Forced migration and its multifarious consequences are evident in the United States and around the world. Today, examples of forced migration include the refugee crisis emerging from the Syrian civil war; the Rohingya people fleeing to Bangladesh to escape murder and violence inflicted by Myanmar’s state forces; migrants from Honduras and El Salvador forced into a treacherous migration route through Mexico to the United States to escape violence; and the challenges facing Ethiopia, which hosts the largest number of refugees in the world even though it lacks basic necessities for that population, such as clean water. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) estimates that nearly 71 million people are forcibly displaced worldwide. The rising number of forced migrants and the dire conditions that they face demonstrates the urgent need for a systematic policy-related review of the available data and analyses on forced migration and refugee movements.
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a workshop in May 2019 to bring fresh and innovative approaches in social demographic theory, methodology, data collection and analysis, and practice and applications to the forefront of the community of researchers and practitioners who are concerned with better understanding and assisting forced migrant populations. Although only some of the workshop sessions are highlighted below, the workshop spanned a large breadth of topics and methodologies, including conceptual and definitional issues, survey research, administrative data collection and analysis, and forecasts and projections, among others. The workshop agenda and planning was led by the co-chairs, Ellen Percy Kraly, Colgate University, and Holly E. Reed, City University of New York (CUNY), Queens College. You can find Dr. Kraly’s concept paper on this topic here, and below are highlights from the workshop.
41m
In 2018, more than 41 million people were internally displaced within the borders of their own countries as a result of conflict.
25.9m
Approximately 25.9 million people had been forced to cross international borders as a result of conflict or persecution.
3.5m
Approximately 3.5 million people were waiting for their asylum claims to be assessed.
Presentation from Michaela Hynie, York University
Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) and Refugees, in millions
Presentation from Michaela Hynie, York University
Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) and Refugees, in millions
Presentation from Michaela Hynie, York University
Turkey | 3.6m |
Lebanon | 968k |
Jordan | 667.2k |
Germany | 514k |
Iraq | 251.2k |
Egypt | 129.7k |
Sweden | 104.9k |
Pakistan | 1.4m |
Islamic Republic of Iran | 951.1k |
Germany | 116.7k |
Uganda | 784.5k |
Sudan | 768.1k |
Ethiopa | 445k |
Kenya | 114k |
DRC | 93.1k |
Bangladesh | 943.2k |
Malaysia | 106.4k |
Thailand | 97.4k |
Ethiopia | 256.4k |
Yemen | 256.4k |
Kenya | 251.4k |
Presentation from Michaela Hynie, York University
Percent of Change in Regional Refugee Populations in 2018
Presentation from Michaela Hynie, York University
Presentation from Fernando Riosmena, University of Colorado at Boulder
Presentation from Aimee Chin, University of Houston
Presentation from Mark VanLandingham, Tulane University
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report, The Integration of Immigrants into American Society, used a large number of indicators of integration, some of them controversial, such as the extent to which children were living in two-parent households. Other groups have developed scales of integration using multiple indicators, though many academics are reluctant to do this, due to the need to agree on the components of migrant and refugee well-being and then measure those components equally across societies or contexts, which can be difficult to do.
Presentation from Irene Bloemraad, University of California, Berkeley
Related work on immigration and integration from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine:
Mark VanLandingham (Tulane University) co-leads a project called Katrina@10, which is a set of five studies looking at differences in long-term recovery from Hurricane Katrina, where VanLandingham focuses on the Vietnamese community in the eastern part of New Orleans.
VanLandingham suggests that culture was the key to their resilience. The Vietnamese in New Orleans shared a common history and a common set of events that their non-Vietnamese neighbors did not share, which gave them a view of the world, or a way of interpreting it, that distinguished them from the other groups.
Resilience A process of linking a set of adaptive capabilities to a positive trajectory of functioning and adaptation after a disturbance, with the dimensions of economic development, social capital, information and communication, and community competence.
Culture Symbolic systems of beliefs, values, and *shared understandings that render the world meaningful and intelligible for a particular group of people.
*Shared understandings include:
Narratives: The telling, re-telling and refining of key elements of a group’s common history.
Symbolic boundaries: Serve to distinguish members of the group from outsiders.
Frames: Perspectives or orientations, similar to a lens or filter through which we view and interpret our social world.
Cultural toolkits: Repertoires of behavior (coping strategies) that vary systematically among groups” is missing a period at the end.
Presentation from Mark VanLandingham, Tulane University
Presentation from Marwan Khawaja, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia [ESCWA]
SOURCE: NASEM. 2020. Forced Migration Research: From Theory to Practice in Promoting Migrant Well-Being: Proceedings of a Workshop.
Statements, recommendations, and opinions expressed are those of the individual participants. They are not necessarily endorsed by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and should not be construed as reflecting any group consensus.
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation
President’s Fund