Statistical information on foreign nationals and immigrants in Iceland

 

ÍSAFJÖRÐUR JULY 2013

Ari Klængur Jónsson

  i  

 

  ii  

Contents  Graphs  and  pictures  ..................................................................................................  iii  Summary  .........................................................................................................................  1  I.   Introduction  ...........................................................................................................  2  II.   Background  and  numbers  ...............................................................................  3  III.   Migration  figures  .................................................................................................  4  

Comparison with other Nordic countries ...................................... 5  Nationality ......................................................................... 6  Icelandic citizenship ............................................................. 7  Foreign citizen or immigrant ................................................... 7  Numbers and composition ....................................................... 8  Second generation ............................................................... 10  Gender balance .................................................................. 12  Domicile ........................................................................... 13  

IV.   Permits  and  registration  of  foreign  nationals  ......................................  16  Residence permits ............................................................... 16  Nationality ........................................................................ 18  Asylum seekers ................................................................... 18  Registration of EEA and EFTA nationals ...................................... 20  

V.   The  labour  market  ...........................................................................................  21  Workforce ......................................................................... 21  Unemployment and official registration ..................................... 21  Unemployment within groups ................................................. 22  Long-term unemployment ...................................................... 23  Further analysis by sex and nationality ...................................... 24  Unemployment by region ....................................................... 26  Unemployment and background ............................................... 27  Workplace accidents ............................................................ 28  

VI.   Tax  and  earnings  of  foreign  nationals  .....................................................  29  Further analysis by sex ......................................................... 30  

VII.  Study  and  the  education  system  ................................................................  31  Pre-schools ....................................................................... 31  Elementary schools .............................................................. 32  Post-compulsory education .................................................... 33  Student loans ..................................................................... 34  

VIII.Family  ...................................................................................................................  36  Maternity/paternity leave ..................................................... 36  Domestic violence ............................................................... 37  Child protection ................................................................. 38  

IX.   Criminal  law  .......................................................................................................  40  X.   Funding  for  immigration  services  .............................................................  41  References  ...................................................................................................................  43  

Research, reports and other published material ........................... 43  Unpublished material and/or specially created ............................ 44  

   

  iii  

Graphs and pictures  Figure II-1 Proportion of foreign nationals among total population. Source: Statistics Iceland,

2013 ................................................................................................... 3  Figure II-2 Number of foreign nationals by gender and age. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013. 4  Figure II-3 Immigration and emigration of foreign nationals by gender. Source: Statistics

Iceland, 2013 ........................................................................................ 4  Figure II-4 Immigration and emigration of foreign nationals. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

......................................................................................................... 5  Figure II-5 Foreign nationals as proportion of total population of Nordic countries. Source

Nordic Statistics, 2013. ............................................................................ 6  Figure II-6 Biggest foreign groups by nationality at start of 2013. Source: Statistics Iceland,

2013. .................................................................................................. 6  Figure II-7 Number of individuals receiving Icelandic citizenship. Source: Statistics Iceland,

2013. .................................................................................................. 7  Figure II-8 Comparison of the number of foreign nationals and immigrants. Source: Statistics

Iceland, 2013. ....................................................................................... 8  Figure II-9 Age range of foreign nationals. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013. .................... 9  Figure II-10 Age range of immigrants. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013. .......................... 9  Figure II-11 Age range of Icelandic citizens. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013. ................. 10  Figure II-12 Age range of second-generation immigrants. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013. . 10  Figure II-13 Number and proportion of second-generation immigrants. Source: Statistics

Iceland, 2013. ...................................................................................... 11  Figure II-14 Gender balance by residents’ background. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013. .... 12  Figure II-15 Proportion of immigrants and their children of area totals. Source: Statistics

Iceland, 2013. ...................................................................................... 13  Figure II-16 Distribution of immigrants by region. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013. .......... 13  Figure II-17 Proportion of immigrants of total population in the 25 municipalities with

highest proportion of immigrants. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013. ....................... 14  Figure II-18 Number of immigrants in municipalities where immigrants make up 10% or more

of total population. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013. ........................................ 14  Figure II-19 Proportion of immigrants by district in the City of Reykjavík. Source: Statistics

Iceland, 2013. ...................................................................................... 15  Figure III-1 Number of residence permits issued by year. Source: Directorate of Immigration,

2012 and 2013. ..................................................................................... 16  Figure III-2 Proportion of permits to relatives of total residence permits. Source: Directorate

of Immigration, 2012 and 2013. ................................................................. 16  Figure III-3 Types of residence permits issued. Source: Directorate of Immigration, 2013. .. 17  Figure III-4 largest nationality groups by number of issued residence permits. Source:

Directorate of Immigration, 2012, 2012 and 2013. ........................................... 18  Figure III-5 Applications for asylum in Iceland and approved permits. Source: Nordic

Statistics, 2013. .................................................................................... 19  Figure III-6 Proportionate number of asylum seekers by country and population. Source:

Nordic Statistics, 2013. ........................................................................... 19  Figure IV-1 Proportion of foreign nationals on unemployment register in comparison to their

proportion of the total national population. Source: Directorate of Labour, 2013. ..... 21  Figure IV-2 Comparison of unemployment among Icelanders and foreign citizens. Source:

Directorate of Labour, 2013. ..................................................................... 22  Figure IV-3 Long-term unemployed and nationality, as a proportion of total unemployed.

Source: Directorate of Labour, 2013. ........................................................... 24  Figure IV-4 Unemployment by nationality in Iceland. Source: Directorate of Labour, 2013. . 24  Figure IV-5 Unemployment among Poles, by gender. Source: Directorate of Labour, 2013. . 25  Figure IV-6 Residency of unemployed foreign citizens. Source: Directorate of Labour, 2012

and 2013. ............................................................................................ 26  Figure IV-7 Unemployment and background. Average unemployment in 2012. Source:

Directorate of Labour, 2012. ..................................................................... 27  Figure IV-8 Foreign nationals in work accidents and their proportion of the national

workforce. Source: Accident Record of the Administration of Occupational Safety and Health, 2013; and Statistics Iceland, 2013. .................................................... 28  

Figure V-1 Earnings and tax broken down by nationality (calculated from the tax system). Source: Directorate of Internal Revenue, 2013. .............................................. 29  

  iv  

Figure V-2 Comparison of foreign nationals’ average earnings last year, by gender. Source: Directorate of Internal Revenue, 2013. ........................................................ 30  

Figure VI-1 Number of children with foreign nationality in Icelandic pre-schools and their proportion of the total number of pre-school children. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013. ........................................................................................................ 31  

Figure VI-2 Number of children with a foreign first language in Icelandic pre-schools and their proportion of the total number of pre-school children. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013. ................................................................................................. 32

Figure VI-3 Number of children with foreign language in Icelandic primary schools and their proportion of the total number of primary school children. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013. ................................................................................................. 32  

Figure VI-4 Proportion of children in non-compulsory schools (further education). Comparison between number of first year students and fourth year students. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2011 and Ministry of Education and Culture, 2011. .................... 33  

Figure VI-5 Applications by foreign citizens to the Icelandic Student Loan Fund and the number of paid loans. Source: Icelandic Student Loan Fund, 2013. ....................... 35  

Figure VI-6 Largest nationality groups which apply for student loans at the Icelandic Student Loan Fund. Source: Icelandic Student Loan Fund, 2013. .................................... 35  

Figure VII-1 Proportion of foreign nationals among maternity/paternity leave recipients. Source: Maternity/Paternity Leave Fund, 2012. .............................................. 36  

Figure VII-2 Proportion of children of foreign origin involved in child protection cases. Source: Government Agency for Child Protection, 2012. .................................... 38  

Figure VII-3 Comparison of custody arrangements of children of Asian/African origin by whether one of their parents is of foreign origin, or both. Source: Ari Klængur Jónsson, 2012. ................................................................................................. 39  

Figure VIII-1 Average number of inmates with non-Icelandic nationality in Icelandic prisons, per day. Source: Directorate of Prisons, 2012. ................................................ 40  

Figure IX-1 Financing to specific areas 2010-2013. Source: Budget 2010-2013. ................ 41  Figure IX-2 Immigrant budget issues by number of foreign nationals and current prices.

Source: Budget 2007-2013. ....................................................................... 42  

  1  

Summary

£ For the first time since the end of 2008 the number of foreign nationals in Iceland increased between years, and at the beginning of January 2013 there were 21,446 foreign citizens resident in Iceland. That is 6.7% of the total population.

