JHR 425 -COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF IMMIGRATION POLICIES IN THE EU AND NORTH AMERICA

P a g e | 1

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF IMMIGRATION POLICIES IN THE EU AND NORTH

AMERICA

1. HISTORICAL CONTEXT AND POLICY EVOLUTION

Conditions of immigration policies in the EU and North America have changed more than once

throughout the years, influenced by history. During the 19th – early twentieth century, there was

a generally liberal immigration policy towards admitting immigrants to both of the regions to

take up land set for settlement and to meet demand for work force. Restrictions came into force

European. As colonial connections declined and programs of recruiting foreign workers ceased

during the seventies, restriction measures were adopted all over Western Europe. Nevertheless,

civil wars in the Middle East, Africa and Balkans at the end of the twentieth century have

stimulated the flow of asylum seekers and refugees; thus, cooperation measures were launched,

for example, the Dublin Regulation determining the responsibility for determining refugee status.

Schengen freedom in travel also made immigration enforcement more manageable and

challenging at the same time. The terrorism incidents of the twenty-first century upped terror

exacerbation and immigration paranoia, although some nations experienced shortages requiring

more immigration. The Syrian refugee and migration crisis of 2015 presented EU collaboration

and burden sharing with some significant questions. Today, immigration continues to be a

P a g e | 2

sensitive topic, with countries of Southern Europe flooded with immigrants entering across the

Mediterranean and politics divided internationally along humanitarian pro-migrant migrant and

Migration movements in Europe and between Europe and North America began after World War

devastation of the war left Europe in a very poor state economically, with labor scarcities in the

relatively well-off countries such as France, Belgium, and the United Kingdom. The need for

such labor coincided with the relative worsening of jobs available in Southern Europe to

encourage the first large batch of workers to seek destinations in the North, sometimes even

under the TWWW programs. During the decade of the 1950s and the 1960s different countries

such as Britain, France, Belgium and West Germany imported immigration workers on a large

scale coming from Italy, Portugal, Spain, Yugoslavia and many other countries. Actually, about 1

emigrated in the fifties. Postwar growing economy of North America was another factor, as with

their growing economy, there emerged as a recurrent need to fill vacant employer positions

P a g e | 3

frequently. B-Origin Europeans, particularly individuals, who were displaced from the various

parts of Europe, were recruited, whereby almost 2 million Europeans immigrated to Canada

and north European cities.

b. The creation of the EU and its impact on migration policies

nationals. As it happened this was a revolution compared to previous decades where migration

policies were nearly exclusively under national governments. Supports like the Schengen

Freedom of Movement region and such systems as the Common European Asylum System

introduced gradual converging. But contradictions are still a combination of power of

supranational regulation within the EU and the sovereignty of members states. Occasions such as

the refugee crisis experienced in 2015 unleashed underlying structural problems leading to an

existential political crisis and the emergence of anti-immigration populist parties in Europe.

However, there are still solid basis upon which Europe’s modern migration laws are drawn,

namely the acquis communautaire of the European Union. These are the 2011’s Single Permit

Directive that aimed at aligning residency and work permits, the 2013’s Reception Conditions

P a g e | 4

Directive to ensure that asylum seekers be accorded basic rights, the 2016 EU Turkey Deal

focusing on controlling irregular migration while the 2021 New Pact on Migration and Asylum

organized in political and cultural terms as to how ideals of humanitarianism, economy, security,

and a genuine Europe may or may not be resolved. However, the existence of a common

framework within the EU has made policy convergence in migration policy within that hitherto

unthinkable before the Maastricht treaty era while at the same time acknowledging that there

remain disparities within implementation.

c. North American immigration history (US, Canada, Mexico)

Immigrants have been the main population and the workforce in United States of America,

United States of Canada, and United Mexican States for the last few centuries. European

expansion and the Atlantic slave trade introduced new people into North American population

which radically changed its makeup. After gaining their independence America and Canada for

instance encouraged immigration to obliterate frontier regions, for employment as well as for

enhancing population density. It could be argued that between 1820 and 1930 more than 32

million Europeans permanently relocated to the United States while Canada also drew on British,

French or other European populations to fill the western frontier as well as agriculture and

industrial development. Immigration influences changed as massive waves of immigrants from

the southern and eastern parts of Europe arrived along with Chinese and other Asians in a more

P a g e | 5

limited numbers around the close of the nineteenth century. This mass influx of diverse groups

put a pressure on the economic welfare, stimulated the ethnic and religious conflicts and led to

War and The Great Depression, but it recovered gradually in the postwar, with America’s

‘bracero program’ and Canada’s seasonal agricultural worker programs that brought significant

number of Mexican laborers. In doing so, these programs facilitated the development over time

of Central-Latin American migrants and generative influence. The immigration reforms and the

act done in the year 1965 and the absence of the national-origin quotas marked the new period of

the mass immigration that brought about a change to North American society. An increase in

family reunification, skilled labor and business and humanitarian immigrants’ admission

categories also depersonalized immigrant sources. The earliest immigrants mainly from Europe

After the Second World War, the European countries and North American countries went on

recruiting foreign labor to meet the scarcity of domestic workforce. France, Germany and the UK

P a g e | 6

as widely searched for workers in the former colonies or among the citizens of Mediterranean

states – Italy and Spain. North America also likewise took in immigrants, the US hired Mexican

placed for the first time quantitive restriction on immigration from the western Hemisphere in

1976. Europe’s Germany put an end to importing Gastarbeiter or having guest workers in 1973

while some other countries placed visa on the immigrants. Finally, it was argued that if

immigration was to be restricted there were good reasons this should be so based on the

economic impacts of immigrants on the natives with regard to both employment competition and

welfare dependence or based on socio- cultural concerns on the compromising of national culture

and identity by immigration. Most industrialized countries of the G did not look for foreign

workers by the era of 1980s and had placed certain bar on low skilled human resource

relax policies once more like special visa for IT experts. However, elitist policies remain given

the ongoing conflict between the requirements of capital for the supply of human capital and

cultural-political concerns about the effects of immigration on host societies.

