmental organization; OFII = French Office of Immigration and Integration; ZUR = Common Centre for Return Support (Zentrum zur Unterstützung der Rückkehr). 2. RETURN PROCESS AND PRACTICES OF EU MEMBER STATES | 7 some groups such as victims of human traf- Table 2.4 shows how such differences are ficking, unaccompanied minors, female headed manifest in the MS4. Particularly noteworthy households, etc. Of particular relevance to this are the discrepancies in cash benefits for study, return migration programs do not explic- returnees. For example, France offers gen- itly identify the Roma and other ethnic minori- erous return packages, while Belgian assis- ties in the Western Balkans as vulnerable. tance is modest and limited to only the most TABLE 2.4 Predeparture Reintegration Assistance in MS4 Countries Member State Programs Eligibility Services Cash Benefits Austria Caritas Kosovo and Support of basic needs None, but equivalent of Internationalis Serbia excluded; such as medical and €3,000 in kind. Austria: for “vulnerable” psychological care, IRMA-plus returnees only business assistance, and job training FOIA: Return All of the One-time transportation €500 for a person who assistance Western costs absorbed; voluntary is returning after their (basic care Balkans; limited returnees receive material first-instance asylum agreement) assistance for reception conditions until application; €50 for forced returnees departure: food, health people who have care, pocket money, appealed against a clothes, school supplies, rejected decision leisure activities, social advice and return assistance Belgium Fedasil None of the If there is proof of None Western urgency, irregular stay, Balkans, except identity, and lack of transportation money to pay for the costs ticket, Belgian authorities will absorb the cost of removal by air Specific All of the Postreturn assistance For vulnerable groups project for Western Balkans with registration only. Cash grant of people from for social services, €250 per adult and the Western housing, education, €125 per child; Balkans unemployment via IOM/ additional budget for administered Caritas International in-kind benefits through IOM Belgium local offices. and Caritas If necessary, the local Internationalis service provider takes care of administrative costs, photos, document translation, and other items (continued) 8 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS vulnerable. Divergent criteria result in signifi- even from different parts of the same state— cant variations in return migration assistance. might benefit from very dissimilar return Returnees to the same part of the Western packages and could become aware of this Balkans from different EU member states—or fact upon their return. TABLE 2.4 Predeparture Reintegration Assistance in MS4 Countries (continued) Member State Programs Eligibility Services Cash Benefits France OFII All of the Assistance in formalities €300 for Kosovo; €650 Western Balkans of leaving the country; for Albania, Bosnia plane ticket reservations; and Herzegovina, help obtaining travel North Macedonia, documents; support for Montenegro, and cost of transportation; Serbia; increased other financial assistance financial help available of up to €1,850 per person in exceptional circumstances Germany Reintegration All of the Travel costs and Lump-sum payments, and Western Balkans additional lump-sum but only if returnees Emigration payments if returnees lack financial means to Programme lack financial means to cover costs for Asylum cover costs Seekers in Germany Government Limited eligibility Additional financial €500 lump- Assisted for Albanians and benefit for initial sum payment Repatriation Serbians staying reintegration assistance plus additional Programme in Germany under (Starthilfe) reimbursements; a tolerated stay reintegration support (Duldung) for at in benefits deemed least two years appropriate, including up to €2,000 in housing costs for families and up to €1,000 for individuals; and up to €3,000 of medical costs for families and up to €1,500 for individuals.a Source: Stakeholder mappings (see appendix A). a. See http://germany.iom.int/de/starthilfeplus accessed April 9 2018. Fedasil = Federal Agency for the Reception of Asylum Seekers; FOIA = Federal Office for Immigration and Asylum IOM = International Organization for Migration; OFII = French Office of Immigration and Integration. 2. RETURN PROCESS AND PRACTICES OF EU MEMBER STATES | 9 On June 28, 2018, The European Council as an example, is a major provider of AVR on Refugees and Exiles emphasized the need assistance in Belgium. In Germany, the IOM to reform its migration and security policy implements all federal AVR programs in and to make the process of returning irregular collaboration with the respective authorities, migrants more effective. In response, the EC but some Länder have also implemented their announced legislative proposals at the State own programs, mainly on an ad hoc basis. The of the Union on September 12, 2018, although central governments of member states do not they encompass security and border control typically receive the data gathered on return- rather than the broader issue of reintegration ees through these channels (Kuschminder and support and assistance. 11 Siegel 2018). Further, there is absolutely no data available on voluntary returnees arriving 2.3. DATA MANAGEMENT outside of a formal program. Several additional factors prevent a Given how important return is to the EU meaningful analysis of AVR uptake. Because migration agenda, the deficit of relevant data eligibility criteria vary across member states, and management is striking and limits the collecting comparable data on uptake is ability to effectively monitor and evaluate problematic. Even when controlling for this, the effectiveness of policies. This data deficit approaches to measuring AVR uptake differ is partly due to the lack of prioritization and (see Leerkes et al. 2016). The limited under- coordination around migration movements standing of AVR uptake motivators is not among EU sending states and the receiving surprising given the lack of and discrepancies Western Balkans. Measurement methodolo- in data collection, but a better grasp of these gies also need improvement. factors is key to promoting effective policies. The method by which EU records the 2.3.1. Prereturn return rate is also arguably ineffective. Within member states, systematic data Eurostat calculates the rate annually but, as collection regarding the number of voluntary Mananashvili (2017: 5) highlights, a “return return migrations and departures and, con- decision taken in a given year does not sequently, assisted voluntary return (AVR) always lead to actual departure or removal in uptake is lacking. IOM is the most systematic the same year.” On paper, the effectiveness collector of return migration data, deseg- rate is therefore distorted. A multiannual regated according to sex, gender, age, and analysis would be a more appropriate way destination, but it is not the only provider to measure the return rate. For example, of return assistance. Caritas Internationalis, Germany shows a return rate of over 100 percent in 2017, but under a multiyear analy- 11. The recommendations include recasting the EU’s directive on returns (EC 2018c), regulating the European Border and sis, it drops to 49.9 percent (Kuschminder and Coast Guard (EC 2018d), and amendments to the proposed Siegel 2018). Regulation on the European Agency on Asylum (EC 2018e). See also similar observations by ECRE (2018a, b). 10 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS The EC increasingly recognizes the need the enlargement agenda. The enlargement to improve the management of return-related reports published in April 2018 by the EC data. On May 16, 2018, it adopted a proposal with respect to the Western Balkans explicitly to amend the migration statistics regulation emphasize the need for information exchange about the obligations of member states to and data management.13 collect and transmit statistics on asylum and managed migration to Eurostat (EC 2018c). 2.3.2. Postreturn The changes would upgrade Eurostat’s statis- Lastly, there is a dearth of data on the tics by “providing a legal basis for statistics postreturn experience of migrants, including that are currently collected voluntarily” (EC regarding the evaluation of return assistance. 2018c). However, the proposal only addresses Among the main sending countries to the specific improvements for data that national Western Balkans, only Austria and Belgium authorities already collect and that is gener- have been actively engaged in identifying lon- ally available. 12 ger-term outcomes under AVR and reintegra- On May 16, 2018, the EC also adopted tion programs (EMN 2016).14 However, these a proposal to revise the regulation on the efforts do not tend to assess whether or not European network of immigration liaison the returnees are successfully reintegrated, officers (EC 2018f). It seeks to addresses which points to a broader problem: the shortcomings identified in an evaluation of absence of global best practices for postre- the regulation by improving coordination turn data collection (Kuschminder and Siegel and more effectively and efficiently using 2018). Postreturn data collection by Western European assets deployed outside of the EU. Balkan governments is limited, beginning with The proposal’s key elements include the need gaps in the registration of returnees upon for better horizontal information exchange arrival (see chapter 3.2.1). between immigration liaison officers and other liaison officers in same location and vertical information exchange between the national authorities of member states and the institutions and agencies of the EU. Good data management will also enable more comprehensive monitoring of 13. See http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-3342_ en.htm for the suite of reports. 12. For this reason, ECRE calls for a more “ambitious and 14. Norway and the Czech Republic also collect postreturn in-depth reform of the Regulation” (AIDA 2018). data in this manner. 2. RETURN PROCESS AND PRACTICES OF EU MEMBER STATES | 11 3 Return Processes and Practices in the Western Balkans Readmission agreements provide the main 3.1. TARGETED POLICIES coordination frameworks between European AND FRAMEWORKS WITHIN Union (EU) member states and the Western THE WESTERN BALKANS Balkans. Their focus is on return and border security rather than reintegration. Following Between 2009 and 2017, targeted cen- return, the institutions of the Western tral-level policies for the reintegration of Balkans, local nongovernmental organizations returnees that dovetail with existing read- (NGOs), and the local chapters of donor and mission agreements in their scope and focus international organizations take over reinte- were adopted throughout the Western gration efforts. Balkans. As shown in table 3.1, some have or are shortly due to expire. TABLE 3.1. Targeted Policies for the Reintegration of Returnees in the Western Balkans Area Policy Year of Adoption Covered Period Albania Strategy on the Reintegration of Returned 2010 2010–15 Albanian Citizens Bosnia and Strategy for the Reception and Integration of 2015 2015–18 Herzegovinaa the Bosnia and Herzegovina Nationals Who Return under Readmission Agreements and Action Plan Kosovo National Strategy for Sustainable Reintegration 2017 2018–22 of Repatriated Persons North Program for Assistance and Support for 2010 Not defined Macedonia Reintegration of Returnees Montenegro Reintegration Strategy for Persons Returned on 2016 2016–20 the Basis of a Readmission Agreement Serbia Strategy of Reintegration of the Returnees 2009 Not defined Based on the Readmission Agreement a. The World Bank’s Supporting the Effective Reintegration of (Roma) Returnees in the Western Balkans project is currently supporting the drafting of a new strategy for 2019–22. 12 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS In theory, central governments coordinate access to social services and service delivery. with local-level counterparts to achieve policy Further details of these laws, bylaws, ordi- outcomes. In reality, the adoption of targeted nances, and guidelines —and how they relate local-level reintegration policies has been to each other—are set out in the respec- uneven. No local policies focused on return- tive institutional mappings compiled for the ees have been adopted in Albania, North Western Balkans (see appendix C). Macedonia, or Montenegro, although one municipality in North Macedonia did include 3.2. IMPLEMENTATION reintegration measures in its local action Notwithstanding the existence of legal and plans for the Roma. Eleven municipalities have institutional frameworks, gaps persist in the developed and adopted local action plans for implementation of policies targeted at return- the reintegration of returnees In Bosnia and ees as well as relevant nontargeted ones, Herzegovina; 103 municipalities have done which negatively affects the sustainability the same in Serbia. In Kosovo, 34 municipal of return and thus increases the likelihood action plans for returnees have been adopted. Table 3.2 presents an overview of the of carousel migration. Particularly prominent central- and local-level institutions that are areas of weakness include the registration of involved in various aspects of the reintegra- returnees, communication and coordination tion process. The most active central-level among central-level governments and among institutions tend to be those responsible for central and local levels of government, and health care, personal documentation, and fiscal constraints. social protection, as well as those tasked with migration and/or minority rights issues. 3.2.1. Registration and Data The most active local-level institutions tend Management to be those focused on migration, the Roma, Registration on arrival. Systems for regis- and/or social protection. tering returnees differ across the Western In addition to these targeted policies Balkans, and they are only applied when regarding returnees, numerous laws, bylaws, returnees enter via air rather than by land. ordinances, and guidelines have been imple- Kosovo has the most developed system. mented in the Western Balkans to address Electronic registration of people returned specific issues around the reintegration of under readmission agreements takes place at returnees; they do not specifically target the airport in Prishtina, and the information returnees but apply to them nonetheless. is integrated with referral to relevant munic- Examples include regulations around housing, ipal-level services at a returnee’s previous education, and access to services and vulner- place of residence. In Albania, the border able groups. These laws are not all under the and migration department of the state police rubric of central-level strategies, and there collects data on the age, gender, and type of are no mechanisms aimed at synchronizing return (forced or voluntary) of returnees, but 3. RETURN PROCESS AND PRACTICES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS | 13 TABLE 3.2. Government Institutions Active in Relation to the Reintegration of Returnees Area Central Level Local Level Albania • Ministry of Internal Affairs • Migration counters • National Employment Service (National Employment Service) • Ministry of Education, Sport and Youth • Ministry of Finance and Economy • Ministry of Health and Social Welfare • Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs Bosnia and • Ministry of Security • Centers for social work Herzegovina • Ministry of Civil Affairs (Ministry of Civil Affairs) • Ministry of Human Rights and Refugees Kosovo • Ministry of Internal Affairs • Municipal Offices for Communities • Ministry for Communities and Return and Return • Ministry of Education, Science and Technology • Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare • Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning • Ministry of Health North • Ministry of Interior • Centers for social work Macedonia • Ministry of Health (Ministry of Labor and Social Policy) • Ministry of Labor and Social Policy • Romani health mediators (Ministry of Health) • Romani information centers (Ministry of Labor and Social Policy) Montenegro • Ministry of Interior • Centers for social work • Ministry of Health (Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare) • Ministry of Human and Minority Rights • Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare Serbia • Ministry of Interior • Centers for social work • Ministry of Labor, Employment, Veteran, (Ministry of Labor, Employment, and Social Affairs Veteran, and Social Affairs) • Ministry of Construction, Transport and • Trustees for refugees and migration Infrastructure (Commissariat for Refugees and • Ministry of Education, Science, and Migration)/local migration councils Technological Development • National Employment Service • Ministry of Health • Health mediators (Ministry of Health) • Commissariat for Refugees and • Pedagogical assistants (Ministry of Migration Education, Science, and Technological • Office for Human and Minority Rights Development) • Romani coordinators Source: Institutional mappings compiled by World Bank (2018). 14 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS discrepancies between its numbers and those of knowledge about where to register are served by the migration counters illustrate among the reasons for not doing so (Vathi, the fact that most returnees do not regis- forthcoming). ter upon arrival in their place of residence. 15 Within the Western Balkans, the process The case of Serbia is broadly similar, with of registering for services (including reinte- the commissariat for refugees and migration gration services) is further hampered by the operating an extensive network to register document-related burden of registration. and provide services to returnees at the local Registration for certain social services is con- level, while only serving a small proportion of ditioned upon accessing documentation from recorded returnees at the border. In Bosnia abroad, such as medical, education, and birth and Herzegovina, the only data on returnees certificates. The mechanisms for the stream- are those collected by the ministry of secu- lining the transfer of personal records from rity, and these are limited to people returned the EU to the Western Balkans are limited; under readmission agreements; they are not and depending on the extent of returns coun- otherwise disaggregated. Finally, the respec- selling, returnees might not necessarily know tive interior ministries of North Macedonia to acquire them prior to departure. and Montenegro record returns under read- Further, even where such documents mission agreements, but the data they are available, administrative requirements of receive are fragmentary, and there are no nostrification and translation can make com- databases maintained for this purpose. pleting the registration process expensive Although most of the Western Balkans and cumbersome, as is reportedly the case in recognizes the need to establish a data Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia, management system for readmitted people, and Montenegro (see chapter 4.2.2 and 4.2.6). no hard requirements for such a system exist. In addition, identification cards can only As a result, records of the returnee experi- be obtained with proof of address. Recent ence are scant, and—as discussed in section returnees, especially the Roma, can find this 2.3.2 above—returnees cannot be tracked to requirement challenging (see chapter 4.2.3). determine if they are accessing their rights and entitlements. 3.2.2. Coordination Registration for services. Where return- Targeted policies for the reception of return- ees are not registered, their access to—and ees (table 3.1) envisage a coordinated eligibility for—returnee assistance is compro- response to returnee reception and reintegra- mised or delayed. Specifically, when returnees tion. In practice, however, coordination is lack- are not registered upon arrival, the burden ing among the central levels of government in to apply then falls on them. Stigma and lack the Western Balkans, and among the central and local levels of government. 