.post img { border:10px solid #191919; dotted:2px; } a:link{ colour brown } h2{ colour: brown;| }
  • Maiyegun's Diary

  • | Breaking News
  • | Sports
  • | Entertainments
  • | Politics
  • | Opinions |

Maiyegun General

Saturday, 5 September 2015

Seeking a Fair Distribution of Refugees in Europe

German and European Union leaders have called for European countries to share the burden of absorbing the hundreds of thousands of migrants who have poured into the continent this summer. One plan, which was proposed in May, would have established quotas based on each country’s size and resources. The quotas were rejected in June, but they may be a starting point for any comprehensive solution.

Based on the proportions outlined in the May proposal, here are countries that have already accepted …
Sweden Denmark Netherlands Germany Belgium Italy Bulgaria Cyprus Malta

Fewer than the quota



Finland Estonia Latvia Lithuania Ireland Poland Britain Czech Rep. Slovakia France Hungary Romania Slovenia Croatia Portugal Spain Greece
Source: New York Times analysis. Note: Austria has not disclosed how many people it has granted asylum.

The scope of the May proposal was limited: Distribute 20,000 newly arrived refugees over two years. It was supposed to be a first step in addressing the crisis.

The plan assigned each country a share of refugees based on its economic strength, population, unemployment and asylum applications approved over the last five years. Several member countries, however, opposed the quota system and have approved relatively few asylum applications. A version of the plan without a comprehensive quota system was adopted in July but was widely criticized as insufficient to contain the migration crisis.

Quotas are likely to be part of the European Union’s approach to the issue in the coming weeks. On Thursday, the president of the European Council called for the fair distribution of at least 100,000 refugees.

These charts use the proportions from the May plan to assess which countries have been taking on a higher share of the refugee burden than the proposal would require, and which have not.
If the quotas proposed in May went into effect now:

Nine countries would meet the quota

18 countries would have to accept more applicants

Target proposed in May

Slovakia France Germany Croatia Britain Italy


Share of people granted asylum in Europe, January 2014 to March 2015


Hungary Spain Netherlands Finland Poland Sweden Ireland Portugal Belgium Latvia Romania Denmark Slovenia Czech Republic Bulgaria Lithuania Estonia Malta Luxembourg Greece Cyprus


10%


20%


10%

Sources: Eurostat; European Commission. Note: Austria has not disclosed how many people it has granted asylum.

A country’s population and its gross domestic product account for 80 percent of the formula used to calculate the proposed quotas. The European Commission said that larger populations and economies “are generally considered more able to shoulder greater migration pressures.”

The chart below shows that, of the larger countries with stronger economies, Germany and Sweden have accepted many more asylum seekers than the proposal would require, while France and Britain are behind. Bulgaria, Cyprus and Malta stand out as accepting more applicants than the proposal would require despite being smaller and poorer countries.
Population vs. wealth


Accepted proportionally more refugees than proposed


Fewer than proposed



Germany


100,000,000 population

France Poland Britain Spain Italy Netherlands Romania Belgium Greece Portugal Czech Republic Bulgaria

10,000,000

Hungary Sweden Finland Slovakia Croatia Denmark Ireland Lithuania Slovenia Latvia Estonia Cyprus

20%

Circle size shows share of all people people granted asylum in Europe from January 2014 to March 2015


1,000,000

10%

5%

Malta

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

Poorer economies

Richer economies

Gross domestic product per capita

Sources: International Monetary Fund; Eurostat; European Commission. Note: Austria and Luxembourg are not shown.

Additional editing by Jeremy White

Telegraph 

No comments:

Post a Comment