P a g e | 7

e. Impact of 9/11 on immigration policies

The dreadful events of September 1I primarily affected the immigration laws of the United

States. After the horrific attack on the twin towers in New York World Trade Centre and the

Pentagon in Washington, the policymakers actively started changing the strategic process of the

national security system and revitalizing it devoted purely to counter terrorism. Indeed, this

change of paradigm involved significant transformations of the rules of immigration and border

polities. Members of the legislative branch approved of a number of anti-terrorism laws targeting

foreign terrorists entering US; among them is the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry

Enforcement, USCIS –Citizenship and Immigration Services, CBP – Customs and Border

Protection. These reorganized offices indicate that there was change from a concentration on the

immigration bureaucracy to the consideration of more national security in implementing the

immigration policy. New screening resulted from superior technology and additional patrol

agents at the US-Mexico border sought to politically and physically control the population which

might pose a threat to safety. The REAL ID Act of 2005 ensured that migrants applying for visas

or asylum have to present identification documents that meet higher standards. Moreover, de

Soto’s reform to the immigration policy also widened the causes for deportation. Although 19 of

the hijackers that were involved in 9/11 had entered America legally, the attacks encouraged a

resentment to immigration in general. Federal polices of the Bush era became much more

P a g e | 8

restrictionist in tone and focused on enforcement and deterrence measures against undocumented

Latino migrants despite their inconsequential link with counterterrorism. The drastic changes in

The Syrian refugee crisis that started in 2011 to date, is estimated as the largest refugee crisis,

people on the EU territory have become more effective. For example, the EU- Turkey deal of

March 2016 was designed to stem migration movements by sending back any asylum seekers

who arrived in Greece. As a result of the ‘Covid’ crisis, EU member states have intensified

restrictions on asylum and finally closed the external borders, limited family reunification, and

accelerated the deportations of failed asylum seekers and other migrants with irregular status.

Likewise, the Trump administration in the United States put in place measures that included a

travel ban that paralyzed refugee resettlement, restricting metering asylum seekers at the ports of

entry, another measure was family separation, and the Remain in Mexico policy. Canada also has

reduced the number of refugees who can be granted asylum, and resettlement due to expansion in

refugee claims. The different policy responses also portray the contradiction between nation

P a g e | 9

state’s desire to protect their borders, national security and cultural integrity and their legal and

human rights responsibility to protect refugees under international law. While displacement

and dependent on efforts addressing the drivers of both vulnerability and conflict, development,

and climate change mitigation.

laws and policies have been generally rigorist due to the social demand on the key causes such as

economic impacts, cultural assimilation, and security risks. However, the legal and institutional

factors defining policy measures have considerably differed.

to meet both securitization aims and economic imperatives as well as human rights concerns.

P a g e | 16

century. It is equally important, however, to recognize that there are still strong tensions between

Mexico’s defense of its sovereignty and migrant rights on the one hand and its security concerns,

treaties Mexico has ratified.

f. International conventions and their implementation

adopted into regional and domestic laws by the EU and other North American nations though

some modifications may be present. For example, the EU’s common European asylum system

harmonizes the procedures of determining refugee status among the EU member states, whereas

the USA and Canada have different approaches to the asylum application.

speedy court review. International conventions have had a somewhat weaker effect on

P a g e | 17

International and regional agreements reinforce and extend conventions to rule on particular

migration channels and are concerned with topics such as visa facilitation, the treatment of

regional migration system that exists in North America.

The degree of incorporation of provisions of these myriads of similar international, regional and

bilateral instruments into federal law and administration significantly differs among EU member

states and North American states. Although regional actors such as the EU bodies can force

to naturalization. However, there is no comparable supra national institution that can coordinate

the immigration measures of Canada, the United States and Mexico.

policy, the Schengen Area which covers elimination of control at internal frontiers, and the

P a g e | 18

external borders. This integration shows that the EU wants its member states to be economically

and politically integrated. As for North America, Canada and the United States of America still

The United States has a relatively hard line – the Department of Homeland Security maintains

intensive control to prevent illegals from entering from Latin America through the borders. US-

VISIT introduces programs such as the screening procedures that are even lawful visitors

undergo, they are uglified to take biometric tests. Other nation-states such as Canada have far

more relaxed polices which aim at encouraging as many immigrants to come and boost the

economy rather than have control of migration seen as sheer security necessity. For instance, the

Global Skills Strategy means that high-skill individuals are processed on a two-week visa. They

well as others in Eastern Europe, actively resisted EU plans to relocate asylum seekers first

arriving in Greece and Italy.

reinforced after the 2015-16 migrant crisis and increase in cross-border criminality. A number of

EU member states including France, Austria and Denmark also consequently capped flows for

various reasons. Migrant caravans arriving at the US-Mexico border from Central America in

P a g e | 19

immigration, there are changes expected to take place with corresponding changes in strategies

to control the borders. Comparing the nature of policy changes on both continents allows

Currently the European Border and Coast Guard Agency or just Frontex is one of the most

significant actors of the European Union’s external borders and immigration approaches. Frontex

The main tasks of Frontex includes helping the EU member states at external borders in the

identification of migrants and asylum seekers. For instance, Frontex officers can help the Greek

authorities in identification of the migrants, registration and taking their fingerprints of the

migrants who arrived to the Aegean islands from Turkey. Hence, security clearance is quicker

However, North America does not have a similar entity as external borders force. The borders of

Canada and the United States over land are primary governed by two national organizations

P a g e | 20

which are the U.S Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Canada Border Services

Agency (CBSA). Maritime boundaries largely depend on the U.S. Coast Guard, and the

Corresponding to the rising trend in asylum claims in the EU, Frontex has evolved not only as a

force of prevention of unauthorized migration but also as a coordinator of the asylum seekers’

identification and procedure, as well as management in their assimilation or deportation. In 2022,

Frontex finalized an aerial over 30 million tender for the services to provide coverage over

Africa & Turkey; maritime resources are committed to Greece & Italy in parallel with the border

checks & registrations after an interception. However, critics argue that technology enables

surveillance and state that Frontex’s expanded role may lead to abuse as well as human rights

abuses with too little civil or judicial watchdogs.

b. US-Mexico border policies and enforcement

enhance the control of the southern border, limit arrivals of unauthorized immigrants from

P a g e | 21

the 1990s, the Bush’s and Obama’s proposal and setting-up of the Border Patrol and fencing of

the border areas and Trump’s attempts to build more barriers and declare border emergency. The

the US and Immigration control measures along the border and in the interior of the two

countries work in a way that they contradict the demand for labor and established migration

paths that connect people in the borderland region.