15. Migration counters are desks in regional labor offices that Distinctions emerge at the central level facilitate returnees’ access to services, such as those related to housing, training, and employment. regarding the respective involvement of 3. RETURN PROCESS AND PRACTICES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS | 15 central-level institutions in the reintegration 3.2.3. Local-level Capacity process. Some institutions deal with the Section 3.1 explains that across the Western security and migration dimension under visa Balkans, local-level reintegration policies liberalization agreements, including the regis- are scarce. Without central-level coordi- tration and reception of returnees and border nation, local level capacity to reintegrate management. These institutions coordinate returnees is further limited. In Albania, North most directly with EU member states on mat- Macedonia, and Montenegro,16 where there ters of returnee reception. Other institutions are no established local-level coordinating are involved in the process of reintegration— bodies, some degree of central-local coordi- specifically in the areas of social protection, nation exists. This is also the case in Bosnia housing, and education. Horizontal coordina- and Herzegovina, where local readmission tion among these two groups of institutions is teams have been formed in 11 municipalities often lacking. At the core of this challenge is but where evidence of activities beyond the the scarcity of data and mechanisms to track development of local action plans for the rein- returnees. tegration of returnees is lacking. By way of Compounding the problem is the fact that contrast, the coordinating bodies established the coordinating bodies envisioned in the at the local level in Kosovo effectively pro- main policy documents for the reintegration mote coordination between the central and of returnees are not functioning. In Bosnia local levels by including among their members and Herzegovina and North Macedonia, as local-level representatives of the central-level examples, years after the adoption of these institutions responsible for the overall coor- policies, any coordination that might exist dination of measures for the reintegration of remains effectively ad hoc. In Montenegro, the returnees. Again, the absence of a manage- interdepartmental working group formed to ment information system makes it impossible oversee implementation of both the reintegra- to achieve an efficient, cost-effective, and tion strategy and the strategy for integration timely case-file approach to managing the migration management, meets and produces reinsertion or reintegration of returnees. reports, but has not provided contact people There is simply no means of handing over any for relevant institutions or appointed local details about returnee families, such as the teams to support the reintegration of return- date of their arrival, the size and composi- ees. Finally, the absence of provisions for a tion of their family, and information regarding central-level coordinating body in Kosovo’s vulnerability and special needs. reintegration strategy suggests the need for further attention in this area. 16. Although Montenegro’s Reintegration Strategy for Persons Returned on the Basis of a Readmission Agreement calls for the formation of local teams (of unspecified composition), by mid-2018, no such teams had been formed. 16 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS 3.2.4. Fiscal Constraints regarding the party responsible for imple- Inadequate or in some instances utterly menting the different parts of action plans; lacking budget allocations limit the effective and in most of the region, the responsibility implementation of reintegration policies, devolves to local municipalities, which are strategies, and action plans. In the reinte- expected to deliver services out of their gration strategies set out in table 3.1, action mainstream budgets. plans designate the government institutions responsible for providing targeted social pro- 3.3. NONGOVERNMENT tection services as well as the level of gov- STAKEHOLDERS ernment that should coordinate and monitor NGOs, international organizations, and the service delivery. However, throughout the donors throughout the region have helped Western Balkans, the fiscal requirements nec- to fill the considerable gaps in service deliv- essary to implement these action plans are, ery left by the low levels of implementation to varying degrees, inadequate or altogether of targeted reintegration policies. No formal absent. Service provision for the reintegra- mechanisms exist to allow governmental tion of returnees in Kosovo compares favor- and nongovernmental stakeholders to meet, ably with the rest of the Western Balkans. However, in recent years, the rising number exchange information, or coordination service of returns coupled with reductions in funding delivery. Hence, the capacities of these orga- has negatively impacted the implementation nizations are not always efficiently leveraged. of the strategy regarding the reintegration of returnees. Under Montenegro‘s strategy, 3.3.1. NGOs temporary accommodations are planned Several NGOs are active in the reintegra- but unavailable due a lack of municipal-level tion of returnees to the Western Balkans, funding allocations. Ironically, the lack of including some whose primary focus is not clarity around responsibility and the absence the reintegration of returnees per se, but of coordinating implementation mechanisms which may, nevertheless, offer returnees key means that allocated budgets are sometimes services or targeted programs. Particularly left unused. An example is North Macedonia, noteworthy are the numerous organizations where a budget line item was included for the that are actively involved in the assistance ministry of labor and social policy to imple- of vulnerable groups, including the Roma and ment the reintegration program in 2010–12, children. Table 3.3 provides a sampling of but because the budgeted funds were not NGOs active in the reintegration of returnees used, there have been no additional alloca- to the Western Balkans. tions in subsequent years. There is also a A determination of which NGOs have further complication: in some parts of the successful service-delivery records relies Western Balkans, there is insufficient clarity on information from municipal officials or 3. RETURN PROCESS AND PRACTICES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS | 17 TABLE 3.3. Sampling of NGOs Active in the Reintegration of Returnees in the Western Balkans Area NGOs Albania Union for Development and Integration of Roma Minority in Albania; Roma Women’s Rights Centre; Institute of Romani Culture in Albania; Romani Baxt Albania; Romano Khan; Disutni Albania; Voice of Roma; National Association Education for Life; Tirana Legal Aid Society; Help for Children Foundation; Roma—Egyptian Youth Movement; Social Organisation for the Support for the Youth; Roma Gate to Integration; Roma Versitas Albania; USHTEN; TREJA; Romano Sezi Bosnia and Herzegovina Association Vaša Prava (Your Rights); Local Democracy Foundation; Bosnia and Herzegovina Women’s Network; Association of Citizens for Promotion of Roma Education—Otaharin; Kali Sara-Roma Information Centre; Romlen Kakani Kosovo Balkan Sunflowers Kosova; Bethany Christian Services; Kosova Education Centre; Kosovo Education Centre; Kosovo Foundation for Open Society; Nevo Koncepti; Syri I Vizionit; Shl-Kosova; The European Centre for Minority Issues in Kosovo; The Roma, Askhalia Documentation Centre; the Network of Roma, Askali, and Egyptian Women Organizations of Kosovo; Voice of Roma, Askhali, and Egyptians North Macedonia Ambrela—Centre for Integration (Skopje); Association for the Defense of Children’s Rights; Association for Human Rights Protection of Roma; Association for Perspective, Integration, and Development “Roma Perspective” (Prilep); Association ROMANO NEVO DIKIBE; Centre for Integration of the Roma; European Policy Institute; First Children’s Embassy in the World (MEGJASHI); Macedonian Young Lawyers’ Association; National Roma Centrum (Kumanovo); Organization of Roma Youth Bela Kula; Roma Lawyers’ Association; Roma Community Centre— DROM; Romano Vilo; SONCE Montenegro The Legal Centre; Minority Shareholders of JSC Gornji Ibar; Democratic Centre of Bijelo Poje (BDC); Democratic Roma Centre; Montenegrin Women’s Lobby; Euromost; Institute for Entrepreneurship and Economic Development (IPER); Mladi Romi (Young Roma); Defendology. Serbia Roma Education Fund; Standing Conference of Roma Associations of Citizens (SKRUG); Roma Forum Serbia; Bibija Roma Women’s Centre; YUROM Centre Niš; Roma Education Centre; Association Bakija Bakic; URBO Source: Stakeholder mappings (see appendix A). NGO = nongovernmental organization. 18 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS international stakeholders. The stakeholder 3.3.2. Donors and international mappings conducted for this study reveal Organizations that there are examples of NGOs throughout As table 3.4 shows, there is a strong presence the Western Balkans that, notwithstanding of donors and international organizations in their mission statements to the contrary, are the Western Balkans, especially Kosovo and largely engaged in advocacy with very limited North Macedonia. Deutsche Gesellschaft involvement in service delivery. für internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), Further engagement by local- and cen- the Swiss Agency for Development tral-level institutions will help identify how and Cooperation, and the International these NGOs do and do not meet the needs Organization for Migration (IOM) are active of returnees and how to better leverage their throughout the Western Balkans. A summary expertise. of findings follows. TABLE 3.4. Primary Active Donors and International Organizations in the Western Balkans Area Donors Albania GIZ; IOM; Open Society Foundation for Albania; OSEC; Save the Children; Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation; Terre des Hommes; UNICEF; UNDP Bosnia and Herzegovina Catholic Relief Services; European Union; GIZ; IOM; MARRI; OSEC; Swiss Development Cooperation Kosovo Caritas Internationalis Kosova; Council of Europe; Danish Refugee Council; GIZ; IOM; OSEC; Save the Children; Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency; Swiss Development Cooperation; Terre des Hommes; UNCF North Macedonia GIZ; International Centre for Migration Policy Development; IOM; Migration, Asylum, Refugees Regional Initiative; OSEC; Swiss Agency for Development and Coordination; Swiss Agency for Development Cooperation; UNDP; UNHCR Montenegro UNDP; UNHCR; IOM; European Union; GIZ; Red Cross; MARRI Serbia European Union; GIZ; IOM; Swiss Agency for Development Cooperation; UNDP Source: Stakeholder mappings (see appendix A). GIZ = Deutsche Gesellschaft für internationale Zusammenarbeit; IOM = International Organization for Migration. MARRI = Migration, Asylum, Refugees Regional Initiative; OSEC = Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe; UNCF = United Nations Children’s Fund; UNDP = United Nations Development Programme. 3. RETURN PROCESS AND PRACTICES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS | 19 The primary point of administrative and financed by different EU member states, contact between member states and rein- and information exchange is either nonex- tegration operations in the Western Balkans istent or limited. There is scant formalized, usually comprise international donors and lateral, on-the-ground cooperation between organizations. In Belgium and Austria, these agencies; and coordination with the main institutional cooperation around Western Balkan governments is ad hoc and returnee integration is through the agen- unstructured. cies responsible for managing those returns, Reintegration programs run by interna- particularly IOM and, in Belgium, Caritas tional donors and organizations are primarily Internationalis. In France, there is formal working alongside one another with different policy collaboration, and given the central- setups, regulations, and procedures—even if ization of authority regarding returns in the only one or two agencies are managing them. French Office of Immigration and Integration As a result, in most cases, long-term local (OFII), administrative contact—when it capacity building for municipalities and NGOs occurs—is mainly through OFII and Kosovan is limited or nonexistent. counterparts. In Germany, GIZ indicates that Like local NGOs, international nongovern- it works closely with local authorities in the mental stakeholders tend to secure funding Western Balkans to support the reintegration on the merits of their respective program- of returnees. This also applies to Switzerland ming. Therefore, in the absence of formal and Sweden, whose development agencies coordination channels at the institutional are also active in the Western Balkans. level in the Western Balkans, their coordina- Return projects focus on very specific tion is not directly incentivized. target groups, parallel structures are set up 20 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS 4 Profiles of Returnees The importance of targeted policy responses situations—poverty, lack of housing, unem- becomes apparent when considering the ployment, and a lack of or insufficient social complex and multilayered vulnerabili- security provision—and consequently, an ties of returnees to the Western Balkans. inability to provide a basic standard of living Notwithstanding the lack of consistent data for themselves and their families. Across the collection on returnees, available qualitative Western Balkans, returnees cited both push data allows for a preliminary profile of the and pull factors as reasons for migration. Our main challenges they face. The findings below findings are consistent across the region and are based on the vulnerability mapping con- with other studies (Vathi, forthcoming). ducted as part of this study as well as avail- It is striking how many focus group able academic and third-party reports. The respondents feel that their home economy research is explicitly—but not exclusively— had stagnated and that the likelihood of its focused on the push and pull factors that improvement was low. Many made it quite Roma returnees have identified rather than clear that their departing came with consid- those experienced by non-Roma returnees. erable difficulties, such as the breaking up of families, disposing of assets, and fear of the 4.1. PUSH AND PULL unknown, with sometimes debilitating psy- FACTORS chological effects on individuals and families. Socioeconomic factors are the main reported The impact of these stressors should not be drivers of migration from the Western Balkans underestimated, particularly as the return to the European Union (EU). Returnees process produces a host of new ones. Pull emphasize that they migrate to meet basic factors are driven by a mix of hope, hearsay needs rather than out of a desire to econom- from people that had already migrated, and ically or socially advance. Overall, returnees simply the knowledge that there were both in interviews and focus group discussions economic opportunities and better social said that they left to escape poor economic security, particularly health care, in the EU. 4. PROFILES OF RETURNEES | 21 Some of the narratives collected during Many Roma and other ethnic minori- this research suggest that the average age ties said they departed because of dis- among those leaving is increasingly dropping, crimination and marginalization. Roma although no empirical evidence is available to face widespread discrimination in education, support these observations. If true, it would the labor market, and everyday bureaucratic mean that pull factors are less likely to moti- encounters, such as when trying to access vate families with heads of household in their social services (O’Higgins 2012, Vathi, forth- thirties. coming). The result is a lack of regular and Roma-specific factors. There is scant normalized interaction with local communities consistent data collection on the ethnic (Vathi, forthcoming). In interviews, Roma gave makeup of migrants and returnees from the accounts of covert racism as well as instances EU, but data collected in the Western Balkans of overt and racially motived violence. suggest that the Roma are highly repre- Discrimination and the poor socioeco- sented in migratory flows to Europe (Vathi, nomic situation of the Roma reinforce one forthcoming). Data collected in Germany, for another, producing strong push factors. example, shows a majority representation of Roma communities in the Western Balkans are Roma among asylum seekers from Bosnia and characterized by lower socioeconomic indica- Herzegovina, North Macedonia, and Serbia tors than non-Roma; they are prone to under- (see table 4.1). employment and low incomes from unskilled TABLE 4.1. Number of Asylum Applicants and Share of Roma (Germany) All Asylum Roma Applicantsb Nationality Year Applicantsa Number Percent Albania 2015 54,762 3,118 5.7 2016 17,236 1,116 6.5 Bosnia and Herzegovina 2015 7,473 3,979 53.2 2016 3,190 1,827 57.3 Kosovo 2015 37,095 4,758 12.8 2016 6,490 1,744 26.9 North Macedonia 2015 14,131 8,284 58.6 2016 7,015 4,334 61.8 Montenegro 2015 3,635 735 20.2 2016 1,630 431 26.4 Serbia 2015 26,945 23,338 86.6 2016 10,273 8,484 82.6 Source: Deutscher Bundestag 2017. a. In some cases, there are minimal discrepancies regarding the total number of applicants between this table and Eurostat data. In substance, the figures from the two sources are consistent. b. Based on self-declaration of applicants. 22 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS stage, some forms of discrimination were “We had problems because drunk guests beginning to emerge in the EU. Interestingly, of local pubs were physically attacking us, the overwhelming majority spoke positively throwing stones and bottles at us. That’s of the social protection systems in EU coun- why I left the job.” tries and generally felt that they had been Alben, a 34-year-old Roma man from Montenegro, well treated and had not been discriminated linking racism to why he left one of his jobs as a cleaner at a utility service against, as opposed to their experiences in their homeland. Discussion participants jobs in the formal and informal sectors. In did not attribute this difference to less some cases, the disparity in socioeconomic Roma-targeted discrimination inside the EU, indicators is very high. For example, according however, but rather to the fact that service to interviews with the leaders of the primary providers were unable to identify them as Roma, Ashkali, and Egyptian organizations Roma. in Kosovo, the unemployment rate in these While discussion participants expressed communities is 80–90 percent. Employment that migration was a means to satisfy abroad is the only consistent source of avail- basic needs, many also shared their moti- able work for them and therefore the only vation to secure a better future, particu- way they can generate a substantial income.17 larly for their children. During qualitative interviews, men and women often referenced “We decided to leave … because of the the trajectories of their own lives and their difficult economic conditions that we were desire for a better future for their children. in. We didn’t have a job here, neither of us, Their hopes focus on two opportunities. The so we sought salvation in Europe.” first is education: children in the EU must Ivo, a man from North Macedonia regarding the attend school, and the standards are higher. decision he and his wife made to migrate When pushed to explain why they did not force children to attend schools in their During focus group discussions, some homeland, many claimed that doing so was Roma returnees noted that while they pointless because the education system is remained marginalized at the fringes of poor, the schools are segregated, and the their host EU countries, their experience of educators are unwelcoming of Roma stu- outright discrimination was much less com- dents. Some Roma parents said that if they mon, partly due to their being identified as believed that going to school would increase migrants or asylum seekers rather than as their children’s opportunities, they would Roma, allowing them to go more unnoticed more actively encourage them to do so. than in their homeland. Other returnees, how- The second key opportunity is employ- ever, claimed that, while still in the nascent ment. Young men and, to a lesser extent, young women, can easily find low-level 17. In 2017, the official unemployment rate in Kosovo was 30.5 percent (Kosovo Agency of Statistics 2017). work in construction, hospitality, or cleaning 4. PROFILES OF RETURNEES | 23 One particularly damaging perception is “Children’s education is also an important that of “returnee wealth,” which can foster cause for migration. It gives children feelings of resentment and expectations opportunities to learn more.” of wealth distribution within communities. Ramadan, the leader of a This perception is common in other return Roma organization in Kosovo contexts as well and can exist regardless of whether it can be substantiated (see services. This work allowed families to better Riiskjaer and Nielsson 2008). In fact, those themselves financially and, as some respon- who return after short periods abroad after dents noted, was a process of creating in being removed are less likely to return with themselves a sense of worth and confidence, additional financial resources; they may even which could spill over into the next genera- be worse off. Such accounts were common tion. For recent returnees actively planning during the vulnerability mapping phase. to remigrate to the EU, education and jobs Returnees described a high degree of socio- represent strong pull factors. cultural shame, leading to alienation from social networks—a phenomenon also com- 4.2. VULNERABILITIES mon to returnees elsewhere (see for example, UPON RETURN Schuster and Majidi 2013). Returnees often reencounter old problems Additional issues faced by Roma. upon their return. They also face a common The perception of returnee wealth is more set of challenges during the reintegration complicated among the Roma, where social process. Gaps in reintegration support, as expectations of wealth distribution are strong described in chapter 3, become apparent and where wealth discrepancies between when considering their experiences. They those who stay, and returnees are potentially lack a sense of belonging, institutional sup- higher. In addition to tensions in their own port, proper housing, employment, health communities, returnee Roma face continued care, psychosocial support, and educational discrimination from mainstream society in opportunities. We consider each of these the Western Balkans. Reportedly, this dis- challenges below, with additional attention crimination gets reinforced during bureau- given to the specific vulnerabilities faced by cratic encounters that accompany the return the Roma. process, such as when registering as unem- ployed or for social services. Discrimination of 4.2.1. Reception by Home Community this type, especially after living in countries Returnees to the Western Balkans face where they have faced less discrimination, discrimination on multiple fronts. Those who can compound the psychological trauma of have spent many years abroad, particularly return. These findings point to the need to children, may struggle to regain acceptance bolster inclusion of returnees to the Western in their home communities (see section 4.3). Balkans, including within Roma communities. 