£ At the beginning of the year there were roughly the same number of men and women with foreign citizenship living in Iceland. That is a big change from the beginning of 2008, when over 5,000 more foreign men than women were living in the country.

£ At the beginning of 2013 immigrants numbered 25,926 and 29,130 if their children, born in Iceland, are also counted. That means that 9.1% of the people in Iceland are either first or second generation immigrants.

£ Eight in every hundred children in Iceland, aged 0-4, can be called second generation immigrants.

£ Of individual countries, the most foreign nationals in Iceland come from Poland: 9,363 individuals at the start of 2013, which is 44% of all foreign citizens in Iceland. Poles account for 3% of all Icelandic residents.

£ The number of issued residency permits has decreased by 37% since 2008. Around half of residency permits are granted for reasons of family reunification.

£ The highest proportion of immigrants to total population can be found in the Westfjords and Suðurnes regions. However, numerically there are most in the capital region: or two out of every three immigrants in Iceland.

£ Foreign nationals account for around 8% of the Icelandic labour force; though approximately one in five people on the unemployment register have foreign nationality.

£ Poles accounted for 56% of all foreigners on the unemployment register in June 2013 and unemployment among Poles is around 15%, compared to 4% among Icelanders.

£ Preliminary studies by the Intercultural Centre and the Icelandic Human Rights Office indicate that the high level of unemployment among immigrants in Iceland is not solely related to nationality, but an individual’s background has an effect. In 2010 the highest unemployment rate was among Icelanders of foreign origin, there was more unemployment in this group than among the foreign nationals.

£ It is generally possible to state that foreign citizens contribute much more to the national treasury than they receive from it, according to figures from the internal revenue directorate. Foreign citizens with registered tax-paying status in Iceland paid around ten billion krónur in taxes last year.

£ Since the millennium the number of pre-school children with foreign citizenship has increased by seven times. 11 in every 100 pre-school children have a foreign mother tongue.

£ The number of children with a foreign mother language in Icelandic primary schools has increased sevenfold since 2007. Today they account for 6% of all primary school children: 2,663 in total.

£ Around 80% of children with an immigrant background started non-compulsory further education in 2010, compared to 96% of children with no foreign background. Proportionately fewer immigrant children go on to complete non-compulsory education than their Icelandic peers.

£ The number of individuals with foreign citizenship receiving Icelandic student loans has increased year-on-year, by about 1,167% since 2002.

£ One third of women who sought help at the Women’s Shelter last year were foreign nationals.

£ Multicultural Centre and Human Rights Centre research shows that children of foreign background are much less likely than children of Icelandic background to be in joint custody and that background strongly influences whether a parent gets custody.

£ Funding set aside in the budget for immigrant issues has decreased significantly since 2008. Simplifying the figures significantly, it can be said that 21,000 krónur was spent per foreign national in 2008, compared to 9,000 krónur in 2013, adjusted for inflation.

  2  

I. Introduction

This report is the third in as many years in which the status of immigrants and foreign

citizens in Iceland is mapped out from statistical data. Such analysis forms one part of

the Multicultural Centre’s rôle, which includes closely following the development of

immigrant issues within society, through research and analysis. The goal is to

highlight the status of foreign citizens and immigrants, wherever appropriate, and then

to provide the relevant authorities with suggestions for actions aimed at ensuring that

each individual can participate actively in society.

This report is intended as an overview of the situation and the methods are therefore

not necessarily alluded to specifically in the text. General patterns are widely sought

due to the extremely wide area – all of society – on which the report is centred and

figures are therefore often based on averages and estimates. The report more often that

not refers to foreign citizens/foreign nationals and not to immigrants; the reason for

which is first and foremost that available data on immigrants are limited. The

information the report is based on comes either from publicly accessible information,

or was compiled by an involved organisation for the Multicultural Centre. Statistics

Iceland, the Directorate of Immigration, the Directorate of Labour, the National

Registry, the Administration of Occupational Safety and Health, the Directorate of

Internal Revenue, the Women’s Shelter, the Government Agency for Child Protection,

the Maternity/Paternity Leave Fund and the Icelandic Student Loan Fund all provided

information. Information was also used from reports, research documents and other

data which were available. The report is also partially based on information gathered

in the course of research by the Multicultural Centre and the Icelandic Human Rights

Centre on widespread discrimination, which is financially supported by the EU

Progress Programme. It is expected that a full report based on that research will be

published in summer 2014.

The Immigration Council and those parties, organisations and government ministries

which provided information are sincerely thanked for their participation.  

  3  

II. Background and numbers

For the first time since the economic crisis at the end of 2008, the number of foreign

citizens living in Iceland has increased between years. Since the millennium the

number of foreign citizens has increased massively; quite steadily to start with, but

very sharply after 2005, and until 2008. The number reached a peak in the beginning

of 2009, when around 24,000 foreign citizens were resident in Iceland. Over the

following years the number decreased significantly and at the beginning of 2012

around 21,000 foreign nationals were legally domiciled in Iceland. The figure

increased slightly again in 2012 and at the beginning of this year the number stood at

21,446 individuals, meaning an increase of some 600 people.  

 Figure II-1 Proportion of foreign nationals among total population. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013

Up to and including 2004, there were more female foreign nationals living in Iceland

than there were male; in other words, more foreign women had settled here than

foreign men. In 2005 this changed and by the start of 2006 there were more foreign

men than women resident in the country. The large increase in foreign nationals which

took place between 2005 and 2008 can largely be attributed to foreign men – whose

numbers roughly tripled between 2005 and 2008, at the same time as the number of

foreign women roughly doubled. The biggest difference in the number of individuals

by gender occurred at the beginning of 2008, when 5,219 more men than women with

foreign citizenship were resident in Iceland. Since then this imbalance has steadily

decreased and at the beginning of 2013 the number of men and women was largely

equal or 10,898 men with foreign nationality resident in Iceland and 10,548 women.

  4  

 

 Figure II-2 Number of foreign nationals by gender and age. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

Migration figures

In the more than 12 years which have passed since the millennium in only one year did

more women with foreign citizenship move away from Iceland than to the country.

The large exodus of foreign nationals which took place after the financial crash can

almost entirely be attributed to men, with the exception of 2009 when the number or

women also decreased and 95 more women moved away from Iceland than moved to

Iceland.

 

 Figure II-3 Immigration and emigration of foreign nationals by gender. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013

In 2000 the net migration figure to Iceland was 1,652, with women in the majority – or

838 compared to 814 men. In the next three years net migration of foreign citizens

decreased, but the number of immigrants nevertheless exceeded emigrants, as 1,440

  5  

more individuals moved to Iceland than from it in 2001, 745 the following year and

480 in 2003. 2004 brought an indication of what was to come, as the net immigration

of foreign nationals compared to emigration doubled in number and stood at 968. The

following year the figure quadrupled as 3,742 more foreign citizens moved to Iceland

than left Iceland, 5,535 the year after that, and 5,299 in 2007. In each of these years

foreign men constituted either a majority or a large majority compared to the number

of foreign women moving to the country. The tightening economic situation in 2008

had a direct impact on migration and the gap between arrivals and departures

narrowed sharply: only 1,621 more people moved to Iceland than moved away. The

next three years saw more people leaving the country than moving to it, for the first

time in the new century. The most emigration took place in 2009 when 2,369 more

people moved away than moved to Iceland; 431 the next year and 93 in 2011. As

previously mentioned, net migration returned to positive in 2012 when 617 more

foreign nationals moved to Iceland as moved away from Iceland – two-times more

women than men, or 411 compared to 206.  

 Figure II-4 Immigration and emigration of foreign nationals. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

Comparison with other Nordic countries

For a long time the proportion of foreign nationals among total population was lower

in Iceland than in the other Nordic countries, with the exception of Finland. This

changed between 2007 and 2009, however, and there were proportionately more

foreign citizens living in Iceland than there were in Denmark, Norway, Sweden and

Finland. In 2010 Norway took the lead again and Denmark and Sweden overtook

Iceland once more in 2011. At the beginning of 2013 there were proportionately the

-3000

-2000

-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

  6  

largest number of foreign citizens living in Denmark, or 8.8% of the population, 7% in

Sweden, 6.7% in Iceland, 3.7% in Finland, and figures were not yet available for

Norway.

 Figure II-5 Foreign nationals as proportion of total population of Nordic countries. Source Nordic Statistics, 2013.

Nationality

A sizable majority of the foreign nationals resident in Iceland have Polish citizenship.

Of 21,446 individuals, 9,363 have Polish citizenship: 5,021 male and 4,342 female.