These US border enforcement endeavors can be compared to the EU de-bordering of internal

with the flows via sea routes and the external part of its border wherein people attempt to enter

the Schengen Area the freedom of movement within most of the EU states is quite different from

the heightened border security between the US and Mexico. Canada can be considered a third

example with the relatively short border with the USA, that experiences moderate unauthorized

immigration but relatively high legal temporary migration in the previous period. All have

implicit partisan politics entailing national security, economic, and humanitarian policy in

borders and immigration policies.

c. Canadian border services and entry procedures

Immigration and entry policies in Canada are well guarded to regulate flow and level of

P a g e | 22

agency that oversees the Canadian border and enforces laws in ports of entry. Any people

wishing to enter Canada from other countries are required to present themselves to a CBSA

The measure of hospitality, as well as the entry procedures, may sharply differ depending on the

traveler’s citizenship. Canada besides has specific visa policies in relation to countries that are in

an alliance with it. For instance, persons from Mexico, Western Europe, Australia and Japan can

enter the country Visa free while others Asian, Africans, most Europeans, Middle Eastern and

Some of the hurdles include security checks, finding if an applicant has been refused a visa in the

past, or if the applicant is inadmissible in any way. However, all persons arriving in Canada from

another country must demonstrate to CBSA inspection officers why they should be allowed entry

based on the following standard admissibility factors – character, health, financial resources and

repute to leave Canada.

The EU Schengen area that has no internal control has full border control with the US still

maintained by Canada. However, the two countries have working relations regarding perimeter

P a g e | 23

compromising the national security issues and public health objectives. As a result of above

changes, liberal democracies try to find a balance between authorized mobility and immigration

Use of visas in regulating travel and immigration is an essential aspect of entry policies across

borders constituting the general borders of any geographical region. It stands for 40 percent in

the EU for instance, but is only 3 percent in North America. By mechanisms such as Schengen

The EU allows the nationals of the European Economic Area (EEA) member states to enter the

territory without a visa. Some non-EEA countries also enjoy visa free regime based on mutual

visa waiver agreements. Currently a majority of the people from North America require a visa in

countries have low rejection rates, but they vary with individual member countries.

P a g e | 24

EU free movement principles also allow visa work, and residence later for EEA migrants that

North American policies do not correct. NAFTA facilitated free movement of workers within the

Policies on refugee/asylum visas are also strikingly different – while the EU tries to subsequently

distribute asylum seekers according to the country’s quotas and economic performance.

Ironically, no such burden sharing arrangement exists in North America for the refugees. Visa

and entry policies are the two crucial aspects that regulate immigration flows; therefore, these

EU-North American differences significantly influence migration, particularly from less-

EU and North America countries have employed a number of procedures and measures as border

control and Checkpoint immigration procedures. Every person that is planning to come in is

exchange which include but not limited to fingerprint databases, terrorist watch lists integrated

P a g e | 25

presented by biometric visas include fingerprints, digital photos or iris scans to facilitate identity

tracking. ESTA is an electronic system of the United States of America which calls on visa

Both the EU and North America have also implemented enhanced passenger screening measures

in international airports and ports or any other borderline. They state that air passengers are

frequently asked by immigration or customs officers about the purpose of their visit or the length

of their visit. Border officers check and review documents to ensure the applicant is qualified, to

ensure the applicant has a return ticket and to determine if the applicant is likely to be an

overstayer. Thus, the EU and North America are gradually relying more on technologies and use

programs as Global Entry in the USA, NEXUS in Canada and the Registered Traveler Program

in the EU.

may violate immigration laws, including working or illegal staying. Those that are referred to as

inadmissible are rejected at the port of departure and not at the port of entry. With increasing

global-economic, external involvements or threats and instability migration occurs and through

P a g e | 32

changes, liberal democracies try to find a balance between authorized mobility and immigration

and prevention of irregular migration and incidents.

d. Seasonal and temporary worker programs

Most nations in the developed world have adopted seasonal and/or temporary foreign worker

programs to meet demand for staff in certain sectors and professions that demand a large supply

of low-skill workers for a limited amount of time. These programs enable aliens to hold legal

jobs for limited periods of time and in most instances work in farming, hospitality, construction

per year for the perennial deficits in fruit and vegetable farms, and greenhouses. Participants

usually arrive from Mexico and the Caribbean region under bi-lateral treaties for up to 8 months.

European countries have also sought hiring of seasonal workers from Eastern Partnership

countries, the Balkans and North of Africa particularly in horticulture and tourism. Larger

numbers are seen in Italy, Spain and Germany while destination countries in northern Europe

such as Sweden and Finland have only recently implemented similar programs. The difference is

that in the US and Canada there is an open-ended, employer-centered system with visa available

so long as employers can demonstrate a lack of supply. While most European countries maintain

programs themselves, European programs also provide more opportunities and mechanisms for

P a g e | 33

the immigrant to gain legal status that offers a right of permanent residence in the longer term.

North American schemes offer less worker right and no conversion from temporary to permanent

the subject of discussion in both the American and the European contexts.

e. Brain drain/gain and circular migration

human capital knowledge communities suffer from ‘brain-drain,’ their qualified citizens

migrating to the developed world in search of higher wages and opportunities. This can deny the

developing countries the human talent in development of new ideas, start-ups and healthy

workers in their economies such as scientists, engineers, doctors, pharmacists etc. To lessen the

impact of brain drain on the developing nations some countries try to encourage people to take

up temporary foreign worker schemes to develop their skills as well as encourage the expatriate

citizens to return home with better education qualification and capital. For instance, Canada’s

Provincial Nominee Programs enable people to obtain temporary admission to the country if the

province needs such workers and then look for a way to deport such immigrants, or Mexico has

sought to link emigrants in the US with businesses at home. The EU also understands the

P a g e | 34

importance of ethically sourcing cheap talent internationally without aggravating brain drain in

the developing world. However, continuing demographic divergence, especially the older Europe

work visas, international talent search programs, educational and training partnerships, Diaspora

based on temporary capital remittances, and policy cooperation between the home and host

countries. In conclusion, the regulation of HSMs in a context of Globalized Labor Market needs

understanding and sensitive approach from the governments and employer as well as employees’

states.

f. Labor market tests and protections for domestic workers

Measures like labor market tests which could involve proving that no qualified domestic workers

are available or displaced, then has been used to regulate labor migration in high income

countries. However, failure to pay adequate attention to the type of work has isolated vulnerable

migrant groups. Those who tend our homes, cook our food and clean are mainly women of color

and are mostly immigrant and they do not get the rights other sectors get to have. Thus, the tasks

performed at home are isolated and this makes it difficult for workers to report abuse such as

being forced to work for many hours without pay. In Europe and North America there exist

struggles for domestic work to be recognized but the struggle is/was not for the women’s labor to

be appreciated as such but to be incorporated within the legal frameworks.