24 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS Cross-cultural studies suggest that social organizations are more about advocacy than networks and inclusion make for a more suc- service delivery. Returnees did not express a cessful return, a finding that can apply to the clear preference for working with a local or Western Balkans (UNHCR 2016). international NGO. Additional issues faced by Roma. 4.2.2. Institutional Support Roma face additional barriers in accessing The implementation issues discussed in institutional support. One practical problem chapter 3 result in service provision gaps. revolves around the need to have a state-is- Returnees do not benefit from available sued identification document (ID) to access services partly due to the ad hoc registration social services. An applicant needs to record of returnees upon arrival into central data- a formal address, and herein lies the problem. bases. In the absence of effective registration Many Roma—whether returnees or not— practices, the burden is put on returnees to live in informal settlements that lack formal register with local authorities. street names and house numbers, resulting Interviews illustrate the lack of effec- in their being unable to obtain an ID, and tive information dissemination about the consequently being denied access to social obtainability of services. When concerted protection, welfare services, and sometimes efforts are made to bolster the awareness education for their children. Furthermore, of services and assist returnees to connect because they lack ID, many Roma parents with them, they are positively received, as do not register their children at birth; these interviews in Serbia demonstrate. Similarly, Roma children therefore do not have birth returnees in Kosovo appreciated being made certificates, further denying them access to aware of their rights and of the services and essential services. During qualitative inter- entitlements they could access. In some views, Roma in Bosnia and Herzegovina, North parts of the Western Balkans, returnees are Macedonia, and Montenegro all noted issues disappointed with both the central and local civil service bureaucracy, which they believe actively undermine their efforts to access “We were afraid to go to the social center documentation and services. Many simply and to fill an application to receive benefits, give up and no longer retain any interest in we were afraid that the representatives the process. When comparing officials at the would cut the benefits which belong to central and local levels, the general sentiment us. They might have asked where we have is that local level officials are better to work been until now, why we didn’t register every with, but most returnees would prefer to month, who we were with abroad etc.” work through nongovernmental organizations Roma man from North Macedonia (NGOs). In fact, many returnees approach (Focus group, Tetovo, male, 31 years old, Roma, completed NGOs and ask them to intervene on their secondary education, Tetovo) behalf, further demonstrating that these 4. PROFILES OF RETURNEES | 25 around registration for social services linked awareness campaigns to warn potential to a lack of ID. migrants about working with agents. As a Other barriers to accessing support are result, some—especially those returning after sociocultural. Given their long history of social spending only a short time in the EU—do exclusion, Roma are prone to mistrust author- not have the money required to repurchase ities, and when combined with discrimination, or build new housing. Many who save during this can disincentivize them from registering their time away use that money to pay back for IDs or key services. Combined with misin- debts related to funding the journey. Practical formation or a lack of quality information, the barriers also impede their ability to obtain consequences can be particularly negative. housing. Securing a permit to build a home or access land rights can be difficult, particularly 4.2.3. Housing in Serbia and Albania. Many returnees no longer have a home of Additional issues faced by Roma. their own in the Western Balkans and there- Housing is an issue for many Roma in the fore must secure housing upon their return. Western Balkans and can serve as a push Some men and women sold or terminated factor. Multigenerational living, sometimes the leases on their homes in preparation in close quarters, is common. A considerable for their journey abroad. Others invested a share of the Roma population lives in spa- substantial amount of money from the sale of tially segregated, rural, or peri-urban areas their homes and other assets to finance their with poor access to basic services (UNDP voyage. Compounding this problem, migrants 2017). The living conditions that migrants do not always receive fair value for the homes leave—and return to—can be dangerous and they sell. There are “agents” who target stressful. In the absence of adequate housing potential migrants and offer package deals to handle the selling of assets. Returnees “When they return…they have to move noted that without an agent’s assistance, back in the same small house. So, housing they could not have managed to secure the is a problem, but not a new one. It is a finances necessary to migrate, but that at the problem that is inherited.” same time they felt cheated—overcharged to Isuf, leader of a large Roma organization in Kosovo migrate and underpaid for their assets. There are no laws prohibiting such practices any- where in the Western Balkans, and while gov- assistance, returnees come to these areas— ernment officials acknowledged the problem sometimes to stay with family. in discussions, they noted that it was difficult Additionally, many Roma lack documents to legislate against. Returnees also bemoaned establishing their legal ownership/use of the fact that there were no government-led their dwelling. Those who find their homes 26 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS reclaimed, damaged, or looted upon return 90-day limit to their stay. This practice, is not have limited legal or financial recourse. new. It has been going on since the 1960s from what was then Yugoslavia, and it is not 4.2.4. Employment conducive to long-term healthy living. Most Despite modest improvements in recent economic reintegration support consists of years, unemployment rates remain high in access to existing active labor market policies the Western Balkans compared with the EU. or—typically donor-financed—self-employ- Throughout the Western Balkans, a large ment programs. These programs are usually proportion—a average of 23.5 percent—of a mix of access to assets (e.g., machinery) the youth population were reportedly not in and micro-grants. Interviews suggest that, employment, education, or training (NEET). while these programs help refugees stay The highest rates are in Kosovo, Albania, and economically afloat during the duration of the Bosnia and Herzegovina at 26–30 percent program, for the most part, the support does (World Bank 2018). Returnees can register not allow them to establish a functioning with unemployment offices on return, but self-employment set-up or create a sustain- many described the experience as unpro- able income. ductive due to a lack of jobs. Returnees who Additional issues faced by Roma. were self-employed prior to departure face Economic reintegration is much more difficult a loss of business and clientele. For many for Roma due to their low levels of education youths, the solution is to participate in cycles and professional skills, their limited social of oscillating migrancy—traveling to the EU capital with the majority population, and and staying for a fraction of the under-90- discrimination. Roma confront higher rates of days permitted while they “legitimately” work, unemployment than the general population and then returning to the Western Balkans for as well as a propensity for employment in the a few weeks or months before returning again informal sector. During qualitative interviews, to the EU. There are numerous instances Roma expressed a stronger recognition of this that such oscillating migrants enter into as an issue after their return, possibly due to medium-term arrangements in EU countries a lower threshold of acceptance on their part with employers who encourage the practice, as their attitudes toward formal employment including using the young migrants to recruit and state institutions shift during their time others for the same purpose. Several key abroad. These changes in perceptions and stakeholders described this as a win-win-situ- aspirations can in and of themselves hamper ation: EU businesses get cheap off-the-books reintegration by contributing to the emo- labor, and the young migrants earn money tional strain of return, increasing the desire that they must bring home due to the forced to migrate again, especially among youth 4. PROFILES OF RETURNEES | 27 (Vathi, forthcoming). However, with the right to suffer temporary or long-term gaps in support, aspirations can be transformed into health care. Poor living conditions compound assets (see section 4.4.1). the psychological effects of return, with the forcibly returned most at risk. 4.2.5. Health Care Most returnees have an inadequate and Psychosocial Support understanding of mental health issues or how Returnees face two main health-related to access mental health interventions. challenges upon return. First, there is the stress experienced during the return process. 4.2.6. Education Psychological stress stands out as a key Interviews and discussions revealed the vulnerability generated by return, especially experiences of returnees who are parents of among the forcibly removed. Second, there school-aged children as well as those pursuing are difficult administrative requirements to education for themselves. The primary issues accessing health care in the Western Balkans. of concern involve enrollment, certification of Many returnees lack access to health care diplomas or degrees, and discrimination. In upon their return if it depends on registering some parts of the Western Balkans, such as as unemployed—or even registering at all. North Macedonia, enrollment in secondary Interviews with returnees throughout the school depends on the provision of school Western Balkans reported problems related certificates from abroad, which are not readily to registering for health care, with delays available to all returnees. Throughout most of resulting in periods without health care, the Western Balkans, returnee children with including for those in acute need. school certificates that indicate their level Additional issues faced by Roma. of education are unable to submit them to Across the Western Balkans, Roma suffer with the appropriate authorities because they are lower health indicators overall than the main- issued in the language of an EU country, fur- stream population. Given the higher propen- ther compounding the problem. The logistical sity for their being unemployed and resistant and cost barriers related to translations, nos- to registration, this population is more likely trification, and the apostil process is more than most returnees can manage. Consequently, children are placed at the level they were at “Imagine now, you go out of the misery when they migrated, leading to demotivation and the shell, you start to live normally and gradual dissociation from their educational [in Europe] and then you are forcibly experience. From an institutional perspec- returned.” tive, the timing of return is impactful because A prominent Romani activist in North Macedonia encouraging the consideration of the jarring effects children cannot enroll in school at any time; of return on the Roma many children lose a year of schooling because 28 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS 4.3. INTERSECTIONAL “When we left, my daughter was in fifth VULNERABILITIES grade. Now we are back [she is 13 years of age] and she was enrolled in the same As discussed, ethnic discrimination against grade. […] She is 13 and is ashamed to go the Roma compound their lower socioeco- to school, she doesn’t want to go. […] nomic status. Age, gender, and disability Her teacher says she is bored because she can also negatively affect the experience is big; she writes fast and learns fast, and is of return. When such factors intersect with now bored. […] And then they will tell you being Roma, vulnerabilities increase. that Roma children do not study!” A woman from North Macedonia 4.3.1. Women Problems accessing health care and social services can be more acute and jeopardiz- they return in the middle of an academic year. ing to the health of pregnant women (Vathi, Interviews with returnees reveal that some forthcoming). In general, female returnees of these issues could have be avoided with encounter specific vulnerabilities linked to appropriate action prior to their departure traditional gender norms and lower levels from EU member states. Counseling on these of employment. Female employment rates and other issues before departure—ideally by in the Western Balkans are low compared an organization independent of state authori- with European standards (World Bank 2018). ties—is therefore crucial. This is linked to patriarchal family structures Additional issues faced by Roma. that ground expectations of women to stay Documentation-related problems can have at home to care for children and the house- negative effects on Roma children seeking hold while men seek paid work. Because this to reenroll in school. First, the money and division of labor encourages women to be knowledge required for nostrification presents financially dependent on men, single mothers a particularly high burden for many Roma. and widows find themselves in a particularly Second, Roma children face specific language vulnerable position upon return. barriers upon return. Many families speak Romani at home, and if their children received “I stayed in Germany for three years and education abroad, they may lose touch with had my second son there. But the person the language of their original homeland.. I lived with abandoned me (…) Now, I live Without adequate support, these children at my parent’s. I live there with my two are susceptible to poorer learning outcomes children, together with my brother, his wife, and placement in lower grades. Roma families their, three children and our mother. But the described the reenrollment process as emo- place has really deteriorated.” tionally taxing, which disincentivizes school Lindita, a divorced Egyptian woman participation. from Shkodra with two children 4. PROFILES OF RETURNEES | 29 These vulnerabilities are even more When we returned, our children lost a prevalent and acute among Roma women. school year because the school did not While variations exist within and across want to accept the certificate of the Roma communities, gender roles are gener- completed grade in Germany. I know a lot ally more perfectly preserved among Roma of kids who don’t go to school because in the Western Balkans, with higher levels of they don’t have money for a snack or a stigma attached to a woman being employed sandwich to take to school, not to mention (Boudet, Petesch, and Turk 2013), UNICEF nostrification of documents. We plan to go 2017). Even when Roma women seek to back to Germany if nothing changes here.” participate in the labor market, gender and ethnic discrimination in the broader commu- Mihrija, a Bosnian woman from Rozaje in North Macedonia nity intersects to create strong barriers to employment (O’Higgins 2012). In this study, Roma women claimed a widespread assump- There are also gender considerations tion on the part of employers that they were for children. Returnee girls face particular only suited for lower-level work and/or that problems as they encounter more traditional they are prone to several pregnancies in the gender norms than those to which they space of a few years. have become accustomed, especially the expectation of early marriage as a means of 4.3.2. Children gaining acceptance in home communities. There is insufficient research on children and Communities may be wary of the more liberal adolescents classified as returnees; however, gender norms of EU countries. This research evidence collected for this study in addition revealed reports of young girls being discrim- to other research in the Western Balkans inated against on the grounds of suspected reveals a prevalence of reintegration diffi- sexual impurity and even being subjected to culties and socioemotional problems among virginity tests to secure marriage prospects. children (Zevulun et al. 2017; Vathi and Duci The most vulnerable returnee children 2016). For those who were either born in or are older adolescents from an ethnic minority taken to the EU at a very young age, the group who experience irregular migration. experience is particularly traumatic. First, These young people tend to live isolated lives there are the language and nostrification after their return. Most drop out of school issues as discussed in section 4.2.6. Second, early, rarely leave their homes, and have versed in the culture and socioeconomic little contact with peers or the wider society realities of EU countries they have left, their (Zevulun et al. 2017). For parents, the experi- learning curve is steep and the support ence of these children can compound existing mechanisms for their reintegration are largely difficulties and incentivize later remigration. lacking. 30 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS 4.3.3. People with Disabilities 4.4. ASSETS UPON RETURN Gaps and delays in social assistance have a Returnees arrive in the Western Balkans with particularly negative effect on people with more than just problems and vulnerabilities. disabilities. Those who have become used to Many have benefited from their stays abroad better care have a particularly difficult time and have acquired a set of distinct assets acclimating to lower standards. This adjust- in the form of human and social capital. This ment can be particularly taxing on a child seems particularly true for Roma returnees, with a disability, who encounters multiple according to this research. If systematically hurdles to schooling and access to health leveraged, returnees could use these acquired care. Multiple studies in the Western Balkans assets to benefit themselves and society. have recognized this as an important issue. Studies show that those who return with Research in In Kosovo finds that vulnerable assets, such as human and social capital, groups among returnees include children with generally fare better upon return (World Bank disabilities, single mothers, Roma, and people 2017) and may contribute positively to their with mental health issues, and leads the call communities (Debnath 2016). In so doing, for improved policy and action (Arenliu and these returnees can become role models and Weine 2015). Given the traditional nature of agents of change for their families and for families and the difficulty women have enter- their communities. Some key assets identi- ing the workplace, the impact of a disability fied by the vulnerability mappings are set out can be particularly debilitating for a family below. whose male breadwinner falls ill. 4.4.1. Skills “In Germany, I stayed for 18 months as Identifying the skills that returnees bring with an asylum-seeker. But, I got sick and was them is an important stage in the reintegra- operated on for a serious disease. (…) I tion process and one which can help smooth have been back for two years, but I have the transition to work and into local commu- not received my disability payment yet. My nities. In practice, the skills of returnees will wife is unemployed, and we do not receive vary depending on where they are returning economic aid. Honestly, I live on charity from, how long they were there, and when (…).” they returned. Further, the returnees’ ability Isuf from Fushë-Kruja in Albania to leverage their new skills depends on local demand for them; where such demand exists, returnees tend to fare better (World Bank 2017).18 18. See also Thomas 2012 for examples from Eastern and Southern Africa. 