That equates to around 44 in every 100 foreign citizens in Iceland. Next in line are

Lithuanians, as 1,589 Lithuanian citizens have legal domicile in Iceland, more men

than women, or 837 compared to 762. This means that over half the foreign citizens

living in Iceland come from those two countries. Poles account for 3% of the national

population. When the population of foreign citizens in Iceland is compared to

population figures in the country it is seen that they outnumber the population of each

individual region, with the exception of the capital region, the northeast and the south.

 Figure II-6 Biggest foreign groups by nationality at start of 2013. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

  7  

Some differences can be seen when nationalities are divided by gender. The figures

show that there are more men than women from Poland, Lithuania, the United

Kingdom, Portugal and the United States of America, but more women than men from

Denmark, Germany, the Philippines and Thailand.

Icelandic citizenship

 Figure II-7 Number of individuals receiving Icelandic citizenship. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

As can be seen in Figure II-7, there has been a decrease in the number of individuals

granted Icelandic citizenship on an annual basis since the peak in 2008, when 914

individuals were granted citizenship – 389 men and 525 women. In 2012 413 foreign

citizens received a new nationality and, as in every year since 1991, women were in

the majority – or 246 compared to 167 men. That is an increase from the previous year

when 370 individuals were granted citizenship, but fewer than 2010 when the number

was 450.

Foreign citizen or immigrant

The terms foreign citizen/foreign national and immigrant are often used

interchangeably, but they are in fact two separate groups. Foreign citizens/nationals

are of course immigrants, but immigrants are not all foreign nationals. This report uses

the Statistics Iceland definition of an immigrant, which is as follows: “An immigrant

[is] defined as an individual born overseas to parents who both have foreign

backgrounds, i.e. both born overseas to parents who were born outside of Iceland.”

(Hagtíðindi 2009:1, page 3). Under this definition an immigrant can be an Icelandic

citizen who was born overseas and has a foreign background. The children of

  8  

immigrants, born in Iceland, are classified as second generation immigrants. Due to

this system it is possible for siblings to fall into different categories, if for example the

elder sibling moved to Iceland with his/her parents and is therefore counted as an

immigrant, while the younger was born in Iceland and is counted as a second

generation immigrant. In the case of this classification it makes no difference whether

or not the parents receive Icelandic citizenship in the meantime. Further analysis of

second generation immigrants can be found on page 10.

Numbers and composition

 Figure II-8 Comparison of the number of foreign nationals and immigrants. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

The difference in the number of immigrants and foreign nationals is first and foremost

due to the individuals who have been granted Icelandic citizenship over the years. At

the beginning of this year there were 25,926 immigrants in Iceland; around 4,500

above the number of foreign nationals, and if the second generation is included, the

number is 29,130. This means that 8.1% of the Icelandic population is classed as

immigrant – and 9.1% if second generation immigrants are included. When this figure

is compared to the national population it can be seen that the number is slightly higher

than the population of the northeast region, where 29,026 people live. To put it another

way, the number of immigrants and their children in Iceland is greater than the

combined populations of Akureyri, Norðurþing, Fjallabyggð and Dalvíkurbyggð – as

well as all other villages and farms in the northeast region.

  9  

In Iceland the number of immigrants is close to the number of foreign nationals, and

that is partly explained by the fact that significant migration to Iceland is a relatively

new phenomenon, at least in comparison to many neighbouring countries. As a result,

the proportion of immigrants and their children is a lot higher in Sweden and Norway

than in Iceland, despite the proportion of foreign citizens being rather similar between

countries. The age range among both foreign nationals and immigrants serves to back

this up: the largest age group being 20-40 years-old and one-in-three being between 25

and 34. By comparison, only 13 in every hundred are 50 or over.

 Figure II-9 Age range of foreign nationals. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

The age range of immigrants in Iceland is generally very similar: roughly one in three

immigrants is 25-34 years old, and a large majority are in the 20-40 age bracket.

Proportionate to the total number of foreign nationals, there are relatively few children

aged 0-9. In their stead there are more individuals at the top of the pyramid, i.e. older

than 70.

 Figure II-10 Age range of immigrants. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

  10  

The age range of Icelanders is much more even and no age group is larger than four in

one hundred. In comparison to immigrants and foreign nationals the age spread is very

different and only 13 in every 100 people across the nation as a whole are aged 25-34;

on the other hand around one-in-three are 50 or older.

 Figure II-11 Age range of Icelandic citizens. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

Second generation

An illustration of how little experience Icelanders have with immigration of foreign

nationals to their country, or at least how recently the experience began, can be seen in

the age and number of people categorised as second generation immigrants, i.e. people

born in Iceland to immigrant parents. Around four-in-five people categorised as

second generation immigrants have not yet reached ten years of age and only seven

percent are aged 20 or over. This means that eight percent of all children in Iceland,

aged 0-4 years, are classified second generation immigrants, nearly one child in ten.

 Figure II-12 Age range of second-generation immigrants. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

  11  

The small number of individuals represented in the higher reaches of the pyramid in

Figure II-12, classified as second generation immigrants, indicates that despite the

large influx of immigrants over the last two decades, the group is still overwhelmingly

made up of first generation immigrants. On the other hand it is noteworthy that 15

years ago only 0.1% of the national population, or 387 people, were classed as second

generation immigrants, compared with 3,204 people at the beginning of 2013 which

equates to 1% of the nation and an approximate tenfold increase in 17 years.

 Figure II-13 Number and proportion of second-generation immigrants. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

Considering the large number of children currently of pre-school age who are

classified either as immigrants (including foreign nationals) or second generation, it

can be expected that the education system has challenges to deal with, now and long

into the future, concerning these children, their needs, and their language skills, more

now than ever before. Roughly one-in-ten children aged 0-3 years is either an

immigrant or second generation immigrant, and if foreign background is looked at

more generally (i.e. just one foreign parent, and children born overseas) this

proportion goes up to 22%, which is more than one child in every five having either a

foreign background or having been born in a different country. In 1996 this figure

stood at 6.3% (Hagtíðindi 2009:1).

 

  12  

Gender balance

The gender balance among immigrants is fairly uneven when classified by specific

background. As previously discussed, a lot more men than women moved to Iceland

between 2004 and 2008, while women have nevertheless been granted more new

Icelandic passports (i.e. citizenship) than men. Figure II-14 shows the effect this has

on the nation’s gender balance when figures are further split by immigrant category.

At the beginning of this year women made up 52.41% of all immigrants in Iceland,

while men made up the majority of foreign nationals, at 50.82%. In relation to

Icelandic citizens, the figure is reversed, as there are slightly more Icelandic men than

women: 50.11% versus 49.89%.

 Figure II-14 Gender balance by residents’ background. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

The gender balance of foreign nationals in Iceland has been marked by large

fluctuations over the years. To illustrate: 61% of all foreign nationals living in Iceland

in January 2008 were men, while in 2001 they made up only 45% of the total and

women were therefore in a clear majority at the time. The Icelandic employment

market is the biggest factor in explaining these changes over the years, as its demand

for different types of labour has a large impact upon which people decide to move to

Iceland, in what numbers, and from which backgrounds (Ari Klængur Jónsson, 2008).

A boom in heavy industry and dam construction, as well as the construction industry

in general, meant that a lot more foreign men moved to Iceland than women between

2004 and 2008 (Hagtíðindi 2009:1). When the European Common Market was

expanded in 2004, citizens of the new accession countries gained easier access to the

Icelandic employment market and that had a direct impact on the nationalities of new

immigrants. Further analysis of the employment market can be found in Chapter IV.

  13  

Domicile

In terms of numbers, the lion’s share of immigrants live in Reykjavík and the wider

capital region, but as a proportion of total population there are most immigrants in the

Westfjords and Suðurnes regions where around 12% of the population are immigrants

or children of immigrants. At the start of this year one-in-ten capital region residents

was of foreign origin, according to the aforementioned definitions, and between eight

and nine percent of the population in the west, the east and the south. There are

proportionately fewest immigrants in the northeast and northwest regions, or 4-5% of

total population.

 Figure II-15 Proportion of immigrants and their children of area totals. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

Two out of three immigrants, including children of immigrants, are resident in the

capital region, or roughly 19,500 individuals out of 29,130. Second on the list is

Suðurnes, where 10% of immigrants live, and around 7% live in South Iceland.