P a g e | 35

Although domestic workers constitute a major segment of a strategic sector, their labor remains

marginalized from foundational legal instruments of many nations’ labor laws pertaining to

Despite being laudable initial efforts, there are always the following challenges: Generally,

actualization of these gains for immigrant women who experience tricky immigration systems

and practices lack enforcement mechanisms or the formulation of industry-wide standards.

Similarly, incremental changes in policy also do not effectively address the continuing social

undervaluation of care work that perpetuates significantly lower pay and status of domestic

assignments as compared to distinctly similarly skilled or qualified professions. To

fundamentally raise the status of domestic work, challenging dominant cultural paradigms of

women, family roles and deservingness beyond the scope of employment relations is needed.

The structure of care chains is compared for Western Europe and North America – flows of

migrant women replacing native-born female labor moving elsewhere for better opportunities –

where the migrant admission systems are dissimilar. While destination countries are still

engaging in immigration reforms some of the stated goals such as the reformation of entry

systems with a view to satisfying skilled labor demand or addressing efficient shortages require

P a g e | 36

workers and to recognize such employment as skilled respectively exists and experimental

decentralization of the formulation of best practices may spur more national models. To achieve

Family reunion policies meanings are basically the policies that enable an immigrant to bring

nationals who are permanent residents. EU directives provide for minimum standards and state

that countries must accept applications from nuclear family members, which include spouses,

minor children as well as dependent parents. However, implementation differs – some countries

have obstacles, including minimum income, language proficiency, and long waits till family

P a g e | 37

At the same time, there were relatively powerful rules for family reunification immigration, and

less immigration for overemployment in the United States and Canada. Incoming relatives

Timmermans and Main assets suggest that tighter door mechanisms for admission have also

limited admittance. Canada has not accumulated significant backlogs but also implemented

measures after realizing such threats as marriage frauds.

Although the resettlement of refugees is still an essential value of immigration systems in the

policy variations are actually compounded by core differences in the perception of immigration

as an economic, humanitarian, or security matter. As for the harmonization it is critical to

understand all these dynamics in order to conduct proper comparison.

a. EU Family Reunification Directive

children. About applications submission, the time taken to process the application, the rights of

P a g e | 38

family members. The directive also empowers member states to make provisions with regard to

more beneficial national provisions which has resulted to differential much implementation

Important elements of the directive relate to issues concerning family reunification and the

general discussions on control of migration policies. Specifying which family members are

eligible has been problematic; most commonly, only those in officially recognized marriages are

included. Measures that have also elicited concerns have included long processing times,

stringent evidentiary requirements, and integration measures like language and culture tests,

which have also been accused of unnecessarily limiting family reunion as a gateway to migration

laws. Some field proposals to broaden the category of compromise with member states of an

extended family have been meet with resistances from more restrictionist. How certain EU states

measures in the directive are the bare minimum standards and as such the directive has led to an

increase in immigration and asylum application rates.

criteria varies between the U.S and Canada and their programs have a combination of global

criteria and domestic requirements, the variation is not very different from that which exists

between different states within the EU directive. However, there is no organizational regional

P a g e | 39

changes in relation to priorities of immigration policy and economic conditions. So, whether the

EU model of providing only a baseline of common rights and parameters for naturalization does

The United States of America has one of the largest systems of family-based migration in the

world, and the focus is made on reuniting nuclear families. Unlike many developed countries,

US immigration law a gives high level of preference and preference to individuals who have

their opponents assert that the current system results in continued “chain migration”. Some are

vehement about the economic implications of low skilled workers’ importation while others have

reasons of social solidarity due to ethnic separation. In contrast, European and the other

developed countries give much importance to the migration for skilled workers than the family

reunification. The system of Canada is somewhat similar to that of the US in the manner in

which nuclear families are privileged although to a somewhat lesser extent extended families are

recognized. In general, the discussion remains open whether the United States should change its

approach to the American family-based migration system and select those immigrants according

to their skills, education, and integration potential or continue to respect the traditions of family

reunification as the duties of every human being and a way for immigrants to become successful

P a g e | 40

Americans. Running throughout the debate are profound structural assumptions on philosophies

of Immigration in the world that is becoming a global village.

c. Canadian family sponsorship program

The Canadian program for sponsoring families enables a Canadian citizen or a permanent

resident bring in certain family members to Canada. Included sponsored members are spouses,

common law partners, dependent children, parents and grandparents. Sponsors have to be

earning a minimum income and have a willingness to support(s) their sponsored relative(s) for 3

one of the EU countries, say France, only the spouses and minor children can be sponsored. Also,

the sponsorship applications for spouses and children for Canadian families are completed within

one year unlike in the EU where it takes 16-19months. The income required from sponsors is

also notably lower in Canada than, for example, in the UK and Germany, which are EU

countries. What the US lacks compared to Canada is that, in actual sense, the US has more

family married immigrant entry than Canada. Like in the United States, a green card holder can

sponsor a spouse, children, parents, and siblings; however, under the Canada immigration

system, sibling sponsorship is not allowed. The US also provides a fiancé(e) visa for the foreign

citizen who intends to marry a US citizen within 90 days upon entering the country. Thus, when

comparing the programs for family reunification of North American countries, Canada slightly

P a g e | 41

lags behind only to the USA in terms of efficiency and openness. Some of the differences are that

application processing is faster, and relatives like grandparents are considered compared to many

The concept of a family and which members of it are permitted to reunite differs depending on

the district and stems from the existing attitudes toward family. This is important, for example,

reason, like the broader definition of families when it comes to reuniting transnational families of

culturally diverse arrangements such as polygamous families, which are widespread in most

African and Middle Eastern countries, than the North American assisted policies.

encompass. The fact that reunification is limited to nuclear families reflect policy views in North

P a g e | 48

that policy aim at decreasing importation of immigrant talent and lack of equal distribution of

resettlement among the member states has fueled this. However, the US also has its relative

Exploring and analyzing the evolution of the Canadian refugee determination system reveals a

Board members decide on this principally by using definitions from the Immigration and

Refugee Protection Act and other policy statements.