4. PROFILES OF RETURNEES | 31 Men and women from the Western Balkans often return from the EU with new “We have learned to work there and respect language skills. Some youth report having deadlines and co-workers. After returning engaged in internships and other training from Germany it is much more difficult to while abroad. These assets are more common integrate into society than before leaving.” among those who spent long periods of time A Roma returnee in Kosovo abroad and who were able to benefit from learning opportunities in Europe. However, 4.4.2. Aspirations and Confidence those who had spent less time abroad also Experiences of more equal treatment in reported new skills, such as for short-term, Europe translate to higher aspirations and contract-based work. For Roma and others confidence among Roma men and women. who tend to occupy unregulated professions Both returnees and community leaders made in the Western Balkans, there are transferable note of this transformation in this study and skills that come with working in a regulated others (e.g., Sigona 2012). For Roma women, and structured environment, including time the shift in attitudes can be particularly management and discipline. apparent. Experiences in the EU can foster The matching of skills to jobs will remain more positive attitudes about women in a challenge while job opportunities are few in the workplace among both Roma men and the Western Balkans. In the case of Roma, the women. Young girls who have spent most of structural discrimination adds another obsta- their formative years in the EU, might espe- cle to employment and thus to the applica- cially share these views. However, as previ- tion of skills in the workplace. So too does ously noted (section 4.3), a reversal of such Roma’s spatial segregation from mainstream gains can occur upon return. communities. Bolstering the inclusion of these communities into mainstream society and into 4.4.3. Entrepreneurship local livelihoods is crucial to capitalizing on In qualitative interviews, aspirations were the skills of returnees. manifest in a willingness to take on new chal- lenges, including any available entrepreneur- “As Roma, we are often discriminated ship opportunities. The literature suggests a against on the job market. People have higher tendency for returnees to self-select prejudices that we are thieves, we do not into entrepreneurship than stayers with the dress nicely, we do not smell nice, etc. I same skills and financial capital (Marchetta think we can pay attention to details, we 2011; Piracha and Vadean 2010; Demurger and quickly learn any job. Especially the Roma Xu 2011). Lack of credit is a major constraint who lived abroad—in Germany for example.” to the establishment of new small-scale Džema, a Roma man and returnee to enterprises (Beck and Demirguc-Kunt 2006), North Macedonia for example, when returnees lack collateral 32 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS or access to formal financial institutions, as is and curious than children who have never left. often the case among Roma. It was unclear whether the parents of Roma returnees were more vigilant about their 4.4.4. Children children attending school or if had reverted Regular school attendance positive impacts to their original behavior. Rather than capital- the behavior of Roma children. Some educa- izing on this human resource, the education tors are quick to point out that returnee Roma system punishes the children for their lack of children are willing students—more attentive acceptable certification. 4. PROFILES OF RETURNEES | 33 5 Main Findings and Recommendations This paper has demonstrated that existing such as ethnic minorities and Roma for whom frameworks in the Western Balkans do not socioeconomic problems more pronounced, offer practical reintegration solutions or, for the reintegration challenge is even greater. several reasons, do not effectively implement The following recommendations were them, leaving returnees with inadequate and formulated in close conversation with the inconsistent support for their reintegration, European Union (EU) and were endorsed by reinforcing their economic and social exclu- the governments of and key stakeholders in sion, and in turn increasing the risk of sec- the Western Balkans. ondary migration. For vulnerable returnees 5.1. EUROPEAN UNION (EU) Finding Recommendation Policies and frameworks 1. In the absence of an overall EU Develop a set of common basic principles for the return and reintegration framework, member reintegration of returnees. The legislative changes proposed at the states are filling the vacuum with State of the Union 2018 go some distance in harmonizing return their own approaches. There are policies, but they focus on increasing the number of returns. A inconsistencies and blind spots holistic, longer-term approach to migration would also consider across these approaches. the effectiveness of reintegration. Common basic principles around return could serve as a roadmap for member states as they develop their return-related policies and interventions. An example of such an approach is the Common Basic Principles on Roma Inclusion (2009). Based on this study’s findings, these principles should—at a minimum—apply to recommendations 2–4 below. 2. There is no commonly Establish a definition of vulnerable groups among returnees, accepted definition of vulnerable with sensitivity to the impact of intersectional vulnerabilities. groups within the EU, resulting Most EU national assisted voluntary return (AVR) programs have in differential treatment of specific criteria for specific vulnerable groups. However, there is no returnees based on varying common legal definition of “vulnerability” regarding returnees. The sending-country definitions. adoption of a common definition would prevent service provision Policies do not address many and assistance gaps to the most vulnerable returnees, would help of the vulnerabilities specific identify intersectional vulnerabilities, would facilitate reintegration, to migrants from the Western and would mitigate the risk of carousel migration. Balkans. (continued) 34 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS Finding Recommendation 3. There are gaps in pre- and Develop minimum standards for pre- and postreturn assistance. postreturn assistance across Return counseling and support programs exist within EU countries, member states, some stemming but they vary both in terms of their depth of content and their from the absence of commonly applicability. These programs should be standardized to the extent accepted definition of vulnerable possible and made compulsory in terms of their being administered groups. to all returnees. 4. Evaluation of evidence on the Cooperate and coordinate between sending countries and effectiveness of reintegration the Western Balkans, including information exchange and a programs and postreturn life is management-on-return process. The onus of responsibility for scarce to nonexistent. monitoring returns should be on the Western Balkans as part of their reintegration strategies and programs. However, it is evident that providing a comprehensive reintegration program like that of Kosovo’s is expensive; and the EU could help with funding for these programs. The monitoring of reintegration outcomes would also help EU member states evaluate the strength of their return policies. Coordination and financing 5. Coordination among the EU Strategically use funding provided through the Asylum and and the Western Balkans focuses Migration Fund and the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance on border control and security to launch and scale up high-priority pilot interventions for Roma rather than on the underlying and non-Roma returnees, communities, and governments. The reasons for migration and findings of this study support the idea that it is crucial to address remigration. the vulnerabilities and socioeconomic needs of Western Balkan communities crucial to mitigate migration and remigration. This recognition should guide the financing of interventions. See local- level recommendations (section 5.4) for examples of interventions. Registration and data management 6. Across the EU, there is Establish common parameters and standards for data collection an information deficit on and reporting regarding returns from member states. Current the numbers, profiles, and proposals to improve reporting to Eurostat through the Migration vulnerabilities of returnees. In the Statistics Regulation could be more ambitious in their scope, absence of this data, it is nearly including regarding the identification of vulnerabilities. In addition impossible to draw conclusions to basic demographic information like gender and age, assessing about the effectiveness of return the vulnerabilities and needs of returnees requires access to policies. sensitive information, such as disability, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. In terms of data sharing, initiatives like the European Travel Information and Authorization System (ETIAS) seek to improve the interoperability of systems, for the purposes of security and border control. However, the question of if and how to tailor such systems to satisfy a sustainable return agenda demands additional consideration. Revise the measurement methodologies related to return and reintegration. The EU return rate should be based on a multiannual projection. Additional indicators, such as a reintegration index, should be developed and used to measure return effectiveness. Steps should be taken to harmonize measurements of AVR uptake and decision making. Determining the percentage of eligible individuals who participate in programs is key to understanding how to improve the overall effective return rate. (continued) 5. MAIN FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS | 35 Finding Recommendation 7. Information exchange on return Design and implement a shared management information system between EU member states and for sending countries and the Western Balkans. The system the Western Balkans is lacking. should formalize the information required from member states for reintegration in Western Balkans, such as identification of special needs, records of education attained while in EU member states, and data on civil registration documents. Building the capacity of central governments in the Western Balkans would improve monitoring of the implementation of return and reintegration policies. The EU could support the development of such a system by establishing the prototype and by supporting its roll-out across Western Balkans. (See box 5.1 for the Philippines’ experience with a management information system). 8. Data are absent in Standardize reporting on returnees in annual enlargement enlargement reports, even progress reports. Include more detailed data in enlargement though migration and border progress reports to promote understanding of current issues and to management are central to the bolster accountability to the agenda. The Directorate-General for enlargement agenda. Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations should establish a standard format for all progress reports to make them comparable and to allow for the tracking of progress over time. The format should use a common set of indicators and priority topics. 5.2. EU MEMBER STATES Finding Recommendation Registration and data management 1. There are gaps and Formalize monitoring and evaluation of pre- and postreturn data, inconsistencies in the collection in country. Ideally, monitoring and evaluation standards will be of return-related data in member set by common basic principles. Member states should set basic states. controls and procedures to ensure that monitoring and evaluation is: (1) conducted on a regular basis; (2) captures all generic categories of returnees; (3) captures all aspects of reintegration— social, economic, and psychological; and (4) captures all forms of returns, not just compulsory ones. Coordination 2. There is little direct Work with and through Western Balkan government institutions coordination with the Western at the central and local levels regarding integration programs. Balkans around reintegration Working through the central government will promote an efficient programs; member states work allocation of funds and resources and help shift from the current through donors and international parallel integration structures in the Western Balkans. organizations, encouraging parallel integration structures. (continued) 36 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS BOX 5.1. Management Information System for Marawi Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Program in the Philippines Between May and October 2017, the rehabilitation of Marawi City and sur- Armed Forces of the Philippines was rounding areas. The technology platform involved in a five-month battle and siege will also facilitate a coordinated process to liberate Marawi City and surrounding for the delivery of programs, projects, municipalities from a coalition of four and activities that aim to rebuild the lives organizations, including an ISIS splinter of displaced families, restore damaged group. More than 77,000 families were properties, and resurrect socioeconomic displaced during the conflict, of which activities. The system’s infrastructure about one third had returned by March will be designed to ensure the necessary 2018. A task force comprising 52 govern- data collection modalities are in place ment agencies was created to oversee to gather, analyze, and process the data the rehabilitation of damaged houses, necessary for over 900 projects to inform roads, schools, health centers, electrical programming geared toward the recon- and water and sanitation supply, and struction of damaged infrastructure, the other infrastructure, as well as the return revitalization of economic activities and of internally displaced people. improvement of people’s means of liveli- A World Bank team is assisting the hood, and the delivery of social services Government of Philippines by providing in the affected areas. The system will a management information system that enable the storage of 77,000 family bene- will streamline assistance delivery to ficiary case files—including all household internally displaced people and act as a members, fingerprint records, and photo- decision-making tool for planning, orga- graphs—to ensure that every household nizing, and monitoring interventions for member has access to and receives all the early recovery, reconstruction, and relevant services. 5. MAIN FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS | 37 Finding Recommendation 3. There are patterns of circular Identify options for strengthening cooperation around skills labor migration from Western transfer and filling seasonal labor market needs across the EU and Balkans to the EU but a lack of in the Western Balkans. Migration can benefit host societies and regular pathways for it. migrants when used to address labor market gaps. Further, there are costs associated with irregular migration and failed asylum outcomes. Germany’s Western Balkan Regulation is one example of a policy seeking to harness such benefits and mitigate costs by providing pathways for labor migration. 4. Returnees leave member states Ensure all returnees receive the necessary core documentation without the key documentation to ease their reintegration process—especially as it pertains to required to register for services, education abroad. Prereturn counseling should raise awareness such as birth certificates and about the importance of these documents and assist in securing education certificates. them. Data suggests that, too often, returnees seek to secure these documents after their return. Given their importance, EU member states should ensure that they offer such services in the EU rather than only providing the documents through agents operating in the Western Balkans. 5. There are limited mechanisms Increase cooperation between registration agencies in the for the streamlined transfer of Western Balkans and corresponding institutions in EU member records from member states to states to ensure that all parties share and recognize all relevant Western Balkans. returnee data. The management information system described above is one approach to streamlining data sharing. 5.3. WESTERN BALKANS: CENTRAL LEVEL Finding Recommendation Policies and frameworks 1. Gaps remain in the Develop reintegration strategies that are evidence-based and realistic, clearly design of targeted identifying the roles and responsibilities of governmental actors at the central returnee policies in and local levels. This strategy should be evidence-based, consider lessons the Western Balkans. learned from past experiences and detail how this multisectoral agenda will synchronize horizontally across line-ministries and vertically among central and local levels. Roles and responsibilities around the reintegration agenda should be defined at the central and local level, and coordination and cooperation mechanisms should be established. Action plans should be concrete and results-oriented, including a results matrix, indicators, and a timeline as well as a clear budget attached to the implementation of planned reintegration activities. 2. Budgeting Develop multiyear program budgets for the integration of returnees, issues hamper the commensurate with the number and needs of the people returned. The ability implementation of a local government to address the needs of returnees and implement of reintegration reintegration strategies is contingent upon this. Funding is also required to strategies, even increase the capacity of public health institutions so they can accommodate when strategy plans the increased demand resulting from the rising number of returnees with health are included in policy problems. This recommendation should be considered in tandem with those documents. for improved implementation mechanisms to ensure that funds are properly allocated and used. (continued) 38 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS Finding Recommendation Registration and data management 3. Nonregistration Develop and roll out efficient and effective electronic data recording systems upon return is a that can capture returnees at different places and times of their movement. major obstacle to Establish a reintegration office or desk at all major airports. A reintegration returnees’ access office should be established at major airports throughout the Western Balkans. to services and It should be visible and accessible to returnees. This is essential as a first point reintegration of contact for registering returnees and collecting data. support. Typically, Establish return reception posts in local municipalities. To promote registration returnees are regardless of the means of travel, returnees should have the option to registered only if register at local-level institutions in their own community or at the local they travel by air employment office. Municipalities can then register any returnee who was not and, even then, previously identified at the airport as well as follow up with returnees who inconsistently. were. The intersectoral teams described in recommendation 2, section 5.4, would help in this regard. Services to be delivered through the teams could include registering returnees, issuing proof of returnee status, and providing information on available services. Additionally, any interviews with returnees regarding their migration experiences could be conducted in the space allotted to the intersectoral team rather than at a police station. Such a program would strengthen local readmission teams by expanding their membership, authorizing them to carry out specific tasks, and providing them with office space and an assistant. 4. Information Develop a case management system with electronic data recording to exchange regarding share at the local and central level. An efficient and effective electronic data returnees to Western recording system could capture returnees at different places and times of their Balkans is poor. movement. A case management system could follow returnees through the Oftentimes, local- reintegration process and indicate that data should be collected at various level partners are times. As a first step their registration at the airport, the returnee’s data should not informed of a be sent through the system to local municipalities. returnee’s arrival and needs unless the person self-reports. 