 Figure II-16 Distribution of immigrants by region. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

  14  

Looking at individual municipalities within Iceland, Eyja- og Miklaholtshreppur is the

place where proportionately the most residents have foreign backgrounds, as 30% of

the population are immigrants or children of immigrants. In Tálknafjarðarhreppur

roughly every fifth resident has a foreign background, 19% of the residents of

Snæfellsbær and 18% of the population of both Grundafjarðarbær and

Borgarfjarðarhreppur. Immigrants make up 17.5% of the population of Sveitarfélagið

Ölfus and Sveitarfélagið Garður, and also of Sandgerðisbær.

 Figure II-17 Proportion of immigrants of total population in the 25 municipalities with highest proportion of immigrants. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

Although the immigrant population of the above municipalities is very high, a

significant majority of immigrants live in Reykjavík. Figure II-18 shows the number

of immigrants and their children living in all the municipalities with immigrant

populations higher than 10%.

 Figure II-18 Number of immigrants in municipalities where immigrants make up 10% or more of total population. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

0% 5%

10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

0 2000 4000 6000 8000

10000 12000 14000

  15  

People of foreign origin are spread fairly unevenly across the different districts of the

City of Reykjavík. The highest proportions are in Kjalarnes, where around one third of

residents are immigrants or their children, and in Efra Breiðholt, where one-in-four

residents have a foreign background. Staðahverfi, Vestur Grafarholt, Norðlingaholt

and Úlfarársdalur have the lowest proportions of residents with foreign backgrounds –

each district with under 4%. When analysing the number of immigrants, as opposed to

their proportion of the population, we see that Efra Breiðholt tops the table with 2,134

residents of foreign origin; there are 1,567 in Austurbær and 1,083 in Norðurmýri.

There are around 1,000 individuals of foreign origin living in Vesturbær and in

Seljahverfi.

 Figure II-19 Proportion of immigrants by district in the City of Reykjavík. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

  16  

III. Permits and registration of foreign nationals

Residence permits

 Figure III-1 Number of residence permits issued by year. Source: Directorate of Immigration, 2012 and 2013.

The number of residency permits issued in 2012 decreased by 14% from the year

before. A total of 2,762 permits were issued, of which 183 persons were granted

permanent residence. The number of permits issued in 2011 also fell between years,

by 209, and the issue of residency permits has therefore gone down by about one fifth

since 2010, and by 37% compared to 2008.

 Figure III-2 Proportion of permits to relatives of total residence permits. Source: Directorate of Immigration, 2012 and 2013.

As in previous years the number of family-related permits is high, with half of permits

being issued on grounds of family reunification, i.e. to relatives of foreign nationals or

Icelanders. The proportion was similar (51-55%) in each of the previous three years.

Two out of three residency permits, on the other hand, were granted to relatives of

foreign nationals or Icelanders in 2008. With the exception of family permits, the

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

  17  

majority of other residency permits were issued for study: 500 student permits were

issued. There were 176 permits issued for specialists in various fields, and 109 were

issued to sportspeople. The number of people granted permits due to labour shortages

was 146 individuals, officially split into three categories: residence permit due to

labour shortage (67), residence permit due to labour shortage B (51), and residence

permit due to labour shortage-service contract (28).

 Figure III-3 Types of residence permits issued. Source: Directorate of Immigration, 2013.

  18  

Nationality

 Figure III-4 largest nationality groups by number of issued residence permits. Source: Directorate of Immigration, 2012, 2012 and 2013.

In both 2010 and 2011 citizens of the Philippines were the biggest recipients of issued

residence permits. On the other hand, in 2012 it was American citizens who received

the most residence permits, or 382 in total. There was a slight drop in the number of

Philippine nationals, as 293 individuals were granted permits during the year. The

picture of the ten top nationalities receiving residence permits has been fairly stable, as

Figure III-4 illustrates.

Asylum seekers

The number of applications for asylum in Iceland reduced between 2008 and 2010, but

increased again in 2011 and 2012. According to the Nordic Statistics database 73

applications for asylum were processed in 2008 and in that year three applications

were approved. In 2009 there were 34 applications received and ten were approved

during the year. A year later there were 44 applications and ten were granted asylum.

In 2011 there were 75 applications received and 40 people were granted asylum in

Iceland. Last year there were more applications than ever before: 120 and of those, 50

applications were approved1.

                                                                                                               1  Attention is drawn to the fact that this is information from the Nordic Statistics database and such statistics are not entirely comparable to figures from the Directorate of Immigration on the issue of special permits. This is because it possible that residence permits to refugees are counted, as well as humanitarian permits, because under some circumstances both are classed as asylum seekers by Nordic Statistics  

  19  

 Figure III-5 Applications for asylum in Iceland and approved permits. Source: Nordic Statistics, 2013.

Compared to the other Nordic countries, based on Nordic Statistics figures, relatively

few individuals seek asylum in Iceland. In comparison for example, 3,600 individuals

sought asylum in Denmark in 2011, around 3,000 in Finland, some 9,000 in Norway

and around 30,000 individuals in Sweden. In all the aforementioned countries except

Denmark, the number of applications went up last year, and roughly 44,000 people

sought asylum in Sweden in 2012 and around 10,000 in Norway. The other Nordic

countries also approve a lot more applications than Iceland does; both in terms of raw

numbers and also proportionate to national population. If Iceland had accepted

proportionately the same number of asylum seekers compared to its population as

Denmark did, then the country would have approved 142 applications; 95 when

compared to Finland; and 424 if Iceland compares itself proportionately with Sweden.

The real number was actually 50, as previously mentioned (if based on the

abovementioned source).

 Figure III-6 Proportionate number of asylum seekers by country and population. Source: Nordic Statistics, 2013.

  20  

To some extent the small number of asylum seekers in Iceland and how few are

eventually accepted can probably be attributed to the location of the country. Then the

Icelandic authorities can invoke the Dublin Regulation, which states that asylum

seekers must seek asylum in their first country of entry into Europe, which is rarely

Iceland. The regulation covers all of the European Union, Norway and Iceland.

Registration of EEA and EFTA nationals

A new law came into effect in August 2008 concerning the registration of European

Economic Area (the EEA covers the European Union (except Croatia), Norway,

Liechtenstein and Iceland) citizens which abolished the so-called EEA permits which

were issued before that time. There were 9,165 EEA residence permits issued in 2007

and 8,186 the next year. Information is not yet available for 2012 and 2013 so far on

the registration of EEA citizens, but a Multicultural Centre report from 2012 found

that between 1st August 2008 and 29th February 2012, 9,260 individuals registered

themselves with the National Registry due to migration to Iceland and the vast

majority of them (87%) were registering for the first time, while 1,204 people were

returning to the country. A large majority of registrations were for the arrival of Poles,

or 4,556 – and there were 846 Lithuanians and 756 Germans registering domicile in

the country during the same period. Most arrivals registered as employees or workers,

but several nationalities stand out for the proportion of people registering as students

in Iceland: as well as the Germans (289), the French (160 of 295 immigrating French

citizens) and the Spanish (159 of 259 immigrating Spanish citizens) top the list. Of all

the European citizens who moved to Iceland between 1st August 2008 and 29th

February 2012, around two thirds still had their legal address in Iceland at the end of

February 2012 (Ari Klængur Jónsson and Elsa Arnardóttir, 2012).

  21  

IV. The labour market

Workforce

Since the millennium the make-up of the Icelandic labour market has changed

considerably. Back then it is believed that 3.5% of the nation’s workforce was foreign

citizens, but their share of the work was to increase steadily until 2008, when one-in-

ten workers had foreign nationality. At the beginning of 2013 it is estimated that 8% of

the Icelandic workforce is made up of foreign nationals, which means about 14,800

individuals among the 183,000-strong workforce (either working or looking for work).

There are slightly more foreign men than women active in the Icelandic labour market:

7,800 men compared to 7,000 women – making up the estimated foreign workforce.

Of these 14,800 individuals, 1,552 were unemployed in April 2013, which equates to

around 10% unemployment among that group, compared to 4.9% registered

unemployment in total.

Unemployment and official registration

 Figure IV-1 Proportion of foreign nationals on unemployment register in comparison to their proportion of the total national population. Source: Directorate of Labour, 2013.