If his or her claim is refused, an asylum seeker may apply to the Federal Court for judicial

able to get pre-removal risk assessments and may apply for temporary resident permits or

P a g e | 49

humanitarian and compassionate considerations to delay removal if their life will be in danger or

if they will face horrible conditions in their countries when they are returned.

Different from the conventional asylum system in the European Union that most members have

established, the system established in Canada empowers an independent administrative tribunal

to make more decisions than political actors would. It also grants the asylum seekers a legal right

of seeking new decisions through various avenues, in case they get negative decision from the

disposition. This complex process of deciding the refugee status may be believed to adhere to the

principles of procedural justice, which corresponds to the literal and moral sense of the UN

Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol ratified by both Canada and the EU Member

Countries.

d. Safe third country agreements

countries of the world. These undertakings state that the asylum seeker should give his or her

claim in the first safe country that an asylum seeker gets to, and not in other countries. The

United States has such conditional accords with Canada and several of the Central American

states. The Dublin Regulation is used by the European Union and also has provisions that

The rationale behind these policies is to reduce unwanted ad hoc migration through preventing

refugees from ‘shopping around’ for countries they can stay in, to process refugees’ claims in the

first safe country, and to deter lazy asylum states from shifting their responsibilities onto other

countries. However, critics oppose that the safe third country arrangements are violating asylum

seekers’ rights and susceptible populations remain in countries with largely overwhelmed asylum

P a g e | 50

regimes. And standards for which nations are considered safe are also not the same for different

countries.

For instance, the use of the Dublin protocol means that in the last decade the number of migrants

that get stranded in Greece has significantly risen. Asylum seekers have those who reside within

it in the process and hosting them while they wait for their application to be processed. Similar

concerns have been made in the refugee camps in the border regions of the U.S and Mexico as

the U.S reduces on the number of refugees it admits under safe country agreements. In

conclusion, for all the intent of fairly sharing risks, opponents point out that safe third country

policies tend to locate asylum seekers in border areas that are the least prepared to host them.

This results in migrant humanitarian issues and claims that developed countries are shirking

duties on their part.

It has hence become a politically sensitive task to reform the processes of determining safe third

countries. The European Commission has brought changes to the Dublin System that includes

promoting the principle of non-penalization of migration status along with human dignity,

represents an ongoing difficult task. Need for creative policy solutions is especially essential.

e. Reception conditions and support for asylum seekers

EU and North America exhibit a lot of divergence regarding the reception conditions and support

offered to the asylum seekers. The Reception Conditions Directive provides legal requirements

P a g e | 51

governing the basic needs as housing, food and clothing, financial assistance and health

insurance. However, there are significant differences from one member state to the other in the

attend public schools directly while in others, there can be delays before enrollment is permitted.

In North America, the US pays for residing, meals, a restricted amount of healthcare, education,

and a very small sum of money via national charities affiliated with the government. But it

deems that asylum seekers can only apply for work authorization after 6 months have passed.

Canada has traditionally offered more comprehensive federal financial, housing, language

training and employment support in the past but help has diminished in recent years. Moreover,

detention policies offer rather distinct reception conditions – most of the EU member states grant

a limit with regard to detention%, while it stays absolutely unlimited in the United States and is

contexts of immigration enforcement. Current policies address changing pressures - be it the

European refugee crisis putting extra pressure on EU border states or the deterrence model

P a g e | 52

adopted recently across the United States drastically reducing asylum opportunities and initial

guarantees for arriving individuals.

f. Temporary protection statuses

Temporary protection has become an important part of asylum seekers and refugees’ rights in

many countries. These special legal references afford these individuals and families limited legal

standing in addition to employment eligibility and social amenities for asylum seekers in their

home countries due to persecution. Temporary protection is not a new concept for countries of

The Temporary Protection Directive in the European Union was adopted in 2001 in order to lay

agreement also creates homogeneity where necessary, standardizes rules and conditions between

EU states. Temporary protection status in accordance with this directive allows for residence

permits, employment rights, housing, social assistance state benefits, access to health care, and

education for children. In its first instance, it is only for one year, but can be renewed for up to

P a g e | 53

Individual European states have their policies in regards to offering various types of temporary

form of humanitarian protection beyond what EU requires. Such compliment status as refugee

In North America, the concept of refugee protection has the United States providing Temporary

Protected Status (TPS), Deferred Enforced Departure (DED), and administrative parole for those

who cannot return to their country safely. These have been applied to individuals from countries

such as El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Nepal, Nicaragua, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Syria,

Yemen when it was unsafe for individuals to be repatriated. Canada has not employed normal

TPMs to extent but collaborates with UNHCR to grant some refugees temporary protection for

addressing challenging policy issues such as border control or reducing the number of people

admitted for resettlement purposes.

knowledge tests or ‘integration contracts.’ Barriers to integration include limited socio-economic

P a g e | 54

to such values as equal rights for women and more emphasis on the Self rather than the group.

Methods of integration include passing of laws against discrimination, employment of

There is no integration policy in the United States or Canada since both nations represent

themselves as countries of immigrants. Intention takes place via the education system, the

association of nonprofit organizations, faith organizations, and through the work. Some major

threats are the exclusion of undocumented immigrants from most public facilities, poverty rates

higher among some immigrants, post-9/11 racial profiling and detention, especially among

Muslims, backlash against bilingual education and a bipolarization of identity and integration

debate. Strategies for integrating immigrant newcomers in the workplace focus on workplace

immigration reform that includes a realistic path to citizenship.

newcomers’ limited access to integration opportunities combined with socially negative

discrimination of immigrants in both regions. Policy harmonization therefore requires extensive

policy strategies that cover aspects such as immigrant’s legal status, education and employment,

P a g e | 55

a. EU integration action plans and funding

The European Union has come up with a number of action programs and financial models for the

absorption of immigrants and refugees in European societies. The present action plan is the 2016

Action Plan on Integration of Third-Country Nationals, which encompasses an action plan and

support measures that the EU states may use to develop and bolster their national integration

strategies. This plan deals with pre-departure and pre-arrival actions, awareness raising activities,

employment and the labor market, various services and opportunities, social inclusion, and

measures for special attention to specific populations. Of greater concern, the Action Plan

education, health, training, shelter and increasing the positive communications between residents

through migrant orientation classes and multicultural exercises.