5. Where Mechanisms should be established for the regular and systematic exchange of cooperation information among implementing partners active in reintegrating returnees in between central the Western Balkans, in addition to the local and central government. Partners governments in the could include: donors, international organizations, and nongovernmental Western Balkans organizations (NGOs) involved in the delivery of services for returnees at and implementing both the central and local levels. This information exchange should examine partners exists at all, the activities of various stakeholders as well as how well they fit in with and it is mostly bilateral support the implementation of central-level reintegration strategies to avoid and reiterative. duplication and coordinate or complement efforts as needed. (continued) 5. MAIN FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS | 39 Finding Recommendation 6. In the absence of Actively destigmatize return through information campaigns to increase self- effective registration reporting to local authorities and promote cooperation. Ideally, the measures practices, the burden set out in recommendation 5 above will serve to lessen the registration burden is put on returnees on returnees. However, the cooperation of returnees is still crucial to promote to register with effective registration, including of their needs. local authorities and Generate a program of awareness, transparency, and access to information communicate their among returnees. With the intention of making out-migration less attractive to needs. Stigma and those most likely to be returned, accessible and accurate printed information lack of knowledge regarding social services should be disseminated, primarily in Romani are reasons why they communities, as well as in centers for social work, employment bureaus, public do not do so. health facilities, and pre- and primary schools. Additionally, representatives of relevant central-level institutions should be posted at the border crossings that returnees use the most often, so people returned due to reintegration agreements can be provided written information and be personally consulted regarding available services. Institutional representatives stationed at border crossings could also issue proof of returnee status to serve as a basis to access services and to monitor that access. Citizen monitoring and evaluation of public service delivery, complaint-handling mechanisms; and institutionalized citizen feedback mechanisms could be built into a larger program of this kind. Coordination 7. A lack of central- Create a central-level platform tasked with improving coordination and level coordination information-sharing between government institutions and their partners, hampers the including donors, international organizations, and NGOs. Central bodies should implementation of have two primary tasks: (1) ensure that the implementation and monitoring returnee policies. of the reintegration strategy is on track, and (2) improve coordination among Reintegration government institutions and partners. A third task of such a body would be to policies in some assist with the establishment of a network of regional centers for integration parts of the Western that are operated by local municipalities and/or NGOs who have experience Balkans include plans working with returnees. Technical assistance for building the monitoring and for coordinating evaluation capacity of the coordinating bodies should be made available. bodies, but they are not yet active. 8. In some parts Simplify access to ID cards. Situations in which people are unable to provide of the Western the proof of residence or address necessary to obtain an ID card under current Balkans, registration legislation should be addressed by introducing provisions that allow applicants for services is to register an address at the local center for social work or another address conditioned on determined by the municipality where the applicant lives. In places where this the presentation has proved to be very difficult in terms of an unwillingness to resolve such of an identification situations by making use of existing legal provisions, the relevant legislation document (ID). should be changed so it mandates that centers for social work register such The administrative people as described. burden of obtaining Simplify access to birth certificates and registration. The central-level these documents can institutions responsible for birth registries in the Western Balkans should impede access to explore possibilities for cooperation with the corresponding institutions in EU services, especially member states to obtain copies of birth certificates for children born abroad for returnees having to people from the Western Balkans. Additionally, the Western Balkans should difficulty providing develop and implement procedures to recognize alternative evidence of birth in proof of residence cases where no birth certificate is available. and an address. (continued) 40 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS Finding Recommendation 9. There are Simplify access to certification of education completed abroad. A process is additional problems needed to facilitate the formal recognition of education completed abroad. with the translation The central-level institutions in the Western Balkans responsible for education and nostrification of should explore possibilities for cooperation with the ministries responsible for education-related education in EU member states to obtain diplomas and transcripts of education documents. Children completed abroad by Western Balkan natives and their children. Consideration are particularly hard should be given to waiving fees for notification of educational documents in hit. cases of need. Additionally, a procedure should be established for assessing the knowledge of returnee children where no documentation of completed education can be provided. 5.4. WESTERN BALKANS: LOCAL LEVEL Finding Recommendation Policies and frameworks 1. Across the Western Balkans, Develop local-level action plans for the reintegration of returnees there are no or limited targeted in a transparent and participatory manner, involving services government policies for the providers and community representatives. These plans should reintegration of returnees at the include mechanisms for coordinating with central-level government, local level. budgeting, and pathways for capacity building at the local level. They should be incorporated into targeted central-level policies. 2. Local-level, capacity to deal Build the capacity of local governments and their partners with the influx of returnees is to implement central-level policies for the reintegration of limited. returnees. Intersectoral teams should be established to reintegrate returnees in localities where a significant influx has taken place or is expected. At minimum, the membership of the teams should include centers for social work, employment offices, public health facilities, pre- and primary schools, the municipal administration, and relevant NGOs, with capacity-building and financial support provided as needed to enable NGOs to contribute as partners of the state in implementing central-level policies for the reintegration of returnees. Central-level institutions should authorize the teams to carry out specific tasks, with office space and staff allotted to each team. Supporting community-level integration and development 3. Poor socioeconomic conditions Support income generation in local communities. With an eye are the main drivers for migration. to addressing the primary push factor behind migration from the Men and women are unlikely Western Balkans to Western Europe, donor and international to face a better situation upon organizations should devote attention and resources to the return and may even encounter development and implementation of initiatives that create worse conditions. conditions for sustainable (self-)employment among members of socioeconomically vulnerable groups. (continued) 5. MAIN FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS | 41 Finding Recommendation 4. Returnees coming back to These nonfinancial assets should be considered when designing marginalized communities often interventions through active engagement with service providers. bring with them nonfinancial Instead of viewing returnees as only as “beneficiaries” of services, assets that can be capitalized on reintegration initiatives should include elements that allow upon their return, including hard returnees to capitalize on and further develop their acquired skills and higher aspirations. skills, especially livelihood skills such as leadership and agency. Investing in youth leadership and youth-led community programs will be an important complementary activity to the already ongoing reintegration efforts that mostly focus on addressing challenges rather than exploiting assets. Initiatives for women and Roma more generally are also warranted, as discussed below. Addressing Specific Needs of Vulnerable Returnees 5. For Roma: Discrimination and Beyond reintegration, develop interventions focused on breaking socioeconomic marginalization down social barriers between the marginalized and broader compounds vulnerabilities and communities through community-based initiatives rather than push factors. information campaigns. Evidence suggests that antidiscrimination campaigns have limited and sometimes even adverse impacts in overcoming the root causes of discrimination because they can deepen the perceptions of “us” vs. “them.” A more effective way to overcome hostility, stereotyping, and discrimination is to bring members of different communities together around a shared cause or task. Intersectional vulnerabilities, such as those faced by Roma women, should be considered a priority when developing and implementing such measures. Develop and implement cooperative social enterprise programs for returnees and other vulnerable nonmigrants in the community to enhance livelihoods and promote social cohesion among groups. Reinsertion and reintegration are the immediate objectives of such initiatives, but there is also the long term-objective of strengthening livelihoods and community cohesion among ethnic minorities and mainstream inhabitants. The active participation of local governments and municipalities is crucial. So too is the involvement of private sector businesses, to link upstream and downstream activities and to provide mentorship support, as well as NGOs, whose core business is involved with the creation of social enterprises and cooperative and small businesses. Activities would involve identifying municipalities that are willing to take an active lead on such initiatives; participants from target communities willing to participate in such ventures, including in-kind investing; and a cadre of private sector businesses and individuals (mentors) and NGOs to assist with implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. The pilots would be conducted in both rural and urban sectors, focusing on manufacturing and production rather than services. There could be similar pilots targeted at vulnerable groups—such as women, the elderly, and youth— while improving social cohesion within the community. (continued) 42 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS Finding Recommendation 6. Some Roma dwellings are Prioritize the formalization of property rights, i.e., tenure and informal and cannot therefore be access to civil documents for ethnic minority returnees. Providing formally owned or assigned an returnees with a means to document their housing will enable address. This creates an obstacle them to register for services. Further, for those returnees who are when a returnee is required to returning to previous dwellings, formalization of their rights will provide an address to register for allow them to reclaim housing to the extent others have claimed it. services. 7. Roma children face specific Introduce targeted accelerated learning programs to support challenges when they reenter the reentry of child returnees into the education system, with the school system related to sensitivity to the reentry of Roma. These programs would address discrimination, lack of language the host of Roma-specific learning disadvantages, with a focus skills, and cultural differences. on students in primary education who, unlike their peers, did not attend kindergarten; who do not speak the main language of the curriculum; and who face other-ing from a very young age. A targeted support program should address these challenges and help develop the requisite coping mechanisms to prepare these children for mainstream education. Such an effort can align with or be led by the Roma teaching mediators in schools where they exist. As an example: Lebanon implemented accelerated learning programs throughout the country to integrate children from Syria into mainstream education. 8. For women: Traditional gender Support the creation of women’s self-help groups for (Roma) norms encourage financial and returnees and vulnerable (Roma) nonmigrants so they can gain social dependence. They have better access to financial institutions and markets and learn less voice and agency in the leadership and entrepreneurial skills. A proven model to achieve return process. this outcome is the establishment self-help groups for women, with links to banks, business incubation, and entrepreneurship. Through these groups, women can develop livelihoods through their communities that are based on market opportunities. Community business promoters are provided with a grassroots business development training to incubate businesses. Groups can link to identified government programs, and the process is facilitated. Where there is critical mass of women engaged in similar enterprises, multiple groups can form cooperatives for collective bargaining and economies of scale. 9. Of major concern are the Establish low-intensity mental health programs that can be mental health issues related adapted to meet the varying needs of refugees, including adults, to return and problems with children, ethnic minority groups, the Roma, the disabled, and reintegration. the mentally disadvantaged. Similar programs for returnees could serve as a model for such programs (see box 5.2). The objective would be to provide local-level support, particularly for communities lacking infrastructure and trained professionals. The design of such programs would focus on low-intensity, simplified, and scalable problem-solving counseling or therapy delivered through educators, social welfare counselors, and NGOs working in the sector that regularly interact with returnee communities or that focus on mental health. These types of preventive measures would strengthen community resilience with the establishment of community infrastructure and a network to prepare, cope, and respond to return-related trauma. 5. MAIN FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS | 43 BOX 5.2. Piloting Psychosocial Support to Conflict-Affected Populations— Community Resilience and Low-Intensity Mental Health Programs in Ukraine Four years of conflict in the eastern at the community level, particularly for Ukraine have resulted in the displacement those areas lacking infrastructure and of over 1.6 million people while also neg- trained professionals. Specifically, the atively impacting the lives of many more. Bank will support the launch and opera- Practitioners and recent studies of mental tion of a community resilience program health issues have noted high levels of that improves the long-term well-being mental health problems among internally of its members with the establishment displaced people and host populations of community infrastructure and a net- in conflict-affected areas. These popu- work to prepare, cope, and respond to lations have experienced or continue to emergencies on a local and regional basis. experience numerous stressors, such as This program will strengthen commu- exposure to violence; loss of home, family nity resilience as a preventive measure, members, and communities; unemploy- identify gaps in the psychosocial field— ment and scarcer economic opportunities; emergency and routine, and develop declining incomes and increasing costs of subprograms to assist those suffering utilities; and difficulty gaining access to from anxiety, psychotrauma, or grief on housing and basic services. The results an individual, family, and community level. of a nationwide mental health survey of As part of the subprograms, the Bank is internally displaced people conducted designing and initiating a Ukraine-relevant between March and May 2016 reveals a program focused on low-intensity, sim- 32 percent prevalence rate of posttrau- plified, and scalable problem-solving matic stress disorder, a 22 percent rate counseling or problem-solving therapy of depression, and an 18 percent rate for schools, social workers, and nongov- of anxiety among this group. The World ernmental organizations working in this Bank is piloting two programs to provide sector. The program focuses on problem support to the government of Ukraine management that will align with the to improve prospects for comprehen- objectives of the State Targeted Mental sive and effective psychosocial support Health Program. 44 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS 6 The Way Forward Moving from evidence to action on the management information system that moni- effective reintegration of returnees requires tors and evaluates returnees. a comprehensive engagement around reinte- Technical assistance toward developing gration measures, with an increasing focus on returnee reintegration strategies and action addressing the socioeconomic push factors plans involves: (1) designing/updating out- motivating people from the Western Balkans dated reinsertion and reintegration strate- to consider remigration. Evidence gathered gies that are needs-based and supported during this research for the Supporting by empirical evidence, and (2) ensuring that Effective Reintegration of (Roma) Returnees these strategies include action plans that shows that socioeconomic considerations are realistic, clearly identify the roles and related to lack of jobs and income, limited responsibilities of governmental institutions access to health care services, low edu- at the central and local levels, and have clear cational quality, and poor socioeconomic budget lines. In addition, action plans are support/feelings of marginalization are the being developed for both the central- and most common push factors for citizens of local-level stakeholders. Technical assistance the Western Balkans to migrate or remi- toward developing a prototype management grate. Findings also showed that readmis- information system includes creating a sys- sions strategies are lacking in some places; tematic case file management system that and the overall management of data, both collects data and tracks progress of returnees within European Union (EU) member states at both the central and local level, which all and in the Western Balkans, is poor. As a social protection agencies can access. result, as extension of this project, technical However, a well-intentioned strategy assistance is provided to several areas in and management information system that the Western Balkans to support the devel- supports a policy focused on return and opment of returnee reintegration strategies reintegration alone is short-sighted. For mar- and action plans and to develop a prototype ginalized groups such as the Roma, who leave the Western Balkans to escape hardship, 6. THE WAY FORWARD | 45 reintegration into the status quo is not an evidence-based, (2) they should be requested effective solution to safeguard their dignity by the relevant government, and (3) they can or mitigate their desire to migrate again. be scaled-up. The most pressing challenges Further, where push factors persist that to effective reintegration are: can significantly impact an entire minority n Policies and frameworks. There are community, irregular migration will continue, gaps in policies on return and reintegra- even if returnees are given incentives to stay. tion within both the EU and the Western Interventions should therefore focus on the Balkans. Among EU member states, no broader socioeconomic inclusion of returnees harmonized approach exists regarding from minority communities. The World Bank the return and reintegration of migrants, proposes three pillars of interventions to including minimum standards for reinte- achieve this outcome, which move away from gration assistance. There is no common addressing immediate reintegration chal- definition of a vulnerable migrant and, as lenges toward the more comprehensive aim a result, the challenges faced by Roma of promoting social inclusion. are not specifically addressed. Within the Addressing these push factors requires a Western Balkans, strategies and action bundle of interventions: from addressing the plans for return and reintegration are immediate and most pressing needs of return- poorly articulated, lacking, or expired. ees to developing comprehensive interventions There is also a lack of policies at the that are integrated into social protection and local level. social