Unemployment among foreign citizens in Iceland has increased significantly since

mid-2007 and the proportion of foreigners among the nation’s unemployed is very

high: roughly one in five people registered as unemployed is a foreign citizen. At the

most basic level it might be assumed that the proportion of foreign citizens registered

unemployed would be the same as their proportion of the labour market: about 8%. In

reality, however, their proportion of the unemployed register is nearly double that; at

  22  

over 18%. For a long time, and well into the last decade, the proportion of foreign

nationals on the unemployment register was low; under 5%. It was not until the

beginning of 2007 that, with the exception of a few individual months, their proportion

of the unemployed went above 5%. After that, their share rose sharply, all the way

until September last year when 19% of the unemployment register was made up of

foreign nationals. Since then between 18 and 19% of the unemployed have been

foreign nationals. To some extent this change can be attributed to the large influx of

foreign workers who moved to Iceland before this time, as the foreign population of

Iceland grew from 2.6% to 6.7% in the same period. This high share of the

unemployment register is, though, in no way proportional to the number of foreign

citizens today. Despite the fact that most foreign citizens in Iceland are of the age of

highest employment participation, the ratio is around three-times higher.

Unemployment within groups

 Figure IV-2 Comparison of unemployment among Icelanders and foreign citizens. Source: Directorate of Labour, 2013.

The proportional rate of foreign nationals’ unemployment has noticeably dropped

since its peak in March 2011, when unemployed foreign nationals made up 16% of the

total2. However, in April 2013 there was still a 10% rate of unemployment among

foreign citizens and 9% in June. At the same time only about 4% of the Icelandic

workforce was unemployed and on the Directorate of Labour registry. Figures IV-1                                                                                                                2  Foreign labour force is defined as working foreign citizens aged 16-74. Statistics Iceland figures are used for labour force participation, total workforce and the number of foreign citizens each year, while Directorate of Labour methodology is used to calculate labour force statistics: Average population is obtained from an average of population over two years, for example an average of population on 1st January 2009 and 2010 to get estimated population for all of 2009. Labour force participation based on Statistics Iceland figures is increased by 2% for foreign citizens after labour force participation has been split by gender. Further explanation and justification of these methods can be found in the Directorate of Labour report: “Erlendir ríkisborgarar á íslenskum vinnumarkaði ári[ð] 2010“ (Karl Sigurðsson and Valur Arnarson, June 2011, pages 6–8).  

  23  

and IV-2 clearly show that the economic recession affected foreign nationals much

harder, in comparison to Icelandic nationals, and bearing in mind that one-in-five on

the unemployment register is a foreign national, it can argued that labour market

dynamics have not yet put the group on a level footing with Icelanders. Despite this,

the number of foreign nationals on the unemployment register has reduced greatly

since the peak in March 2010. Then there were 2,421 foreign citizens without work,

nearly double the number seen in June 2013, when there were 1,317 on the register.

In international comparison, the recession had a greater effect on the unemployment of

foreign nationals in Iceland than elsewhere, as between 2008 and 2012 their rate of

unemployment grew by about 11% in Iceland (January 2008-December 2012),

compared to 5% in the other OECD countries (OECD, 2013). Equivalent statistics for

native populations saw an average increase of 3% across the OECD countries, and

around 4% in Iceland. A partial explanation can be found in the rapid recession of the

Icelandic construction industry at that time: the brunt of the blow was taken by foreign

citizens because of their very high numbers in construction, and the rapid recession

which followed. Unemployment among foreign nationals was very low in January

2008, only 1%, but it must be remembered that unemployment among Icelanders was

also around 1%, meaning that job losses affected foreign citizens more harshly.

Long-term unemployment

The proportion of foreign citizens among the long-term unemployed is rather higher

than their proportion of the overall unemployment register would suggest. In March

2013, at the same time as 18% of the unemployed register was made up of foreign

nationals, one-in-five individuals who had been without work for six months or longer

were foreign nationals, and 23% of those who had been out of work for a year or

more. Further comparison shows that in March 2013 a quarter of Icelandic citizens on

the unemployment register had been there for a year or longer, while it was one-in-

three for foreign nationals and Poles. This is nevertheless slightly lower than March

2012, when 30% of Icelanders on the register had been there a year or more, 35% of

foreign nationals and 37% of Poles.

  24  

 Figure IV-3 Long-term unemployed and nationality, as a proportion of total unemployed. Source: Directorate of Labour, 2013.

OECD specialists warn that long-term unemployment among immigrants is becoming

a major problem within many OECD countries. On average the proportion of long-

term unemployed immigrants among total unemployed immigrants within the OECD

grew from 31% in 2008 to 44% in 2012. These figures are higher than in Iceland, but

it should still be noted that long-term unemployment is becoming a serious issue

among vulnerable groups, like immigrants, and therefore provides a challenge for both

the labour market and social policymakers, for example in connection to the

integration of immigrants into society (OECD, 2013).

Further analysis by sex and nationality

By far the most foreigners without work are Polish citizens, unsurprisingly as they are

the biggest foreign nationality living in Iceland. At the end of June there were 740

Poles without work, or around 56% of the foreigners on the unemployment register at

that time. The number of Poles on the register has been going down though: in May

2013 there were 810 Poles without work, 869 in April and 920 in March.

 Figure IV-4 Unemployment by nationality in Iceland. Source: Directorate of Labour, 2013.

  25  

Unemployment among Poles is nonetheless very high, standing at 15% in March 2013

and few nationalities in Iceland live with as much unemployment as the Polish, with

the exception of Latvians – as one-in-five Latvians are unemployed. Unemployment

figures are very variable when broken down by nationality. For example, only 3% of

Germans in Iceland are unemployed, 4% of Nordic citizens, and 5% among Thais.

 Figure IV-5 Unemployment among Poles, by gender. Source: Directorate of Labour, 2013.

It is not enough to simply look at nationality, as unemployment figures split by gender

show that there is more unemployment among Polish women than men. In March

2013 there was 17% unemployment among women and 13% among men. The same

story is true, i.e. more unemployment among women than men, of Latvians (22%

unemployed women compared to 18% unemployed men), Lithuanians (15% compared

to 12%), Thais (7% compared to 2%) and Filipinos (9% compared to 3%)3.

By comparing the number of unemployed foreign citizens by gender and by year it is

clear that unemployment among foreign men has reduced much quicker than among

foreign women. In February 2012 there were 953 foreign women on the

unemployment register, or 43.6% of all foreign nationals. In March 2013 the number

of women had fallen, but there were still 863 on the register, which is 52% of the

foreign total. The last twelve months have seen a serious drop in the number of

unemployed foreign males, while the women have been left behind. When looking

specifically at Poles it can be seen that a similar level of unemployment existed

between the genders in March 2012, at roughly one-in-five women out of work and

one-in-five men, but by March 2013 unemployment among Polish women had                                                                                                                3  Note that these are estimated workforce figures and the numbers are not completely dependable  

  26  

dropped by 3% and among Polish men by 7%. A possible reason is a reduction in the

number of foreign men in Iceland compared to women, many of whom probably

prefer to leave the country than be without work. It is also worth asking whether the

remedies offered have more successfully reached men than women.

Unemployment by region

 Figure IV-6 Residency of unemployed foreign citizens. Source: Directorate of Labour, 2012 and 2013.

Three out of four unemployed foreign nationals were resident in the capital region in

June 2013. That is a similar proportion to each of the last 12 months, or around 70-

76% of the unemployed. This is a somewhat higher ratio than their numbers in the

capital region would seem to predict, as only around two thirds of foreign nationals in

Iceland are resident in the capital. This means that the rate of unemployment among

foreign citizens is proportionately higher in the capital region than the rest of Iceland.

On the other hand, the number has dropped more in the last year in the capital than in

the rest of the country, but as Figure IV-6 shows, the trend is marked by a level of

fluctuation. Still the rate of unemployment among foreign citizens living in the region

remains disproportionately high.

  27  

Unemployment and background

 Figure IV-7 Unemployment and background. Average unemployment in 2012. Source: Directorate of Labour, 2012.

Results from ongoing research by the Multicultural Centre and the Icelandic Human

Rights Centre shows that high immigrant unemployment in Iceland is not linked to

nationality in and of itself, but average numbers for 2010 indicate that background has

an effect. Average unemployment among individuals with Icelandic backgrounds

measured 7.3% in 2010. At the same time, unemployment among Icelandic citizens of

foreign origin measured 13.4% - which is much higher, but nevertheless lower than

among foreign citizens, whose unemployment rate stood at 14.4%. The group which

fared worse in the unemployment crisis was foreign men, of whom some 16% were

unemployed in 2010. By comparison, at the same time 13.5% of Icelandic men of

foreign origin were unemployed and around 8% of men with Icelandic backgrounds.