States and Canada are incapable to make top-down integration action plans in the twenty first

century, the multicultural culture of the EU aims at making the EU large inclusive to immigrants

P a g e | 56

through standardized plans supported by multiple year’s funding of standard euro amount at

adequate scale. More cross-national research can then assess these policies based on other factors

b. US integration initiatives (federal, state, local)

pioneer in progressive integration policies via actions that open up insurance, higher education,

and workplace regardless of immigration status. The state included undocumented immigrants

into the categories eligible for obtaining a driver’s license as well as professional and for children

opening Medicaid. Locally, in New York City under Mayor Bloomberg both assimilationist

strategies and multicultural ones were adopted and include English and civics classes, refugee

task force, ID cards policies, and equal access policies. Chicago, Houston, Seattle and other

important cities of the country have made similar provisions. Various studies suggested that local

integration policy in the context of the United States has the potential to facilitate immigrant

economic, social and political incorporation. It should also be noted that the subnational

involvement is rather different from the overall EU tendency toward using national level

P a g e | 57

initiatives. Initial empirical evidence indicates that proactively engaging the extrapolation of

integration policies at the regional, municipal and community levels may prove to be more

cities that is most notable points toward integration as something everyone carries as a part of

their nationality and not just a burden on the backs of immigrants to figure out on their own.

another genuine difference from the assimilation models is that ‘true multiculturalism can admit

immigrants as Westerners on their own terms – not forcing them to deny their ethnic roots’. The

policy also declares rights of every person in Canada to protect, develop, and transmit their

cultural identity to ensure multicultural existence in the country. Examples of mundane

multicultural policies and programs include support for cultural endeavors and anti-racisms,

cultural or religious needs, representation of multicultural population in public media, extra

services for immigrants, multicultural education and heritage language in schools, protection

from discriminations in the constitution. The impact assessment of multiculturalism policy in

Canada, and its comparative assessment with European context shows relatively higher levels of

social and economic incorporation and social inclusion. For instance, the experience of the first

P a g e | 64

or any internal EU migrant. For many years, the countries in North American region have been

more welcoming to the talent and refugee population of the world, as indicated by higher innate

volatile and undefined for the population of the EU compared to that of North America.

a. Citizenship laws in EU member states

many EU states have mixed it with some tinge of jus soli, a principle which confers citizenship

on the basis of territory of birth. For instance, Germany primarily observe jus sanguinis but kids

born in Germany to alien parents may naturalize if they fulfill specific residency test. Decision

about citizenship of second or third generation immigrants is made by France and Britain.

hold anti-immigrant political attitudes, however the relationship is anything but straightforward

P a g e | 65

toward immigration, have integrated many immigrants relatively recently. Duration of the

residency term before naturalization can also affect the level of integration or the reverse,

Citizenship policies bear severe relations with immigration admissions policies that every

member state of the country has the discretion to set. The conflict is evident between the liberal

cosmopolitan views, such as those of Sweden, and the France’s French variant laïcité which in

the matter of immigration is intolerant of any assertation of cultural or religious particularism in

public life. Modern society has been coming up with daily discussions that try to balance

between unity and conformity on one side, and difference and inequality on the other. The recent

rise of nationalist political parties all over the European Union will definitely changing some

citizenship policies, in places like Austria and Hungary, which will restrict eligibility for future

Union states which are not very culturally diverse.

b. US citizenship requirements and processes

Amid obtaining the US citizenship, there are legal measures that have to be met and this has

employment, and possibly criminal records background check. Applicants take a set of

P a g e | 66

confirmed, and records searched for grounds for disqualification. Then there is the civics and

English test which consists of a number of questions on the American history, government,

applicants participate in the Oath Ceremony where they vehemently exclude the previous

pledges while embracing commitment to the U.S Constitution. Citizenship then is accorded here

and at this point in the process, individuals are awarded citizenship. Substantial work is achieved

within a time frame of ten months on an average. This is a lot slower than some EU countries

who have a quicker process. For instance, the laws in France and Germany require children to

live in the country for at least 2-3 years before they can be naturalized. The United Kingdom

apparently has a multi-hierarchical mode of categorizing the citizens, and the fastest route to

citizenship takes 3 years. Hoping their tariffs starting from 0 to 00 according to the country.

several years spent living, paying taxes, contributing in that country. The other countries also

have the same concern with regards to immigrants’ integration but with a more affirmative

P a g e | 67

approach embraced. Such policy differences point out more profound cultural beliefs regarding

the immigrants’ place in society.

c. Canadian citizenship criteria and procedures

The procedure of obtaining the citizenship of Canada is highly defined based on the residence,

language, Canadian history and values and other factors. Applicants for naturalization had to

have been physically present in Canada for at least 3 out of the previous 5 years and anyone who

has been living in Canada before obtaining PR status counts towards the physical presence

the applicants are required to fill an application with supporting documents, pay fees, be finger

printed and pass various identification tests and finally swear the appropriate oath of allegiance.

Taken verbally during a more extensive ritual, this oath is to follow the Canadian monarch and

observe the rights and duties of a Canadian citizen. Once the applicants are approved, they are

issued with a citizenship certificate and will be eligible for a Canadian passport. These includes;

They obtain right to vote, eligibly to stand for an elective post, and protection under cross border

by Canadian consular agents. In comparison with some EU countries Canadian naturalization

emphasizes language proficiency, the knowledge of the institutions and values, as well as

declaration of the applicant’s loyalty to the political body. This is different with jus sanguinis EU

countries where by certain people are given citizenship by reason of family relationship. In this

P a g e | 68

regard, it is noteworthy that Canada has for example a shorter required period of residence than

some of the EU countries. It has also strict condition to consider something as criminal or health

d. Dual citizenship policies

countries like Germany and Austria have always frown on this type of arrangement by insisting

that anyone who has been granted citizenship, must relinquish all other citizenships. However, a

few countries in the EU have in recent past liberalized their policies to employ the highly skilled

migrants. These diverse measures are sometimes best understood as being based on ideological

assumptions about nationalism or multiculturalism.

merely swearing that he or she has no intention of keeping up foreign attachments. But the

P a g e | 69

before becoming citizens of this country. Contrary to the past when dual citizenship was

considered as amounting to having divided loyalties, it is embraced by Americans. Canada

The EU and North American approaches contrast and identify philosophical differences in

action. Some policies raise questions of sovereignty, growing supra-governmentalism and

shifting definitions of EU identity, between liberal and restrictive forces. Policies of North

American countries, on the other note, show adherence to birthright models that undeniably lead

to widespread toleration of the second degree of dual nationality. However, acceptance of dual

perceptions and practices on the second citizenship influencing the citizenship and naturalization

policies in America and Europe.