services systems and that address the n Coordination. Coordination on reinte- root causes of remigration. gration is a cross-cutting problem within The World Bank therefore proposes to and between the EU and the Western structure this engagement around three pil- Balkans. There is little harmonization on lars that incrementally move from a reintegra- reintegration among EU member states. tion angle toward a comprehensive structural Some mostly channel reintegration efforts engagement on inclusion. through international donors and non- governmental organizations (NGOs), Pillar 1. High-impact Pilots and resulting in parallel projects. Within the Technical Assistance Western Balkans, these is little horizontal For the first phase—pillar 1—the World Bank coordination between NGOs and central proposes high-impact pilots and technical governments. There is also a lack of coor- assistance formats to address the most dination between central and local levels pressing challenges of reintegration support. of government in the Western Balkans. As These are based on the targeted recommen- a result, service delivery is blunted at the dations discussed in chapter 5 of this report. local level. Newly created management Interventions should be based on the fol- information systems are perfect vehicles lowing guiding principles: (1) they should be to initiate such coordination through 46 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS data collection that allows for monitoring n Community-level integration and and evaluation and that develops further development. Roma returnees in par- evidence. ticular largely return to conditions of n Financing. In the Western Balkans, fund- socioeconomic exclusion. There is a need ing issues at both the central and local to strengthen livelihoods and commu- levels hampers policy implementation. nity cohesion between Roma, ethnic Issues of coordination and implementa- minorities, and mainstream inhabitants. tion also result in funds not being prop- Doing so would limit the push factors erly allocated in some places. that encourage out-migration. Inclusion n Local capacity building. Across the efforts should be sensitive to the inter- Western Balkans, there are either very secting vulnerabilities experienced by few or no local-level government strate- Roma women, children, and persons with gies or plans for returnee reintegration. disabilities. Budget constraints at the local level also severely hamper service delivery, espe- Pillar 2. Identifying Solutions to cially in municipalities absorbing high Address Key Vulnerabilities and Push numbers of returnees. NGOs, interna- Factors Related to Social Inclusion and tional donors, and volunteer organizations Integration have been crucial to filling some of the Over the medium term, support to returnees service delivery gaps, but because they should be streamlined and integrated into the rarely coordinate horizontally, their capac- social protection and social services systems ities are not fully leveraged. in the Western Balkans. Therefore, as second n Registration and data management. pillar, functional reviews of the social sec- Management information systems that tors and services in the region are proposed. support a case file management system These reviews should include: that collects data, tracks progress, and n An analysis of the effectiveness of social connects returnees to all social protection programs and services to address the agencies at both the central and local vulnerabilities and needs of marginalized level are being designed. However, a con- population groups, including but not certed effort will be needed to register limited to returnees. The focus should returnees and their progress at all junc- be predominantly on government-led tures during their reintegration journey. programs, but there should also be a Where returnees are not registered, the review of significant programs and pilots provision of support services is hampered. implemented by international organiza- The continued absence of relevant and tions, bilateral donors, and civil society timely data makes it impossible to draw organizations. accurate conclusions about the effective- n Assessments of the composition of pro- ness of return policies and programs. grams, including financing; institutional 6. THE WAY FORWARD | 47 and coordination capacity; case manage- ownership and platforms for joint engage- ment and referrals; joint tools for benefi- ment and implementation. ciaries’ selection and management (e.g., social registries and payment systems); Pillar 3. Preparing and Implementing and comprehensive community needs. High-impact, Social Inclusion, and n Identification of international best prac- Integration Interventions tices relevant to the Western Balkans. Pillar 1 will test targeted reintegration sup- n An analysis of options for integrating and port interventions, and pillar 2 will identify streamlining select successful returnee high-impact, integrated social inclusion support pilots from pillar 1 as well as interventions that help address the key other relevant pilots into the social inclu- vulnerabilities of returnees and the vulner- sion systems of the Western Balkans. able population, as well as push factors for migration. Pillar 3 aims at preparing and Based on these functional reviews, the implementing select integrated interventions, World Bank can support governments in iden- the specific choice and number of which tifying priorities for high-impact social inclu- will depend on a government’s interest and sion and integration interventions to support ownership and on financing opportunities. In vulnerable populations, including potential addition to helping prioritize solutions, this migrants, returnees, and their communities, will also serve to ensure broader commitment and address push factors for migration. and the exploration of a variety of financ- Priorities will be identified in a participatory ing sources for rolling out these integrated manner across central and local levels of gov- approaches. ernment and will involve citizens and nongov- ernmental stakeholders to generate shared 48 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS Appendix A. Mappings, Studies, and Methodology Following is a list of World Bank studies completed under the Supporting the Effective Reintegration of Roma Returnees in the Western Balkans project Western Balkans Mappings Document Description Area Institutional mapping Assessment of the availability, readiness, costs, Western Balkans and governance challenges of targeted and (24 reports) nontargeted services relevant to the reintegration of returnees Stakeholder mapping Description of governmental and nongovernmental initiatives related to the reintegration of returnees Vulnerabilities mapping Description of returnees’ vulnerabilities and how they are tied to or exacerbated by the positioning of the individual along axes of (in)equality: sex, ethnicity, age, level of formal education, and place of current residence Synthesis Synthesis of the above three mappings for the Western Balkans Legislative mapping Analysis of all legislative frameworks that directly North Macedonia and indirectly apply to rights and entitlements of (1 report) returnees European Union Member State Mappings Document Description Area Return process Exploration of the repatriation process as it All MS4 countries mapping relates to returnees being sent back to their (4 reports) homeland Synthesis Synthesis of all return-process mappings All MS4 countries (1 report) APPENDIX A. MAPPINGS, STUDIES, AND METHODOLOGY | 49 Academic Articles Vathi, Z. Forthcoming. Barriers to (Re)integration: The Roma Return to the Western Balkans. World Bank, Washington, DC. Kuschminder, K., and M. Siegel. 2018. Effective Data Collection in Return Migration Management: The EU and the Western Balkans. World Bank: Washington, DC. Methodology The above mappings were produced using a combination of desk research, structured inter- views with returnees and key stakeholders, and review of existing literature. Fieldwork was conducted in Roma communities for vulnerability mappings, including focus group sessions with returnees. Methodologies adopted for each category of mapping was broadly comparable to allow for cross-analysis. Full details of methodology, including sampling, are contained in the respective reports. 50 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS Appendix B. EU–Western Balkans Returns Process Mapping SUMMARY and psychological counselling in preparing the reintegration project” (EPRS 2017). The The European Commission’s (EC) Directorate approach prioritized by the EC emphasizes General for Neighbourhood and Enlargement voluntary return, but reserves the right to Negotiations (DG NEAR) approached the use punitive incentives and disincentives as a World Bank to develop an evidence base and pathway to forced removal (EC 2017a). to deliver policy advice and technical assis- Return assistance is an acknowledged tance to support the effective reintegration success factor in achieving sustainable of Roma returnees to the Western Balkans— return (EPRS 2017). To contribute to sus- Albania, Bosnia Herzegovina, Kosovo, North tainable return EU member states including Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia. This the MS4 implement heterogeneous return report focuses on the processes of return in programs. These return programs are gen- four European Union (EU) member states that erally aligned behind the policy instruments have in the past five years returned signif- of the Global Approach to Migration and icant numbers of migrants to the Western Mobility (GAMM). Austria, Belgium, France, Balkans: Austria, Belgium, Germany, and and Germany, directly or in cooperation with France (MS4). 19 international NGOs, finance the removal and According to EU migration policy, the return of people to the Western Balkans from return process is guided by the objec- their territories. However, these programs tive of achieving a “sustainable return.” differ considerably in the nature of assis- Sustainable return is understood as the tance provided at the pre- and postdeparture absence of remigration and the returnee’s stages, and the conditions of assistance. For positive impact on the development of their example, cash and in-kind voluntary return communities of origin. The EU perspective is assistance varies across states, as do levels that “factors such as nature of return cho- of prereturn counseling. sen and the success of economic and social At the predeparture stage, few mem- integration of migrants in host countries, are ber states have specific return programs the main factors of successful reintegration at that target people from the Western the predeparture stage, together with social Balkans. From the available data it is known 19. Eurostat (as of May 2, 2018). that returnees from the Western Balkans APPENDIX B. EU-WESTERN BALKANS RETURNS PROCESS MAPPING | 51 face challenging domestic economic and Accordingly, administrative-level coordination social environments (Vathi, forthcoming). This efforts between member states and Western is especially true of Roma returnees, owing Balkan governments tend to be limited to to their historic exclusion from mainstream matters of return and border security rather societies, particularly impacting on Roma than reintegration. Across the MS4, levels women, children and persons with disabili- of interdepartmental cooperation with the ties who face intersectional vulnerabilities. Western Balkans and exchanges between All four-member states researched provide EU governments and service providers in return-focused information counseling to all some parts of the region vary. As the syn- Western Balkan migrants in the respective thesis report further details, some returnees asylum systems, often from a very early point have their capacity to reembed themselves in the application process. That said, none in Western Balkan societies curtailed by target people from the Western Balkans for the process of return, whether through the return counseling or return assistance above experience of difficult removals or whether or beyond any other migrants. There is no through the failure of sending countries clear data on differences between counseling and the Western Balkans to best manage delivered to people from the Western Balkans the returns process to present the greatest who are in the respective asylum systems of opportunity for successful reintegration. MS4 and those who are irregular migrants Fundamentally, there remains an and come to the attention of authorities, are absence of evidence to draw conclusions detained and/or who request return. Cash on the effectiveness of different national- and in-kind voluntary return assistance vary level measures used by the MS4 and across states. Of the four states Germany member states in general. This lack of provides the widest array of supports to peo- evaluative data is evident both through the ple returning to the Western Balkans via the absence of quantitative data measuring authorities of the German Federal States (for impact of reintegration assistance on remi- voluntary and forced return) and via interna- gration to EU member states by people from tional cooperation mainly in Kosovo. the Western Balkans.20 It is also evident in At the postdeparture stage, reintegra- the lack of data measuring the social and tion is managed through Western Balkan economic impact of reintegration assistance governments, local nongovernmental on the lives of returnees, including in line with organizations (NGOs) and the local chap- the criteria set out in the EU’s own scoping of ters of donor and international organiza- success factors in social and economic reinte- tions. Readmission agreements provide the gration of returnees. main coordination frameworks between EU member states and the Western Balkans. 20. Kuschminder 2018 (forthcoming). 52 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS Appendix C. Snapshots of the Western Balkans Albanian Citizens, which expired in 2015 (Government of Albania 2010). Current policy documents that explicitly address returnee concerns include the National Strategy for ALBANIA Development and Integration (Council of Ministers 2016), which seeks to enhance Legal and Policy Framework the sustainability of return migration; the Although Albania lacks legislation specif- National Strategy for Employment and Skills ically designed around people returned and its Action Plan (Ministry of Social Welfare under reintegration agreements, the Law and Youth 2014), which contains measures for on the Emigration of Albanian Citizens for addressing the difficulties faced by returnees Employment Purposes provides for a variety in finding a job; the Strategy on Development of services for the reintegration of returnees.21 of Pre-University Education (Ministry of Further legal measures adopted pursuant to Education and Sport 2014), with its provisions this law lay out procedures for registering for free textbooks and psychosocial services returnees,22 while legislation adopted in the for returnee pupils; and the National Youth areas of education, employment, and social Action Plan (Ministry of Social Welfare and services defines returnees as a particularly Youth 2015), which foresees the recognition vulnerable group.23 of vocational training completed abroad, Albania’s main policy document for certification of skills and work experience the sustainable integration of returnees, acquired abroad, and referral services. the Strategy on Reintegration of Returned The Roma receive attention as a vul- nerable group in the National Strategy for 21. Law No. 9668/2006 on the emigration of Albanian citizens for employment purposes, amended by Law No. 3089/2011 on Employment and Skills and its action plan, amendments to Law No. 9668/2006. the National Health Strategy (Ministry 22. Ibid. 23. Law No. 7952/1995 “On the pre-university education of Health 2017), and the Social Housing system” amended by Law No.8387/1998, Law No. 9903/2008, Strategy (Ministry of Urban Development Law No. 9985/2008 and Law No 10137/2009. Law No 9355/2005 “On social assistance and services.” Law No. 2016), as well as in the National Action Plan 7995/1995 “On Employment incentives” amended by Law No. for the Integration of Roma and Egyptians 8444/1999, Law No. 8872/2002, Law No. 9570/2006, and Law No. 10137/2009. (Government of Albania 2015). None of these APPENDIX C. SNAPSHOTS OF THE WESTERN BALKANS | 53 documents contain attention to the specific of returnees and provides for semiannual situation of Roma returned under reintegra- reporting by the technical secretariat based tion agreements. on information sent by line ministries, both monitoring and reporting on the reintegra- Implementation tion of returnees in Albania ceased with the Per the Albanian reintegration strategy, expiration of the reintegration strategy at the migration counters were established in end of 2015. 36 local and regional employment offices across Albania to provide advisory services Recommendations in accordance with needs identified in inter- PARTNERS AND SERVICES views conducted at the first visit. While n Improve coordination between the migration counters are effective in facilitating Border and Migration Department of the returnees’ access to needed services, avail- Albanian State Police and the migration able information suggests that they serve counters with an eye to increase the per- only a small percentage of migrants returned centage of returnees making use of the under readmission agreements, largely attrib- counters; utable to the voluntary nature of registra- n Reinforce the human and financial tion. The Albanian State Police’s Border and resources of the migration counters to Migration Department collects data on the increase capacity for outreach and to age, gender, type of return (forced or volun- provide services to a larger number of tary), and sometimes district of residence of returnees; and returnees, but not their ethnicity. n Raise awareness among potential migrants and returnees about services Remaining Gaps available in Albania through the dis- Notwithstanding the work of the migration semination of accessible and accurate counters, people returned to Albania face printed information as well as personal poor employment prospects, a lack of needed consultations. documents for nostrification of education completed abroad, limited access to health LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK insurance, poor housing conditions, and dif- n Develop a new reintegration strategy that ficulty accessing social protection schemes. accounts for return-related developments Complaints about the services offered by in Albania since 2010, establishing a ded- employment offices are particularly frequent icated coordinating body to oversee the among Romani and Egyptian returnees. implementation of the strategy; and Although the Albanian reintegration strat- n Facilitate the recognition of education egy includes a list of 20 indicators (mostly completed abroad by exploring interna- quantitative) for monitoring the reintegration tional cooperation for obtaining diplomas 54 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS and transcripts, waiving nostrification Readmission Agreements and Action Plan fees in cases of need, and establishing a for the Period 2015–18 (Ministry of Human procedure for assessing the knowledge of Rights and Refugees 2015). The strategy and returnee children. integrated action plan focus on creating the institutional framework needed to reintegrate BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA people returned under readmission agree- ments; there are also a few provisions regard- Legal and Policy Framework ing specific services to returnees. There is legal framework governing the Policies adopted in the areas of housing, reintegration of returnees in Bosnia and health care, employment, and education (but Herzegovina, but the object of some osten- not social protection), give some attention sibly relevant laws are not people returned to the Roma population but not to people under readmission agreements, but instead returned under reintegration agreements. recognized refugees from Bosnia and Herzegovina and citizens displaced within Implementation it returning to former places of residence Few targeted services for returnees to Bosnia (Službeni glasnik BiH 2003; Službene novine and Herzegovina are available at the state or Federacije BiH 2005; Službeni glasnik local level, and entity-level institutions have Republike Srpske 2012). However, the Law on not been involved in the design and delivery Ministries and Other Bodies of Administration of services under its reintegration strategy. defines the Ministry of Human Rights and Local readmission teams have formed and Refugees as the state-level institution respon- received training, and 11 localities developed sible for the reception and care of people local action plans, but evidence of their imple- returned under readmission agreements mentation is lacking. Monitoring and evalua- (Službeni glasnik BiH 2013). The Ministry of tion of return processes is limited to the data Security’s Sector for Immigration is respon- collected and published by the Ministry of sible for keeping records on these returnees Security on people returned to Bosnia and (Službeni glasnik BiH 2011). A protocol regu- Herzegovina under readmission agreements, lates institutional cooperation in the efficient with no indicators for assessing returnees’ implementation of readmission agreements.24 access to services. Beyond legal provisions, the main valid policy document targeting returnees in Bosnia Remaining Gaps and Herzegovina is the Strategy for the While the reintegration strategy is well Reception and Integration of the Bosnia and designed, the low-level of its implementation Herzegovina Nationals Who Return under leaves gaps in interinstitutional coordination and a lack of data on the returnees’ situation. 