One Size Fits None - Lessons Learned from Immigration Transformations

In the last 15 years, I have had the opportunity to work on major immigration transformations on two continents and have moved to the other side of the world twice over. What I have come to recognise is that immigration transformation is unique in that it is subject to strong political drivers, must be able to pivot and flex on a moment’s notice, and is critical to the prosperity of modern societies. And for most migrants this journey does not just start at the border; it starts long before this when deciding on where to move to, and up until becoming a becoming a settled and contributing member of society.

I recently moved from Australia to Canada, and this has given me the opportunity to reflect on what is common around the world when it comes to modernising immigration systems and what is different; what some countries are doing to increase their attractiveness to immigrants and what others are doing that is not working as well.

This is the second article in my series on Immigration Transformation where I will unpack some of the lessons I have learned working on immigration projects around the world. For my previous article:

1. Agility is Key

Article #2: One size truly does not fit all

?Migration policies and migration realities vary greatly around the world. Countries and their citizens also typically have widely varying view on immigration and on its role in overcoming skills shortages and demographic challenges, as well as its impact on e.g. housing affordability in a country. Immigration is not a domain in which a ‘one size fits all’ solution typically works.

To illustrate this, I will compare the immigration policies and immigration realities of Australia, Canada, the US and the UK. Even though these are four relatively wealthy ‘western’ countries that are all English speaking, they vary greatly.

Comparing and contrasting migration in several countries

The below comparison gives a first view of both regular and irregular migration. Regular migration comprises all visitor, work, study and permanent visas. This is typically the type of migration that a country wants to have, provided they have the right number and the right types of workers. Irregular migration typically comprises asylum seekers / refugees seeking a protection visa (note: the definition of an asylum seekers vs migrant vs refugee vs forcibly displaced person is a discussion in itself that I do not intend to get into here). A quick comparison in alphabetical order:

1.?????? Australia uses a points-based system to select skilled migrants for permanent residency, with a focus on attracting workers in occupations that are in demand. Australia has a humanitarian program that offers protection to refugees and asylum seekers, as well as a family stream that allows Australian citizens and permanent residents to sponsor their relatives.

2.?????? Canada has the highest proportion of immigrants among the G7 nations, with about one in four Canadians being an immigrant. Canada follows a points-based system to select applicants for permanent residency, based on factors such as education, language skills, work experience, and adaptability. Canada also has a federal-provincial agreement that allows Quebec to have its own immigration policies and programs.

3.?????? The UK has recently introduced a new points-based immigration system that came into effect in January 2021, following its exit from the European Union. The new system aims to reduce low-skilled migration and prioritise high-skilled workers, as well as students and researchers. The UK also has a refugee resettlement scheme and a family reunion program for eligible refugees.

4.?????? The US has a complex and diverse immigration system that is based on several categories, such as family, employment, diversity, humanitarian, and temporary visas. The US has the largest number of immigrants in the world, with about 45 million foreign-born residents, but a lower share of immigrants as a percentage of its population than Canada and Australia. The US also faces challenges such as illegal immigration, border security, and refugee admissions, which has been the source of a lot of political debates in the last decade.

Comparison in numbers

Visa types are very different per country, so comparing e.g. tourist visa’s in country X versus country Y can be like comparing apples and oranges. To get a feel for the numbers though, I have listed the number of permanent residents added to the country, as permanent residency is a relatively uniform concept. I have taken the years 2015 to 2019, before Covid hit and really upset the regular trend.

Now these countries have vastly different population sizes. So if we compare the number of additional Permanent Residents from 2019 to their population sizes, it paints the picture as below:

Australia and Canada stand out as the two countries with the highest numbers as compared to their population size. As I have lived in Australia for 9 years and am now living in Canada, I can say from first hand experience they are quite similar countries.

• Politically, they are both part of the Commonwealth, with similar democratic systems
• Geographically, they are both very large countries, with the population condensed in a few cities with a vast amount of land in between. Canada is the 2nd largest country in the world in terms of square kilometres, and Australia is the 6th largest.
• Population density, their population density is comparable with around 3 to 4 people per square kilometre. For comparison, the UK has more than 250 people per square kilometre.

Looking forward

Their visa targets are very different as well: Australia plans to reduce its migrant intake from a projected peak of 510,000 in 2022-23 to about 250,000 by 2024-25, mainly by tightening the visa processes for migrant workers and international students. Canada has set its immigration levels plan for 2021-2023, aiming to welcome over 1.2 million newcomers in three years, with 60% of them being economic migrants. Canada’s immigration minister said the plan is designed to help the country recover from the COVID-19 pandemic and fill labour market gaps.

Illegal migration

If we focus on irregular migration, there are very different patterns as well. This is often driven by demographic factors as well as geographic factors. For example, Australia is a large island far away from other countries. Therefore, the amount of unexpected arrivals of migrants is relatively low. By contrast, the US has a large land border with Mexico which is much harder to control as compared to air or sea borders. To give a sense of numbers, the UNHCR estimates that there are currently 36.4 million refugees and 6.1 million asylum seekers.

So what?

This brief comparison between a few very similar countries shows the vast difference in their migration policies and migration realities. Next to this, it shows that they are serving very different governments that are trying to achieve different outcomes with their migration policies. Migration agencies will have to think long and hard to set up their transformation in such a way, that it meets the goals that they are trying to achieve.

The other component that we have not addressed yet is the fact that it is not just about getting the right people across your border. It's also making sure they can become a valued and contributing member in society. You can bring in a doctor, but the doctor will need a house to live in. And you can bring in a construction worker to build that house, but a construction worker will need a doctor to go to when they are sick. Their children will need to go to schools, and their cars will need enough roads to drive on. This has to happen to maintain the social license in society towards migration. So, it's not just a migration perspective, it's also very much a holistic government perspective of how you make migration successful for your country.

As Accenture, we have supported numerous immigration organisations around the world in their immigration transformations journeys, including agencies such as the UNHCR or not-for-profit organisations such as welcome.us . These are tailored transformation programmes, set up in a way that aligns with the goals that the country is trying to achieve. This is key to make sure that the transformation doesn't just complete successfully, but also delivers the right outcomes for the country. One size fits none.

?

What’s next?

In the next articles I will be looking to cover:

• Imperatives for transformation
• Building a data driven organisation that embraces change
• Identity as a core capability for immigration
• Ecosystem collaboration to address the end to end outcomes

?

Keen to get your thoughts or questions, or suggest other topics you would like to see covered!

Link to Article 1: Agility is Key

Link to Article 3: Cat & Mouse

Footnotes

1. Data in Table 1: The data for Australia are from the Australian Government Department of Home Affairs, and represent the number of permanent visas granted. The data for Canada are from the Government of Canada, and represent the number of permanent residents admitted. The data for the US are from the Department of Homeland Security, and represent the number of persons obtaining lawful permanent resident status. The data for the UK are from the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford, and represent the number of grants of settlement. This does not equal additional people in the country per se, as often new permanent residents are temporary residents that convert into permanent residents.