When unemployment is analysed by both background and gender, it comes to light

that there was more unemployment among men than women within all background

groups; as unemployment among women of Icelandic background was estimated at

around 7%, around 13% among Icelandic women of foreign origin, and around 12%

among women of foreign nationality (Directorate of Labour, 2012). The above are

preliminary figures compiled by the Directorate of Labour and deeper, more accurate

research into how unemployment affects people based on their background is currently

in progress.

  28  

Workplace accidents

 Figure IV-8 Foreign nationals in work accidents and their proportion of the national workforce. Source: Accident Record of the Administration of Occupational Safety and Health, 2013; and Statistics Iceland, 2013.

In the period 2006-2009 the incidence of workplace accidents was very high among

foreign citizens, at least if their number among the total Icelandic labour market is

taken into account. Foreign nationals made up around 7% of the nation’s labour force

in 2006 but were victims in 30% of workplace accidents at the time. There is little

doubt that the high proportion of foreign nationals working in construction and in the

big projects in progress at that time is to blame. The proportion of foreign labour in the

construction and industrial sectors was extremely high; as was the frequency of staff

accidents. To illustrate: Polish citizens were victims of around half of all accidents in

the building and infrastructure sector in 2008, but following the sector’s recession the

proportion of foreign nationals on the Administration of Occupational Safety and

Health’s accident register has fallen considerably. Despite this development, their

proportion of the register is still higher than their number among the labour force

would suggest. In the last three years foreign nationals have suffered 12% of registered

work accidents, at the same time as they make up around 8% of the national

workforce.

  29  

V. Tax and earnings of foreign nationals

 Figure V-1 Earnings and tax broken down by nationality (calculated from the tax system). Source: Directorate of Internal Revenue, 2013.

According to information from the Directorate of Internal Revenue (DIR) there were

264,193 tax payers registered in 2012 and 246,621 individuals had returns calculated

through the tax system. Of those, 17,218 had foreign nationality, or 7%. The total

earnings of those calculated in the tax system were 1,061 billion krónur and foreign

nationals provided 4.9% of that total, or 52 billion. Foreign nationals were behind

4.1% of the tax money paid to the State, despite generating 5.3% of the year’s income,

but on the other hand only one one-hundredth of last year’s investment earnings are

attributable to foreign nationals. Foreign nationals’ proportion of pension payments is

extremely low, with just 0.7% of payments going to people with foreign citizenship. A

much higher proportion of foreign nationals reported earnings from unemployment

benefit than their proportion of the total tax system would suggest, or 18%; which is,

however, in proportion to their percentage of the unemployment register. Overall,

foreign citizens paid 9.8 billion krónur in tax last year, according to tax system figures.

Subtracting out-payments for unemployment benefit, pensions, insurance payments

and other payments, the figure stands at around 4.3 billion krónur. According to rough

estimates, foreign nationals therefore contribute a lot more to the national treasury

  30  

than they take from it. By far the biggest foreign group of taxpayers were Polish

citizens, whose 6,879 individuals made up around 40% of all the foreigners4.

Further analysis by sex

 Figure V-2 Comparison of foreign nationals’ average earnings last year, by gender. Source: Directorate of Internal Revenue, 2013.

Males were 51% of foreign taxpayers and on average each man earned around 800,000

krónur more in wages over the year than foreign women, which amounts to about

67,000 kr. a month. The average wage of foreign men was 2.7 million krónur over the

year, while the average wage of foreign women was 1.9 million, according to tax

system results for 2012. If wage-only figures are replaced with total earnings, i.e.

including benefits, perks, investment earnings etc, then the gender gap widens by

some 142,000 kr; as the total average earnings for foreign men were 942,000 krónur

higher than for foreign women over the year. Average total earnings for foreign men

over the year were 3.5 million krónur each, but 2.5 million for women with foreign

nationality.

                                                                                                               4  Information in this section is based on takings and tax of people in the Directorate of Internal Revenue tax system, after the information has been broken down by nationality. The data were compiled by a DIR staff member on behalf of the Multicultural Centre in July 2013.

 

  31  

VI. Study and the education system

Pre-schools

 Figure VI-1 Number of children with foreign nationality in Icelandic pre-schools and their proportion of the total number of pre-school children. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

Since the millennium the number of pre-school children with foreign nationality has

increased roughly sevenfold. In 2001 there were 159 children in Icelandic pre-schools

with foreign citizenship, while in 2012 that number had increased to 1,031 children,

meaning 5% of all pre-schoolers. There is now double the number of children in

Icelandic pre-schools with a different first language than Icelandic5 and their number

has also increased rapidly over the last 15 years or so. In 1998 there were 572 children

with a foreign mother tongue, 4% of all pre-school children; while 15 years later there

were 2,062 – and therefore 11% of all pre-school children. Two-in-three children with

a foreign first language were in pre-schools in the capital region. The overall picture

shows a year-by-year increase in the number, but in 2012 the ratio of three-year-olds

with a foreign first language was proportionately the highest of all the age groups,

comprising 12% of the total. Proportionately the lowest number of children with a

foreign first language were in the 0-1 age group, or around 8% of the total.

                                                                                                               5  A child is registered as having a foreign first language if its legal guardians (one or both) have a mother language that is not Icelandic and habitually use that language in their daily communication with the child (Statistics Iceland, 2013b).  

  32  

 Figure VI-2 Number of children with a foreign first language in Icelandic pre-schools and their proportion of the total number of pre-school children. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

Elementary schools

Since 1997 the number of children in Icelandic elementary/primary schools with a

foreign mother tongue has increased sevenfold. Then there were 377 such students, or

1% of the total, while 16 years later there were 2,663, meaning around 6% of all

students.

 Figure VI-3 Number of children with foreign language in Icelandic primary schools and their proportion of the total number of primary school children. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2013.

The majority of these students are in elementary schools in the capital region, although

not as large a proportion of the total as foreign language pre-school children, they

were nevertheless 62% of all elementary school children with a foreign first language

in Iceland in 2012. This is an increase of some 5% since 1997, but that increase largely

follows the population increase in the capital region in that period, when the number

of capital region residents went from 60% of the national population to 64%.

  33  

Post-compulsory education

There are no up-to-date figures available for the registration and drop-out rates of

immigrants in Icelandic further education institutions. A more detailed analysis by the

Multicultural Centre and the Icelandic Human Rights Centre will however be released

in a new report next year. The Multicultural Centre report on the subject from 2012

reveals that only 80% of immigrant children registered for further education in 2010,

compared to 96% of children of Icelandic origin. The proportion of children who

registered for further education and have one foreign parent was similar to the

proportion of immigrant children who did the same, at 80.2%. The proportion of

immigrants who signed up for further education right after elementary school

nevertheless increased between 2007 and 2010: only 69% of immigrants aged 15/16

registered for further education in 2007, 71% a year later, and 77% in 2009. Although

this is a positive development, immigrants are still a long way short of their Icelandic-

background peers. The proportion of children of Icelandic origin who registered for

further education after elementary school also grew during the same period and it is

likely that labour market conditions can be credited with increased educational

participation. There were few available jobs for this age group at the time, regardless

of if they were immigrants or Icelanders with no foreign background (Ari Klængur

Jónsson and Elsa Arnardóttir, 2012).

 Figure VI-4 Proportion of children in non-compulsory schools (further education). Comparison between number of first year students and fourth year students. Source: Statistics Iceland, 2011 and Ministry of Education and Culture, 2011.

The educational dropout rate among immigrants is very high. Of those individuals

born in 1991, some 69% started further education in their 16th year but four years later

only around 50% were still in education. The dropout rate was therefore about 20%

between the first and fourth years of college. On the other hand, the dropout rate

  34  

among students of Icelandic origin is similar. In the same age group, i.e. children who

began non-compulsory education in 2007, the sign-up rate among children with

Icelandic backgrounds was 94%, while four years later 76% were still there. The

dropout rate was therefore around 18%. The difference in dropout rates between the

two background groups has shrunk sharply. Dropout fell year-on-year in both groups

in the period 2004-2007, but much more among immigrants: dropping from 34%

among children born in 1988, to 20% among children born in 1991, as previously

stated. In the same period, dropout among students of Icelandic background fell from

21% to 18%. As a result, despite the significant dropout of immigrant children from

non-compulsory education, the problem first and foremost lies in how few immigrant

children sign up for it in the first place, at the end of elementary school. The root of

the problem therefore lies more in the elementary school level than at the further

education level. If we want to stimulate the number of immigrants in further

education, it is necessary to think of the higher years of primary school, and not just

the first year of further education.