24. See Protokol o saradnji u efikasnoj realizaciji Sporazuma There is no evidence that the state-level o readmisiji lica koja borave bez dozvola u drugim zemljama 01-50- 90/10, May 17, 2010. coordination council or the state-, entity-, and APPENDIX C. SNAPSHOTS OF THE WESTERN BALKANS | 55 Brčko district-level coordinating boards have LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK been formed. As a result, three years after n Simplify access to identification (ID) cards the adoption of the reintegration strategy, by requiring centers for social work to coordination around the reintegration of allow people to register who are unable returnees remains ad hoc. While, reportedly, to provide proof of residence and an the unified database envisaged in the reinte- address by using the center’s or another gration strategy has been developed, evi- address determined by the municipality; dence of its functioning is lacking. An annual n Expand access to birth registration by assessment of the needs of returnees has not exploring international cooperation for been conducted, as stipulated in the strategy, obtaining copies of birth certificates for and progress regarding the implementation of children born abroad and by developing local action plans has yet to be seen. and implementing procedures for recogni- tion of alternative evidence of birth; and Recommendations n Facilitate the recognition of education completed abroad by exploring interna- PARTNERS AND SERVICES tional cooperation for obtaining diplomas n Establish state-, entity-, and district-level and transcripts, waiving nostrification coordinating bodies to institutionalize fees in cases of need, and establishing a implementation and monitoring of the procedure for assessing the knowledge of reintegration strategy; returnee children. n Strengthen local readmission teams by expanding their membership, authoriz- KOSOVO ing them to carry out specific tasks and providing them with office space and an Legal and Policy Framework assistant; Readmission procedures in Kosovo are reg- n Monitor returnee needs and access to ulated by the Law on Readmission and by services, providing centers for social work bilateral readmission agreements between with the human and technical resources Kosovo and returning countries (Official needed to carry out annual assessments Gazette of the Republic of Kosovo 2010). of the needs of returnees; and Criteria for support to returnees for their n Raise awareness among potential reintegration and various schemes from which migrants and returnees about services returnees may benefit are defined in the available in Bosnia and Herzegovina Regulation on Reintegration of Repatriated through dissemination of accessible and Persons; the functioning of the Center for accurate printed information as well as the Accommodation of Repatriated Persons personal consultations. is governed by its own regulations (Republic of Kosovo 2017a; Ministry of Internal Affairs 2016). Administrative instructions issued 56 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS by the Ministry of Education, Science, and people returned to Prishtina International Technology (2015; 2016) provides the legal Airport who report that they lack housing framework of reintegration measures for and/or finances are eligible for accommoda- returnee students into Kosovo’s educational tion in the Center for the Accommodation system, with planned measures including but of Repatriated Persons for up to seven days, not limited to supplementary classes. transportation to their previous place of The main policy document targeting residence, food, and in some cases health returnees in Kosovo is the National Strategy care. Electronic registration of returnees also for Sustainable Reintegration of Repatriated takes place at the airport, as does referral Persons (Ministry of Internal Affairs 2017), to services and institutions for meeting the which covers the period 2018–22. The imple- needs of returnees at their previous place of mentation action plan for the strategy, valid residence. 2018–20, includes activities, cost estimates, Emergency assistance provided for up to and both output and outcome indicators 12 months upon arrival at the previous place corresponding to each of the strategy’s five of residence may include but is not neces- objectives. Other policy documents outline sarily limited to food and hygiene packages; measures targeting returnees, including housing, through rent arrangements; medi- the Strategy for Communities and Return cal treatment and medications not covered (Ministry of Communities and Return 2013), by health insurance; and winter packages, the Strategy on Diaspora and Migration including warm clothes for children, blankets, (Ministry of Diaspora 2014), the Strategy for and candles. Among the forms of support Inclusion of Roma and Ashkali Communities in provided to returnees over the longer term Kosovo Society (Republic of Kosovo 2017b), are assistance in securing necessary docu- and the State Strategy on Migration and ments; furnishing, reconstructing, or reno- Action Plan (Republic of Kosovo 2013). Some vation of housing; registration of children in municipalities have adopted local action plans schools and targeted supplementary classes; for the reintegration of returnees. and services related to employment or self-employment. Implementation Under the oversight of the Department Remaining Gaps for Reintegration of Repatriated Persons Service provision for the reintegration of within the Ministry of Internal Affairs, people returnees in Kosovo compares favorably with returned to Kosovo under readmission agree- the rest of the Western Balkans. Nonetheless, ments generally receive immediate assistance in recent years, rising numbers of returns at the point of entry, emergency assistance coupled with reductions in the level of fund- upon arrival in the previous place of resi- ing for implementation of the reintegration dence, and longer-term assistance for sus- strategy have sometimes affected service tainable reintegration. In the first category, provision in such a way as to reduce the APPENDIX C. SNAPSHOTS OF THE WESTERN BALKANS | 57 effects of the strategy’s implementation on in North Macedonia in Accordance with the reintegration of returnees. In addition, not Readmission Agreements, the Law on Primary only have the numbers of returnees grown, Education, and the National Action Plan for but their needs have also changed over time. Education 2016–20, which corresponds to the Strategy for the Roma in Republic of Recommendations Macedonia 2014–20 (Vlada na Republika Makedonija 2010; Služben vesnik na Republika PARTNERS AND SERVICES Makedonija 2008; Ministerstvo za trud i n Provide levels of funding for the integra- socijalna politika 2016; see also Ministry of tion of the reintegration strategy com- Labor and Social Policy 2014). mensurate with the number and needs While some attention to the Roma is of the people returned, and increase the apparent in central-level policies adopted in capacity of public health institutions to the areas of social protection, housing, health accommodate the increased demand care, employment, and education, attention resulting from the rising number of return- ees with health problems; to people returned under reintegration agree- n Improve coordination among government ments is lacking. Consistent with the lack of institutions, donors, international organi- sustained attention to returnees at the cen- zations, and nongovernmental organiza- tral level, references to returnees in policies tions (NGOs) in the delivery of services adopted at local level are rare. No municipal- to returnees at the central and local level; ity has adopted a policy for the reintegration and of returnees, and the Romani-majority munic- n Increase the availability of psychosocial ipality of Šuto Orizari in Skopje is the only services for returnees with an emphasis locality in North Macedonia that has included on Romani, Ashkali, and Egyptian children. measures for the reintegration of returnees in its local policies toward the Roma. LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK n Consider modifying the institutional Implementation model for the reintegration of returnees The only targeted mechanism established to reinforce the role of local-level institu- to date for returnees in North Macedonia tions, adjusting the distribution of respon- was the Coordinating Body on Returnees, sibilities as well as resources accordingly. which formed in 2011 and ceased to function by 2015. However, the failure to establish NORTH MACEDONIA centers for reintegration, databases, and a Legal and Policy Framework reception center as envisaged in the reinte- Government measures targeting returnees gration strategy suggests that any activities are enumerated in only three documents in undertaken by the Coordinating Body on North Macedonia: the Program for Assistance Returnees have been ineffective. Additionally, and Support for Reintegration of Returnees the returnee reintegration measures called for 58 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS in the Law on Primary Education and in the is the main reason that returnees left North National Action Plan for Education under the Macedonia in the first place, an absence of Strategy for the Roma in the Former Republic attention to returnees in policy documents of Macedonia 2014–20 have not been adopted about employment suggests that developed. the reintegration program’s calls for returnees Despite the lack of implementation of to be provided with individual employment the targeted measures for returnees, some plans and access to active labor market mea- evidence exists of coordination among the sures have not been heeded. ministries of health, interior, and labor and social policy, including the Ministry of Health Recommendations sending a medical team to meet returnees at PARTNERS AND SERVICES the airport as needed based on information n Establish a network of regional centers provided by the ministries of interior and labor for integration operated by NGOs experi- and social policy transmitting from the Ministry enced in working with and for returnees; of Interior to local centers for social work. n Establish a center for reintegration to house a central database and assist in Remaining Gaps the coordination of regional centers for Although the reintegration program seems to integration; provide a viable framework for the delivery n Revive and expand the coordinating body of targeted services to returnees, the failure on returnees under the leadership of to implement the program means that as the Ministry of Labor and Social Policy’s of mid-2018, there is neither a coordinating Department for Migration, Integration of body, centers for reintegration, databases, Refugees, and Humanitarian Assistance; nor a reception center. The absence of these and mechanisms means that state-provided tar- n Establish an office for reintegration at geted assistance for returnees is unavailable Skopje Airport, staffed by representa- beyond the medical examinations performed tives of the ministries of health; interior; on returnees with documented health prob- and labor and social policy and/or the lems. Returnees must then seek help from National Center for Reintegration. NGOs or try to navigate a complex system of LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK institutions and laws that do account for their n Facilitate access to ID cards by introduc- specific needs. ing provisions that allow applicants to While returnees receive more attention in register an address at the local center documents related to education than in other for social work or another address deter- areas, this recognition of returnees’ needs has mined by the municipality; not brought sustained attention from relevant n Expand access to birth registration by institutions. Further, despite the govern- exploring international cooperation for ment’s recognition that lack of employment APPENDIX C. SNAPSHOTS OF THE WESTERN BALKANS | 59 obtaining copies of birth certificates for envisage any other direct services to return- children born abroad and by developing ees. Instead, these documents primarily focus and implementing procedures for recogni- on coordination among relevant institutions, tion of alternative evidence of birth; including the establishment and operation n Abolish documentation requirements for of an interdepartmental working group to free legal aid to improve access to birth oversee the implementation of the strategy. certificates and other forms of personal There are no local-level policies for returnees documentation; in Montenegro. n Facilitate recognition of education com- While some attention to the Roma pop- pleted abroad by exploring international ulation is apparent in policies adopted in the cooperation for obtaining diplomas and areas of social protection, housing, health transcripts, waiving nostrification fees in care, employment, and education, attention cases of need, and establishing a pro- to people returned under reintegration agree- cedure for assessing the knowledge of ments is lacking. returnee children; and n Make school records independent of cit- Implementation izenship status to allow children without Implementation of the reintegration strat- citizenship to obtain official documenta- egy is at an early stage, as demonstrated tion of completed education. by some of the measures called for in the action plan: regular meetings of the interde- MONTENEGRO partmental working group; appointment of contact people on returnees in central-level Legal and Policy Framework institutions and at the municipal level; estab- The only documents in Montenegro that lishment of local teams to support the rein- target returnees are the Reintegration tegration of returnees; establishment of an Strategy for Persons Returned on the Basis electronic database on people returned under of a Readmission Agreement for the Period readmission agreements; and preparing and 2016–20 as well as the action plans for distributing informational materials for rele- its implementation (MUP 2016a, b; 2018). vant institutions and returnees on the reinte- Services provided to returnees on arrival gration process (MUP 2018). There are neither under the strategy include medical assis- monitoring and evaluation systems in place tance, transportation to the intended place of that include indicators to assess returnees’ residence, and temporary accommodations. access to services nor precise data on the The Ministry of Interior coordinates medical number of returnees to Montenegro. assistance and transportation; temporary Despite the low level of implementation accommodations are not available due to of the reintegration strategy, the ministries lack of municipal-level funding. The reinte- of health; human and minority rights; interior; gration strategy and action plans do not and labor and social welfare have delivered 60 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS and coordinated with one another on relevant Recommendations services for returnees. PARTNERS AND SERVICES n Establish a network of regional centers Remaining Gaps for reintegration operated by NGOs and Addressing the needs of returnees in authorized by the Ministry of Interior to Montenegro appears held back by factors issue proof of returnee status that would related to both the design and implementa- government institutions would recognize; tion of the reintegration strategy. Regarding n Establishing a center for reintegration to the former, the only direct services to return- house a central database and assist in ees envisaged in the strategy and action coordination involving regional centers for plans are medical assistance on arrival and integration; transportation to the intended place of n Strengthen the interdepartmental working residence; most measures focus on inter- group, expanding its membership institutional coordination. While available n to include the Ministry of Human and information suggests that these services have Minority Rights, international organi- been delivered when requested, the absence zations, and the NGOs that operate of additional measures for returnees in the regional centers; and strategy means that state-provided targeted n Establish an office for reintegration at assistance only begins at the time of the Podgorica Airport, staffed by represen- returnee’s arrival in Montenegro and ends no tatives of the ministries of human and later than at the moment they arrive at their minority rights; interior; and labor and intended place of residence. social welfare, and/or the National Center Due to the lack of implementation of for Reintegration. the strategy, as well as its design flaws, it is not currently possible to conduct a system- LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK atic assessment or to address the needs of n Facilitate access to ID cards by introduc- returnees. The institutions responsible for ing provisions that allow applicants to social protection, housing, health, employ- register an address at the local center for ment, and education at the central and local social work or at another address deter- levels lack adequate understanding of the mined by the municipality; and readmission process, and they often lack the n Facilitate the recognition of education capacity to assist returnees in a way that completed abroad by exploring interna- accounts for their specific needs. Moreover, tional cooperation for obtaining diplomas coordination between central and local levels and transcripts, waiving nostrification is often insufficient. This is particularly evident fees in cases of need, and establishing a as it relates to issues of migration, where the procedure for assessing the knowledge of relevant institutions at central level lack local- returnee children. level counterparts. APPENDIX C. SNAPSHOTS OF THE WESTERN BALKANS | 61 SERBIA i manjinska prava 2013). Additionally, the Strategy of Social Inclusion of Roma calls for Legal and Policy Framework educational support for children returned The 2012 Law on Migration Management to Serbia under readmission agreements lays the legal groundwork for the reinte- (Republic of Serbia 2016). At the local level, gration of returnees, extending the compe- 103 municipalities have adopted action plans tencies of the Commissariat for Refugees for the reintegration of returnees. and Migration to cover the reintegration of returnees and obliging local authorities to Implementation establish migration councils for implementing The past decade has seen the removal of migration policies at the local level (Official major barriers for returnees’ access to their Gazette of the Republic of Serbia 2012). The rights due to adjustments to the institutions, principal document defining the institutional laws, and policies relating to the reintegra- framework, objectives, and measures for the tion of returnees. Particularly noteworthy sustainable reintegration of returnees is the is the progress made in access to personal Strategy of Returnees’ Reintegration Based ID documents, allowing returnees to access on the Readmission Agreement, adopted in education, health care, and social protection February 2009 (Republic of Serbia 2009b). services. The strategy identifies Roma as a population Central-level recognition of the import- that accounts for a substantial percentage ant role local commissioners for refugees of returnees and acknowledges their expo- and migration play in the reintegration of sure to specific risks in the return process. returnees is reflected in resource allocations, The main activities envisaged in the strategy including the availability of funds for commis- and its action plans concern access to edu- sioners to hire short-term staff to handle the cation, health care, personal ID documents, increased workload associated with public and social welfare, in addition to economic calls. In some municipalities, commissioners empowerment and improvement of housing have used public calls to motivate returnees conditions. to register. Returnees are also mentioned in the Migration Management Strategy (Republic Remaining Gaps of Serbia 2009a); the National Employment Although some returnees to Serbia report Strategy and its action plan for 2017 positive experiences with (re-) enrolling (Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije 2011; their children in school, instances of return- Ministry of Labor, Employment, Veteran, ees giving up on education due to negative and Social Affairs and Social Inclusion experiences with school management are also and Poverty Reduction Unit 2016) and reported, usually related to the recognition of the Strategy of Prevention and Protection education completed abroad. Dissatisfaction against Discrimination (Kancelarija za ljudska with health care services constitutes another 62 | SUPPORTING THE EFFECTIVE REINTEGRATION OF ROMA RETURNEES IN THE WESTERN BALKANS barrier to reintegration, as does delayed and n Increase the availability of psychosocial inconsistent application of procedures by services for returnees, with an emphasis civil servants when processing requests for on Romani children; and social assistance. Additionally, awareness and n Expand employment opportunities for take-up of available housing support from the returnees by harnessing the knowledge Commissariat for Refugees and Migration are and skills they acquired abroad, possi- poor, particularly among Romani returnees. bly through the establishment of social All local action plans for the reintegration enterprises. of returnees contain a section on monitoring LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK and evaluation, including process and perfor- n Develop a new reintegration strategy mance indicators that local migration councils that accounts for developments relating should report on a semiannual basis, but in to returns since 2008, including but not most municipalities this process is qualita- limited to the shift from predominantly tively and quantitatively inadequate. long-term to predominantly short-term migrants; and Recommendations n Facilitate the recognition of education PARTNERS AND SERVICES completed abroad by exploring interna- n Raise awareness among potential tional cooperation for obtaining diplomas migrants and returnees about the ser- and transcripts, waiving nostrification fees vices available in Serbia by disseminating in cases of need, and ensuring uniform accessible and accurate printed informa- application of the procedure for assessing tion and through personal consultations; the knowledge of returnee children. APPENDIX C. SNAPSHOTS OF THE WESTERN BALKANS | 63 REFERENCES Deutscher Bundestag 2018. Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten Eva-Maria AIDA (Asylum Information Database). 2018. “ECRE Comments Elisabeth Schreiber, Heike Hänsel, Michel Brandt, weiterer on the Reform of the Migration Statistics Regulation.” Abgeordneter und der Fraktion DIE LINKE. Migrations- Asylum Information Database, December 6. www.asylumi- beratungszentren in elf Ländern und ihre Wirksamkeit. neurope.org/news/12-06-2018/ecre-comments-reform-mi- Drucksache 19/476. URL: http://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/ gration-statistics-regulation. btd/19/004/1900476.pdf. Alscher, Stefan; Johannes Obergfell, and Stefanie Ricarda Roos. EASO (European Asylum Support Office). 2013. Asylum Appli- 2015. “Migrationsprofil Westbalkan. Ursachen, Heraus- cants from the Western Balkans: Comparative Analysis of forderungen und Lösungsansätze.” Working Paper 63 des Trends, Push-Pull Factors and Responses. Brussels: European Forschungszentrums des Bundesamtes. Nürnberg: Bunde- Asylum Support Office. samt für Migration und Flüchtlinge. www.bamf.de/Shared- ———. 2015. Asylum Applicants from the Western Balkans: Docs/Anlagen/DE/Publikationen/WorkingPapers/wp63-mi- Comparative Analysis of Trends, Push-Pull Factors and grationsprofil-westbalkan.pdf?__blob=publicationFile. Responses—Update. Brussels: European Asylum Support Arenliu, A., and S. M. Weine. 2015. Reintegrating Returned Office. Migrants to Kosovo. Conference Proceeding in Publication— EC (European Commission). 2011a. On the Post-Visa Liber- Conference: Emigration and Immigration on the Balkans in alisation Monitoring for the Western Balkan Countries in the Focus of Political Psychology, November 2015, Sofia, Accordance with the Commission Statement of 8 November Bulgaria. 2010. Brussels: European Commission. Beck, Thorsten, and Asli Demirguc-Kunt. 2006. “Small and ———. 2011b. Second Report on the Post-Visa Liberalisation Medium-size Enterprises: Access to Finance as a Growth Monitoring for the Western Balkan Countries in Accordance Constraint.” Journal of Banking and Finance 30 (11): 2931–43. with the Commission Statement of 8 November 2010. Brus- Bither, Jessica, and Astrid Ziebarth. 2018. Creating Legal Path- sels: European Commission. ways to Reduce Irregular Migration? What We Can Learn ———. 2017a. Communication from the Commission to the from Germany’s “Western Balkan Regulation.” Berlin: The European Parliament and the Council on a More Effective German Marshall Fund of the United States. Return Policy in the European Union—A Renewed Action BMZ (Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Devel- Plan. February 3. Brussels: European Commission opment). 2017. Voluntary Return and Reintegration—With ———. 2017b. Report from the Commission to the European Prospects. The Returnee Program “Returning to New Oppor- Parliament and the Council: First Report under the Visa Sus- tunities. Bonn/Berlin: BMZ. pension Mechanism. Brussels: European Commission. Bornarova, Suzana. 2011. “Returning Migrants in the Republic of ———. 2018a. Update on the Implementation of the Re- Macedonia: The Issue of Reintegration.” Two Homelands 24: maining Benchmarks of the Visa Liberalisation Roadmap by 127–36. Kosovo, as Outlined in the Fourth Report on Progress of 4 Boudet, A. M. M., P. Petesch, and C. Turk, eds. 2013. On Norms May 2016. Brussels: European Commission. and Agency: Conversations about Gender Equality with ———. 2018b. A Credible Enlargement Perspective for and En- Women and Men in 20 Countries. Washington DC: World hanced EU Engagement with the Western Balkans. Brussels: Bank. European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/ Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales. 2013. Beschäfti- sites/beta-political/files/communication-credible-enlarge- gungsverordnung. ment-perspective-western-balkans_en.pdf. Council of Ministers. 2016. National Strategy for Development ———. 2018c. Proposal for a Regulation of the European and Integration 2015–2020. Tirana: Council of Ministers. Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 862/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council on Demurger, S., and Hui Xu 2011. “Return Migrants: The Rise of Community Statistics on Migration and International Protec- New Entrepreneurs in Rural China,” World Development 39 tion. 2018/0154 (COD). (10), 1847–61. ———. 2018d. Proposal for a Directive of the European Deutscher Bundestag. 2017. Unterrichtung durch die Bundes- Parliament and of the Council on Common Standards and regierung: Erster Bericht zu der Überprüfung der Vorauss- Procedures in Member States for Returning Illegally Staying etzungen zur Einstufung der in Anlage II zum Asylgesetz be- Third-country Nationals (Recast). 2018/0329 (COD). zeichneten sicheren Herkunftsstaaten. Drucksache 19/299. http://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/002/1900299.pdf. 64 | REFERENCES ———. 2018e. Proposal for a Regulation of the European Ghanem, T. 2003. “When Forced Migrants Return Home: The Parliament and of the Council on the European Border and Phsychological Difficulties Returnees Encounter in the Rein- Coast Guard and Repealing Council Joint Action n°98/700/ tegration Process.” RSC Working Paper. University of Oxford, JHA, Regulation (EU) n° 1052/2013 of the European Parlia- Oxford, UK. ment and of the Council and Regulation (EU) n° 2016/1624 GIZ (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenar- of the European Parliament and of the Council. 2018/0330 beit). 2017. Regional Project on Social Rights for Vulnerable (COD). Groups (SoRi). Skopje: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internatio- ———. 2018f. Proposal for a Regulation of the European nale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ). Parliament and of the Council on the Creation of a European Government of Albania. 2010. Strategy on Reintegration of Network of Immigration Liaison Officers (Recast). 2018/0153 Returned Albanian Citizens 2010–2015. Tirana: Government (COD). of Albania. ECRE (European Council on Refugees and Exiles). 2018a. ———. 2015. National Action Plan for Integration of Roma and “Taking Liberties: Detention and Asylum Law Reform. ECRE’s Egyptians in the Republic of Albania, 2015–2020. Tirana: Concerns about the Restrictions on Asylum Seekers’ Liberty Government of Albania. in the Reform of the Common European Asylum System and in Practice.” Policy Note 14. www.ecre.org/wp-content/up- Kancelarija za ljudska i manjinska prava. 2013. Strategija loads/2018/09/Policy-Note-14.pdf. prevencija i zaštite od diskriminacije za period od 2013. do 2018. godine. Belgrade: Vlada Republike Srbije. ———. 2018b. “Voluntary Departure and Return: Between a Rock and a Hard Place. ECRE’s Analysis of European Kosovo Agency of Statistics. 2017. Labor Force Survey, Q1, July. Practices in the Area of Return including “Voluntary De- Kuschminder, K., and M. Siegel. 2018. Effective Data Collection partures” and Assisted Return, with its Recommendations in Return Migration Management: The EU and the Western to the EU.” Policy Note 13. www.ecre.org/wp-content/up- Balkans. World Bank: Washington, DC. loads/2018/08/Policy-Note-13.pdf. Leerkes, A., Van Os, R., and Boersema, E. 2016. “What Drives EMN (European Migration Network). 2014. “Overview: Incen- ‘Soft Deportation’? Understanding the Rise in Assisted tives to Return to a Third-Country and Support Provided to Voluntary Return Among Rejected Asylum Seekers in the Migrants for their Reintegration.” EMN Inform note. Euro- Netherlands.” Population, Space and Place. pean Commission, Brussels. https://emnbelgium.be/sites/ default/files/publications/emn_reg_inform_-_in-cash_in- Mananashvili, S. 2017. “EU’s Return Policy: Mission Accom- kind_assistance_to_return_june_2016_0.pdf. plished in 2016? Reading Between the Lines of the Latest EUROSTAT Return Statistics.” Policy Brief. ICMPD, Vienna. ———. 2016. “Austria Country Factsheet.” EMN Country Fact www.icmpd.org/fileadmin/2017/Policy_Brief_22.05.2017_ Sheets. European Commission, Brussels. https://ec.europa. Mananashvili.pdf. eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/01_austria_coun- try_factsheet_2016_en.pdf. Marchetta, Francesca. 2011. “Return Migration and the Survival of Entrepreneurial Activities in Egypt.” EUI Working Papers ———. 2018. “The Effectiveness of Return in EU Member RSCAS 2011/01. States 2017.” Synthesis Report for EMN Focussed Study. European Commission, Brussels. Matrix Insight, ICMPD (International Centre for Migration Policy Development), and ECRE (European Council on Refugees European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) 2017. Briefing and Exiles). 2012. Comparative Study on Best Practices to Protection of whistle-blowers at EU level. October 2017. Interlink Pre-Departure Reintegration Measures Carried out European Asylum Support Office. 2013. Asylum Applicants in Member States with Short- and Long-Term Reintegration from the Western Balkans: Comparative Analysis of Trends, Measures in the Countries of Return. European Commission Push-Pull Factors and Responses. Brussels: European Asylum Directorate-General Home Affairs. Matrix Insight, ICMPD, Support Office. and ECRE 2012. JLS/2009/RF/CA/1003. ________. 2015. Asylum Applicants from the Western Balkans: Migration Policy Institute. 2018. “Asylum Recognition Rates Comparative Analysis of Trends, Push-Pull Factors and in the EU/EFTA by Country, 2008–2017.” Migration Policy Responses—Update. Brussels: European Asylum Support Institute. www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/ Office. charts/asylum-recognition-rates-euefta-country-2008-2017 (accessed June 18, 2018). European Stability Initiative. 2015. New Facts and Figures on Western Balkan Asylum Seekers. Berlin/Brussels/Istanbul: Ministerstvo za trud i socijalna politika. 2016. Nacionalen European Stability Initiative. akcionen plan za obrazovanie 2016–2020 (National Action Plan on Education 2016–2020). Skopje: Ministerstvo za trud i socijalna politika. REFERENCES | 65 Ministry of Communities and Return. 2013. Strategy for Com- MUP (Ministarstvo unutrašnjih poslova). 2016a. Akcioni plan munities and Return 2014–2018. Prishtina/Priština: Republic za implementaciju Strategije reintegracije lica vraćenih na of Kosovo. osnovu Sporazuma o readmisiji za 2017. Godinu (Action Plan for Implementation of the Reintegration Strategy for Persons Ministry of Diaspora. 2014. Strategy on Diaspora and Migration, Returned on the Basis of a Readmission Agreement for 2013–2018. Prishtina/Priština: Republic of Kosovo. 2017). Podgorica: Ministarstvo unutrašnjih poslova. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. 2015. Adminis- ———. 2016b. Strategija reintegracije lica vraćenih na osnovu trative Instruction (MEST) No. 19/2015 for Systematization Sporazuma o readmisiji za period 2016–2020. godine, sa Ak- of Pupils that Migrated During the School Year 2014/2015. cionim planom za implementaciju Strategije za 2016. godinu Prishtina/Priština: Ministry of Education, Science and Tech- (Reintegration Strategy for Persons Returned on the Basis of nology. a Readmission Agreement for the Period 2016–2020, with ———. 2016. Administrative Instruction (MEST) No. 01/2016 Action Plan for Implementation of the Strategy for 2016). on Determination of Conditions, Criteria and Procedures on Podgorica: Ministarstvo unutrašnjih poslova. Organization of Supplementary Learning for the Repatriated ———. 2018. Akcioni plan za sprovođenje Strategije reinte- Students. Prishtina/Priština: Ministry of Education, Science gracije lica vraćenih na osnovu Sporazuma o readmisiji za pe- and Technology. riod 2016–2020. godina, za 2018. i 2019. godinu, s Izvješta- Ministry of Human Rights and Refugees. 2015. Strategy for the jem o implementaciji Akcionog plana za 2017. godinu (Action Reception and Integration of the BiH Nationals Who Return Plan for Implementation of the Reintegration Strategy for under Readmission Agreements and Action Plan for the Persons Returned on the Basis of a Readmission Agreement Period 2015-2018. Sarajevo: Ministry of Human Rights and for the Period 2016–2020, for 2018 and 2019, with a Report Refugees. on Implementation of the Action Plan for 2017). Podgorica: Ministarstvo unutrašnjih poslova. Ministry of Education and Sport. 2014. Strategy on Pre-Univer- sity Education Development, 2014-2020. Tirana: Ministry of O’Higgins, N. 2012. Roma and non-Roma in the Labour Market Education and Sport. in Central and South Eastern Europe. UNDP: Bratislava. Ministry of Health. 2017. National Health Strategy. Government Official Gazette of the Republic of Kosovo. 2010. “Law on Re- of Albania. admission.” Official Gazette of the Republic of Kosovo 3. Ministry of Human Rights and Refugees. 2015. Strategy for the Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia. 2012. “Law on Reception and Integration of the Bosnia and Herzegovina Migration Management.” Official Gazette of the Republic of Nationals Who Return under Readmission Agreements and Serbia 107. Action Plan for the Period 2015–18. Government of Bosnia Piracha, M., and F. Vadean. 2010. “Return Migration and Occu- and Herzegovina. pational Choice: Evidence from Albania,” World Development Ministry of Internal Affairs. 2016. Regulation (MIA) No. 04/2016 38 (8), 1141–55. on the Functioning of the Centre for Accommodation of Republic of Kosovo. 2013. State Strategy on Migration and Ac- Repatriated Persons. Pristina/Priština: Official Gazette of the tion Plan 2013–2018. Prishtina/Priština: Republic of Kosovo. Republic of Kosova. ———. 2017a. Regulation (GRK) No. 13/2017 on Reintegration ———. 2017. National Strategy for Sustainable Reintegration of Repatriated Persons. Pristina/Priština: Official Gazette of of Repatriated Persons. Republic of Kosovo. the Republic of Kosova. Ministry of Labor and Social Policy. 2014. Strategy for the Roma ———. 2017b. Strategy for Inclusion of Roma and Ashkali in Republic of Macedonia 2014–2020. Skopje: Ministry of Communities in the Kosovo Society 2017–2021. Prishtina/ Labor and Social Policy. Priština: Republic of Kosovo. Ministry of Labour, Employment, Veteran and Social Affairs, and Republic of Serbia. 2009a. Migration Management Strategy. Social Inclusion and Poverty Reduction Unit. 2016. National Belgrade: Republic of Serbia. Employment Action Plan for the Year 2017. Belgrade: Gov- ernment of the Republic of Serbia. ———. 2009b. The Strategy of Returnees’ Reintegration Based on the Readmission Agreement. Belgrade: Republic of Serbia. Ministry of Social Welfare and Youth. 2014. Employment and Skills Strategy 2014-2020. Tirana: Ministry of Social Welfare ———. 2016. Strategy of Social Inclusion of Roma for the and Youth. Period from 2016 to 2025. Belgrade: Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia. ———. 2015. National Youth Action Plan 2015–2020. Tirana: Ministry of Social Welfare and Youth. Ministry of Urban Development. 2016. Social Housing Strategy. Government of Albania. 66 | REFERENCES Riiskjaer, Maria Helen Bak, and Tilde Nielsson. 2008. “Circular Thomas, Kevin J.A. 2012. “The Human Capital Characteristics Repatriation: The Unsuccessful Return and Reintegration of and Household Living Standards of Returning International Iraqis with Refugee Status in Denmark.” New Issues in Refu- Migrants in Eastern and Southern Africa.” International gee Research. Research Paper 165. UNHCR, Geneva. Migration 50 (4) 85–106. Schuster, L., and N. Majidi. 2013. “What Happens Post-depor- UNDP. 2017. Regional Roma Survey 2017: Country Fact Sheets. tation? The Experience of Deported Afghans.” Migration UNDP Europe and Central Asia. www.eurasia.undp.org/ Studies 1 (2): 221–40. doi: 10.1093/migration/mns011. content/rbec/en/home/library/roma/regional-roma-survey- 2017-country-fact-sheets.html. Sigona, N. 2012. “Between Competing Imaginaries of State- hood: Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian (RAE) Leadership in UNHCR. (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees). Newly Independent Kosovo.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration 2009. “Desk Review on Urban Reintegration.” OSTS/DOS Studies 38 (8): 1213–32. (August). www.unhcr.org/4b0d502c9.pdf. Službeni glasnik BiH. 2003. Zakon o izbjeglicama iz BiH i UNICEF. 2017. “Child Marriage Among the Roma Population raseljenim osobama u BiH (Law on Refugees from BiH and in Serbia: Ethnographic Research.” November. UNICEF, Displaced Persons in BiH). Službeni glasnik BiH 33. Belgrade. ———. 2011. Pravilnik o evidenciji državljana Bosne i Hercegov- Vathi, Z. Forthcoming. “Barriers to (Re)integration: The Roma ine koje se vraćaju po sporazumu o readmisiji (Rulebook on Return to the Western Balkans.” World Bank, Washington, the Registration of Citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina Who DC. Return on the Basis of a Readmission Agreement). Službeni Vathi, Z., and V. Duci. 2016. “Making Other Dreams: The Impact glasnik BiH 21. of Migration on the Psychosocial Wellbeing of Albanian-Or- ———. 2013. Zakon o ministvarstvima i drugim organima igin Children Upon their Families’ Return to Albania.” Child- uprave Bosne i Hercegovine (Law on Ministries and Other hood 23 (1): 53–68. Bodies of Administration of Bosnia and Herzegovina). Vlada na Republika Makedonija. 2010. Programa za pomoš Službeni glasnik BiH 6. i poddrška pri reintegracija na povratnici vo Republika Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije. 2011. Nacionalna strategi- Makedonija soglasno readmisionite dogovori (Program for ja zapošljavanja za period 2011–2020. Godine (National Assistance and Support for Reintegration of Returnees in Employment Strategy for the Period 2011–2020). Službeni the Republic of Macedonia in Accordance with Readmission glasnik Republike Srbije 37. Agreements). Skopje: Vlada na Republika Makedonija. ———. 2012. Zakon o raseljenim licima, povratnicima i izbjeg- World Bank. 2017. Forcibly Displaced: Towards a Development licama u Republici Srpskoj (Law on Displaced Persons, Re- Approach Supporting Refugees, the Internally Displaced and turnees, and Refugees in Republika Srpska). Službeni glasnik their Hosts. Washington, DC: World Bank. Republike Srpske 52. World Bank. 2018. Western Balkans Labor Market Trends 2018. Služben vesnik na Republika Makedonija. 2008. Zakon za Washington DC: World Bank. osnovnoto obrazovanie (Law on Primary Education). Služben Zevulun, D., Wendy J. Post, A. E. Zijlstra, M. E. Kalverboer and vesnik na Republika Makedonija 103. E. J. Knorth. 2017. “Migrant and Asylum-seeker Children Službene novine Federacije BiH. 2005. Zakon o raseljenim oso- Returned to Kosovo and Albania: Predictive Factors for So- bama i povratnicima u Federaciji Bosne i Hercegovine i izb- cial-emotional Wellbeing After Return.” Journal of Ethnic and jeglicama iz Bosne i Hercegovine (Law on Displaced Persons Migration Studies. DOI: 10.1080/1369183X.2017.1391076. and Returnees in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and on Refugees from Bosnia and Herzegovina). Službene novine Federacije BiH 15. REFERENCES | 67