Germany and France, use tests that check an immigrant’s understanding of languages, cultures,

P a g e | 70

improved assimilation and demonstrate the willingness of an immigrant to adapt and embrace the

new nation. However, critics have argued that difficult exams and language rules acting as

Different countries have highly varying approaches to outlining what needs to be tested and how

the test should be conducted. North American tests are focused on questions about the US and

Canadian Constitution, and civic issues only, while European exams include questions about

national history, tradition, and manners. The UK Life in the UK test is ridiculous for asking

questions like the age of Big Ben and not asking the year in which women got the right to vote.

Another area has to do with administrative procedures that vary from one country to another.

Though the Canada test may be taken orally if required, in the USA there are only possibilities of

waiver off the requirements for the applicants of certain age and length of stay only. Therefore,

communication in English or French, US, Netherlands and Austria require much closer to native-

like English/Flemish/German respectively. While embracing multiculturalism, languages

standards might compromise on particular minority groups in these nations.

policies that advance integration interests and stifle naturalization. Proponents of strict

naturalization requirements countered that the latter enables them to select only immigrants most

eager to embrace the rights and duties of democratic citizenship. But critics argue, citing

P a g e | 71

naturalization that were intended to enable rather than hinder equal belonging. In conclusion, the

use of these citizenship assessment tools in integrating immigrants and endorsing the

Birthright citizenship, jus soli, has greatly debated in the recent years, mostly in Washington.

citizen or permanent resident parent. Meanwhile, most European countries practice jus sanguinis

– the principals by which citizenship is derived from parents rather than the place of birth. For

instance, Germany has recently increased requirements for a similar reason due to its citizens

having children for the purpose of gaining EU citizenship for the child.

citizen or must be an Australian resident and at least one of the parents must be an Australian

P a g e | 72

between human rights as well as practical considerations of how to enforce those rights and

public opinion about one of the most private – although official – matters: who is to be

9. IRREGULAR MIGRATION AND ENFORCEMENT

problems of irregular migration flow and immigration enforcement, but their policy measures

distinguished themselves significantly.

Within the EU, the area without internal borders is called the Schengen area which is based

the EU. It also contributed to extend votes for even punitive types of immigration policies from

P a g e | 73

by side with preservation of laws on asylum as well as the rights of refugees. For instance,

Frontex, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, is upping cooperation to improve

In North America it has been more largely on strong Immigration enforcement by country border

and interior patrol agents. Hence, in the U.S. for instance, the solution to the issue of unlawful

immigration has assumed the proportion of partisan politics in relation to security and cultural

sovereignty. The militarization of the borders especially the US- Mexico border with Department

of Homeland Security has influenced the movement of the’ aliens’ in more dangers routes. Also

disputably, the U.S. also indefinitely detains or quickly deports may asylum seekers under

restrictive measures. Similarly to the US, Canadian approach to enforcement is also grounded in

political phenomena that shape migrant intent as well as governments’ responses to irregular

movements across the Atlantic. Nevertheless, the selected policy tools and rights frameworks

used demonstrate some discrepancies between NA and EU attitudes toward border management,

refugees’ obligations and noncitizens.

a. EU Return Directive and deportation policies

deportation actions, entry restrictions and their preconditions, detention standards, as well as the

P a g e | 80

f. Employer sanctions and worksite enforcement

Most liberal democratic states practice employer sanctions that are the actions taken against

employers for hiring the irregular migrant and the worksite enforcement measures that have been

adopted with the purpose of identifying the unauthorized employee employer relationship. These

policies have developed from awareness that limitation of employment opportunities can in real

sense discourage such movements in the EU and North America. Nevertheless, there are

differences in the implementation and the extent of such measures. For example, in the 1990s the

United States federal government passed legislation against the ‘knowing employment of aliens’,

raids, while others chose less harsh measures and merely administrative ones. Major EU

countries have harmonized with most employer sanctions measures over the past decade through

implementation of corresponding Directives that set fines for the employment of illegals. All the

same, there remain differences in the degrees of stringency of inspection regimes and

enforcement intensity. Also, E-Verify and Social Security No-Match letter programs of US are

more overall electronic employment verification than typically from Europe. Other critics such

as Anna Tri and Afyllidou have specified that it is still more of a debate whether such employer-

focused restrictive measures can work. Although they have increased the risks and costs for the

companies to employ them, there is not much empirical support as to massive decrease in

employment opportunities for irregular migrants and changes in their behavior concerning

P a g e | 81

migration decisions. The core employment incentives remain intact, employers are willing to

take the more minor penalties as the price to pay for doing business. The same critics also claim

The policy on immigration continues to be a knotty and sensitive problem in Europe and North

In Europe, the ever-lingering refugee crises that are as a result of conflicts around the Middle

disagreement among the members. Despite individual countries like Germany and Sweden

having opened their doors to refugees the EU has been accused of an insufficient collective

effort. Other problems are how to deal with economic migration from younger EU states and

how to create common control over ‘exit’ borders. Populist parties have managed to increase

On the future course, the EU has to maintain between humanistic paradigms, fiscal efficiency,

and an ever-growing dissatisfied populace. It may increase the refugee resettlement in the

countries while increasing the security of external borders. Additionally, more cooperation with

the migrant origin and transit countries is anticipated to occur. For its part, widely acceptable

P a g e | 82

governance of migration within the EU is needed not only for the future of the individual EU

member states but also for the future of the EU project as a whole.