Student loans

The rights of foreign citizens to loans from the Icelandic Student Loan Fund are

dependent on their nationality and are in many cases contingent on certain residency

requirements. Nordic citizens can, for example, take advantage of student loans as

easily as Icelandic students, if they are legally domiciled in Iceland and registered on a

loan-eligible course of study in Iceland. Students from EEA countries and their

families have the right to Icelandic student loans if they have lived continuously in

Iceland for five or more years. If they are in employment and want to take courses

related to their profession, they can apply for student loans sooner than the five year

limit. Other foreign citizens, who are married to or in registered partnerships with an

Icelandic citizen, have the right to student loans as long as they have lived in Iceland

for at least two of the last five years at the time the course begins. There is a general

rule also that if Icelandic students enjoy similar rights in the concerned individual’s

homeland, then they have the same rights in Iceland (Icelandic Student Loan Fund,

2013).

  35  

 Figure VI-5 Applications by foreign citizens to the Icelandic Student Loan Fund and the number of paid loans. Source: Icelandic Student Loan Fund, 2013.

The number of individuals with foreign nationality who receive student loans has

grown annually for the last 12 years, by about 1,167% since 2002, when nine

foreigners received loans from the Icelandic Student Loan Fund. In school year 2012-

2013, 105 foreign citizens were granted student loans of the 142 who applied, which

was a record number of both applications and approvals. With the exception of

academic year 2011-2012, the number of applications to the Fund has also gone up

every year, by a factor of 13 since 2002, when there were 11 applications from foreign

nationals in total. Last year there were applicants from 43 countries. With the

exception of Icelanders, the most applications came from German citizens, or 22

individuals, 18 of whom received loans. The next largest group was applicants from

Poland, and of 18 Polish applicants, 11 were granted student loans. There were 12

Danish applications, all-bar-one of which was approved. Applicants from Germany

have consistently applied the most for Icelandic student loans and in the last seven

years German students have been granted more loans than any other foreign

nationality. Polish citizens have also significantly increased their representation in the

last four years, and Danish and British citizens have also been conspicuous when

looking at the nationalities of applicants.

 Figure VI-6 Largest nationality groups which apply for student loans at the Icelandic Student Loan Fund. Source: Icelandic Student Loan Fund, 2013.

  36  

VII. Family

Maternity/paternity leave

Up-to-date figures for maternity/paternity leave by nationality are not available, but a

report from the Multicultural Centre from 2012 demonstrates that the percentage of

new mothers with foreign background has increased rapidly since 2001 when 4.2% of

new mothers were foreign citizens, compared to 13.1% in 2011. Between 2010 and

2011 the number of foreign mothers who received payments from the

Maternity/paternity leave fund went down by 60: from 838 to 778. At the same time,

the total number of people in receipt of new parents’ leave funding went down, so the

proportion of foreign mothers remained about the same.

 Figure VII-1 Proportion of foreign nationals among maternity/paternity leave recipients. Source: Maternity/Paternity Leave Fund, 2012.

In comparison to new mothers, there are proportionately fewer new fathers of foreign

origin who take paid paternity leave. In 2010 there were 663 foreign men paid by the

Fund and 577 the following year. This equates to 11.1% of all payments to fathers in

2010 and 10.7% in 2011 (Ari Klængur Jónsson og Elsa Arnardóttir, 2012).

Whether looking at foreign mothers or fathers, Polish citizens represent by far the

biggest group in both cases when Fund recipients are split by nationality; which is

consistent with the fact that Poles make up roughly half of all foreign citizens living in

Iceland, at about 43%. The proportion of Poles among new fathers with foreign

backgrounds receiving paternity leave in 2010 was slightly higher than their numbers

  37  

would suggest, or 53% and 48% of the total in 2011. Polish mothers made up 45% of

foreign citizens taking maternity leave in 2010 and 44% the following year.

Domestic violence

One third of the women who sought help from the Women’s Shelter last year were

foreign citizens. A total of 324 women sought help there last year. The women came

from 37 different countries and the majority of them came from Europe, including

17% from Europe, not including Iceland. 7% were from Asia and 5% were from

Africa, North America or South America. A quarter of people who visited the shelter

for interview/counselling were foreign citizens. However, foreign women are more

likely to stay at the shelter than visit to talk – and over half of the women who stayed

at the shelter were foreign citizens, or around 55%. A proportional increase of foreign

women took place between years, for both interviews and stays, as 52% of women

staying at the shelter in 2011 were foreign nationals, and a fifth of interviewees.

The proportion of women with foreign background who seek help from the Women’s

Shelter is much higher than their proportion of the total population would suggest, as

around 7% of women in Iceland are foreign nationals and some 9% are immigrants.

The Women’s Shelter annual report says, however, that this very high percentage does

not necessarily indicate that foreign women suffer more domestic violence than their

Icelandic-background peers. The reason could also be that foreign women cannot

always turn to as many friends and family as Icelandic-raised women and therefore

have less options of where to go for help. Nationality is important though, as the

position of women from countries outside the EEA is in many cases worse, even being

reliant on partners/spouses for work permits in some cases (Women’s Shelter, 2013).

When looking specifically at the abusers: a large majority of them are Icelandic, or

about 80% of perpetrators, but they come overall from 26 countries. Around 13% of

them are European, 4% Asian, and 1-2% of them come from the Americas or Africa.

  38  

Child protection

 Figure VII-2 Proportion of children of foreign origin involved in child protection cases. Source: Government Agency for Child Protection, 2012.

Up-to-date information on child protection cases is not available. A Multicultural

Centre report from 2012 states that, according to the Government Agency for Child

Protection, the number of child protection cases has been increasing since 2006, when

they numbered 3,656, though the peak was in 2008. In that year there were 4,265 child

protection cases, which dropped by 118 in 2009 and stood at 4,247 in 2010 (Ari

Klængur Jónsson and Elsa Arnardóttir, 2012). During this time period the proportion

of these cases involving children of foreign origin increased year-on-year, although the

nationality of children investigated on the basis of child protection laws has only been

officially recorded since 2008. In this case “foreign origin” is defined as having one or

both parents/legal guardians of foreign origin, or a mother tongue other than Icelandic

(Government Agency for Child Protection, 2012). In 2008 and 2009, 8% of children

officially discussed in relation to child protection laws were of foreign origin, while an

increase took place in 2010, up to 13%. Comparatively it was most often applied for

the admission for children of foreign origin into rehabilitation centres in 2008: 9% of

children were of foreign origin. In 2009 and 2011 the rate was 8%, and 7% in 2010

(Government Agency for Child Protection, 2012).

Custodial arrangements for children of foreign origin

Last year a report into custodial arrangements for children of foreign origin after the

split of parents was released by the Multicultural Centre and the Icelandic Human

Rights Centre. The results of the research revealed, among other things, that children

of foreign origin were much less likely than other children to be put into joint custody,

and especially in the case of children with Asian or African backgrounds, who were 17

  39  

times more likely to be in the custody of their father than Icelandic children were.

When the parents’ background is examined further is came to light that children in

joint custody were six-times more likely to have their legal address registered with

their father when their mother was of Asian or African origin, compared to children of

Icelandic origin, and it was 78% less likely for children to have their legal addresses

with their father when he was of Asian or African origin, compared to children with

Icelandic origin. Results indicate that the custody arrangements of children of foreign

origin seem to be evolving toward what happens among children of Icelandic origin,

although there is still some way to go, especially when children of Asian or African

descent are involved.

 Figure VII-3 Comparison of custody arrangements of children of Asian/African origin by whether one of their parents is of foreign origin, or both. Source: Ari Klængur Jónsson, 2012.

The research showed an incontrovertible relationship between a child’s background

and custody arrangements, which were first and foremost determined by the parents’

origin. Several possible influencing factors are highlighted which could explain the

differences in custody settlements, including cultural and social issues, but

nevertheless it is not possible to rule out discrimination, whether direct or indirect,

against parents’ background/upbringing. The research results recommend that the

authorities and key stakeholders need to re-examine, at least to some extent, whether

the legal environment and services available to parents involved in custody cases well-

enough take into account people’s differing circumstances; especially those who are

not of Icelandic origin (Ari Klængur Jónsson, 2012). The report can be read in full on

the Multicultural Centre website: www.mcc.is/media/frettir/Forsja-skyrslan.pdf

  40  

VIII. Criminal law

New figures on criminal prosecutions of foreign nationals were not available at the

time of writing this report. The Multicultural Centre report from 2012 states, however,

that the average number of foreign citizens in prison or custody per day was much

higher in 2008-2010 than in previous years. In 2010 there were an average of 26

foreign nationals in prison or custody each day, 23 the previous year, and 24 the year

before that. By comparison, looking at the first years of last decade, the average was

four individuals in prison or custody each day in 2000 and 12 in 2001.

 Figure VIII-1 Average number of inmates with non-Icelandic nationality in Icelandic prisons, per day. Source: Directorate of Prisons, 2012.

Usually a majority of foreign inmates serving sentences in Iceland are registered

residents of other countries. The ratio between the number of foreigners in prison who

live in Iceland and those who do not fluctuates between years, however. In 2009 there

were, for example, 46 prisoners with primary residence overseas out of 67 prisoners

with foreign nationality in the nation’s gaols, compared to 20 prisoners in 2006 that

lived overseas before being sentenced – that year there were 35 foreigners serving

time in Icelandic gaols (Ari Klængur Jónsson and Elsa Arnardóttir, 2012).

  41  

IX. Funding for immigration services

The largest portion of funding provided in this field goes towards the teaching of

Icelandic, and this year that funding amounts to around 131 million krónur, compared

with 127.7 million and 120.9 million in the two previous years. Around 40 million

krónur was put towards the Immigration Council and to activities relating to the

reception of refugees, and 30 million krónur was earmarked for the Multicultural

Centre. In total the amount of annual funding in 2013 amounts to 199.1 million

krónur.

 Figure IX-1 Financing to specific areas 2010-2013. Source: Budget 2010-2013.

The Reykjavík Academy immigration research centre, the Equal Rights House and

Iceland Panorama received a combined total of 5.5 million krónur in state funding in

2011, but nothing in the last two years. In other areas it can be seen that funding to the

Multicultural Centre has been cut severely since 2008, when 43.3 million krónur was

provided for its running. Funding this year though was higher than the previous two,

when 29.6 million and 29.3 million krónur were allotted, respectively. In 2009 the

Immigration Council and the committee on the reception of refugees got 71.5 million

krónur, 48.8 million the next year, 45.1 million in 2011 and 46.3 million last year.

  42  

 Figure IX-2 Immigrant budget issues by number of foreign nationals and current prices. Source: Budget 2007-2013.

Measured in number of krónur, the amount of national budged set aside for

immigration issues has grown fourfold since 2006, when 50 million krónur was

earmarked in the area. Immigration issues received the most money in 2008, when 341

million krónur was provided. Since then the sum allotted from the national budget has

gone down; both in amount, and especially when adjusted for inflation – as Figure IX-

2 shows. In simple terms it can be said that in 2008 the sum of 21,000 krónur was

provided for each foreign citizen in Iceland, compared with around 9,000 krónur in

2013 (amounts are adjusted for inflation). It should be noted when examining these

figures, however, that this only covers state funding directly earmarked each year for

immigration issues. This means it does not cover other connected areas, such as cost to

the Ministry of Welfare for the reimbursement of social services provided to foreign

citizens by local municipalities – as the state treasury refunds municipalities for all

financial assistance given to foreign citizens who have been resident in Iceland less

than two years, or are foreigners in need of emergency assistance. These additional

related costs were 41 million krónur in 2012.

       

  43  

References  

Research, reports and other published material

Ari Klængur Jónsson (2012). Fyrirkomulag forsjár barna af erlendum uppruna – samanburðarrannsókn. Multicultural Centre / Icelandic Human Rights Centre, Ísafjörður. From: http://www.mcc.is/fjolmenningarsetur/utgefid-efni/nr/2256

Ari Klængur Jónsson and Elsa Arnardóttir (2012). Tölfræðilegar upplýsingar um

erlenda ríkisborgara og innflytjendur á Íslandi. Multicultural Centre, Ísafjörður. From: http://www.mcc.is/fjolmenningarsetur/utgefid-efni/nr/2259

Barnaverndarstofa (2012). Ársskýrsla 2008–2010. Government Agency for Child Protection 2012, Reykjavík.

From: http://www.bvs.is/files/file988.pdf

Fjárlög (Budget) 2005–2012. From: http://www.fjarmalaraduneyti.is/verkefni/fjarlog

Hagstofa Íslands (Statistics Iceland) 2012 og 2013. Information obtained from Statistics Iceland website:

www.hagstofa.is

Hagstofa Íslands (2010). Hagtíðindi 2010:3. Statistics Iceland,

Reykjavík. Hagstofa Íslands (2009). Hagtíðindi 2009:1. Statistics

Iceland, Reykjavík.

Karl Sigurðsson and Valur Arnarson (2011). Erlendir ríkisborgarar á íslenskum vinnumarkaði ári[ð] 2011. Directorate of Labour, Reykjavík.

Lánasjóður íslenskra námsmanna ( I c e l a n d i c S t u d e n t L o a n F u n d ) (2013). Information obtained from Fund website:

www.lin.is

Nordic Statistics (2013). Information obtained from Nordic statistics database: http://91.208.143.50/pxweb/pxwebnordic/database/3.%20Population/3.%20Population.asp

OECD (2013). International Migration Outlook 2013. OECD Publishing.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/migr-_outlook-2013-en

Slysaskrá Vinnueftirlitsins ( A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f O c c u p a t i o n a l S a f e t y a n d H e a l t h a c c i d e n t r e g i s t e r ) (2013). From: http://slysatolfraedi.ver.is

Vinnueftirlitið ( A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f O c c u p a t i o n a l S a f e t y a n d H e a l t h ) 2011 and 2012. Information obtained from Administration website:

www.vinnueftirlit.is

Vinnumálastofnun ( D i r e c t o r a t e o f L a b o u r ) (2000–2013). Mánaðarlegar skýrslur um stöðu á vinnumarkaði.

From: http://www.vinnumalastofnun.is/vinnumalastofnun/utgefid-efni-og- talnaefni/manadarlegar-skyrslur-um-stodu-a-vinnumarkadi

  44  

Vinnumálastofnun 2010. Samantekt yfir tölulegar upplýsingar. Directorate of Labour, Reykjavík.

Vinnumálastofnun / Fæðingarorlofssjóður (2010). Samantekt yfir tölulegar

upplýsingar Fæðingarorlofssjóðs 2001–2009. Directorate of Labour / Maternity/Paternity Leave Fund, Reykjavík. From: http://www.faedingarorlof.is/files/Sk%FDrsla%20- %20T%F6lulegar%20uppl%FDsingar%20F%E6%F0ingarorlofs_sj%F3%F0s%20fr%E1%202001 -2009_587989908.pdf

 

Unpublished material and/or specially created

Ari Klængur Jónsson (2008). A Critical Analysis: The Icelandic Immigration Control Policy – Selecting Immigration in Modern Iceland. Thesis at University of Bristol. Fangelsismálastofnun (Directorate of Prisons) (2012). Information compiled for the Multicultural Centre. Multicultural Centre and Icelandic Human Rights Centre (2013). Unpublished research. Maternity/Paternity Leave Fund (2012). Information compiled for the Multicultural Centre. The Women’s Shelter (2011, 2012 and 2013). Information compiled for the Multicultural Centre. Icelandic Student Loan Fund (2012 and 2013). Information compiled for the Multicultural Centre. Ministry of Education and Culture (2011), compiled by Statistics Iceland. Information sent to the Multicultural Centre. Directorate of Internal Revenue (2013). Information compiled for the Multicultural Centre. Directorate of Labour (2012 and 2013). Information compiled for the Multicultural Centre.                          

Upplýsingar | Aðstoð | Ráðgjöf450 3090www.mcc.is mcc@mcc.is

Information | Assistance | Counsel450 3090www.mcc.is/englishmcc@mcc.is

Informacje | Porady | Doradztwo470 4708www.mcc.is/polszczyznapolska@mcc.is

Informacije | Pomoc | Konzultacije470 4709www.mcc.is/serbian-croatianinformacije@mcc.is

www.mcc.is

�cI=UA�� CN=&bC>ZGASI���N?7?R�EN470 4702 www.mcc.is/phasa-thai tailenska@mcc.is

Información | Ayuda | Consejería470 4705 www.mcc.is/spanish spaenska@mcc.is ƐƵƼƶƸƴƨƾưLJ�_�ƗƶƴƶǁDŽ�_�ƒƶƵƹƻƳDŽƺƨƾưư470 4707www.mcc.is/russian russneska@mcc.is

Informacija | Pagalba | Konsultacijos470 4706www.mcc.is/lithuanianlithaiska@mcc.is

www.mcc.is www.fjolmenningarsetur.is