In North America the now long-standing issues in the United States are the argument about the

legalization of immigrants and the norms on the borders. Conflicts and poverty push the common

Central American out to seek better asylum in the US even as the immigration service shuts its

doors tighter and more difficult to penetrate. Restricting immigration has been a policy priority

of Trump from the erection of a wall at the Mexico border to banning people from certain

countries, to arresting immigrants. Thus, the US also remains in struggle with understanding of

what the immigration reform’s history was and might be. Canada has been more welcoming

especially to skilled refugees and immigrants but like any other country has faced internal clamor

concerning integration of immigrants.

Going forward, immigrant intake and the issues surrounding immigration will not fade into the

background. It means that in the nearest future, the Americans will face very essential decision

integrating migrants into national communities.

a. Impact of climate change on migration patterns

According to forecasts, climate change will remain one of the key migration impulses in the

post-century period. Arising out of global warming, corrections in climate, increased natural

catastrophe incidences, and unpredicted changes mean that some parts of the world may become

P a g e | 83

or are becoming uninhabitable. Forced displacement could increase to 200 million people due to

climate change by 2050 suggest the specialists. This has major consequences for migration and

systems of immigration will be on the receiving end. The crisis situation may arise where it is

necessary to contemplate introducing new types of legal immigration schemes for climate

refugees. This might involve amendment of law in order to categorize environmental issues as

reason for humanitarian status. It may also expect more global integration and coordination

and/or globalization of obligations. The EU is arguably better placed than North America to

come up with a coordinated regional response since it has a common immigration policy regime.

However, both regions are devoid of sound policies on how to address climate migration. If

flows of displaced peoples become uncontrollable, failure to pre-empt this emerging challenge

time for a more tactical process. Struggles of Migrants: Challenges addressed to immigration

politicians require tailoring immigration systems to ensure that displaced persons on grounds of

environmental factors have referral to legal migration.

P a g e | 84

b. Demographic challenges and immigration

The decrease of birth rates plus the increase of the life span is one of the greatest issues of

demographic life cycle which is occurring in many developed countries across Europe and

America. This is leading to a problem of labor scarcity, also in some areas of economy and

pressure on social security systems due to fewer people paying for more pensions and pensions

recipients. As a result of population ageing, talent gaps and mismatches that are now looming,

several countries are eyeing immigration as the solution. But, correctly setting goals for

immigration policy and its intensity causes complex issues. High levels of cultural diversity due

Many EU countries like Germany and France allow skilled workers in healthcare, engineering

the service sectors require to employ increasing retiring baby boomers are some of the

difficulties.

P a g e | 85

The three case-study countries have high ageing population creating pressure on them to seek

higher levels of immigration, for humanitarian as well as economic reasons. However, deciding

Over the last few years, there has been rising fascist and nationalist movements in Europe and

whine about loss of job opportunities, spending on immigrants and refugees and threats to the

national culture. This is true since high profile terror incidents conducted by the extremism also

influence anti-immigrant reactions. Centrist parties, in particular, find more restrictionist reforms

consistent with their electoral platforms as a reaction. First and foremost, this renewed global

trend of nationalist protectionism will present a major question to the future of a successful

integration of immigrants within the societies of the Western democracies. It becomes possible to

certify that the US as well as other leading European states may tend towards continuance and

multilateral enhancement of selective, more stringent immigration policies prioritizing the

admission of skilled personnel in comparison with humanitarian and family reunion programs.

This poses a danger of enhancing polarization and economic disparities as well as eroding on

P a g e | 86

standards of diversity equity and reasonable benchmark of equal protection, nondiscrimination

and basic human rights for all. This can also frustrate future policy coordination on issues of

d. Technology and AI in immigration management

claims. On the other hand, the US and Canada investigate employing algorithmic technologies to

prescreen the applicants for a visa based on the features in the biometric and electronic records.

Friends of such change argue that it improves efficiency, decrease costs and enhances the

nation’s security. However, critics opine that relying too much on those technologies without

their supervision compromises civil liberties while maintaining organizational bias and

nontransparent, self-serving decisions.

current priorities are the measures to improve the framework of safeguarding information and

P a g e | 87

strengthening the public confidence. As more distinct segments of our society involve a degree

of AI automation with include machine learning, policymakers need to decide for limitations

When, however, technology is managed responsibly with democratic check and balances, it

harbors the ability to fashion the kind of immigration system that is responsive and humane for

the twenty first century. However, it is equally important to remember that there are potential

dangers of misuse, ulterior motives or going overboard /unintended negative outcomes which

cannot be ruled out. Striking a balance between high-technology border control and immigrants’

rights remains one of the Hallmark struggles that define the future of immigration policy makers.

The periodic demands for regional co-ordination in the context of immigration policy, on the one

hand, and the appeals to national sovereignty in formulating migration policies, on the other

hand, are irreconcilable. Where EU policy-making initiatives are concerned with harmonizing

aspects of the member states’ immigration policies, or with the creation of common mechanisms,

the questions of how to strike the right balance between integration and sovereignty are regularly

raised. Critics say that lodging of such a regional approach transgresses national jurisdictions in

an especially sensitive field. Nevertheless, its supporters believe that issues connected with

migration and integration in the global context cannot be solved separately. Compton, J., &

Kaun-Ferris, M. Indeed, similar controversies have arisen in North America; however, they are

P a g e | 88

more central to border protection as an aspect of immigration policy than to immigration

admission and rights. Events arising after the arrival of a large number of illegals and asylum

source of pressure in future, which will inevitably force member states to cascade in agreeing on

how to address this issue in the long run. However, translating this recognition into willingness

to adopt legally binding regional treaties will always be hard as long as there is no consensus on

the right burden-sharing. That said, it appears that Europe’s populist parties are well on course to

maintain politically exploiting public concern over perceived eroded sovereignty to anti-

integration governing parties. Similar to the attempts to strike out an effective balance between

border security and North American trade freedom, the following disputes are typical proper

controversies. Here regional cooperation is more inclined on exchanging information and

f. Post-COVID-19 immigration policy shifts

Immigration policies have been considerably influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic in the

countries of both the Americas and Europe. As borders have been shut and movements restricted,

there has been a rethink of the programs and propositions. When the post Covid19 world comes,

adjustments of immigration policy will still be as a result of the economic and a demography

factors, as well as some kind of political realignment. Older people and skill gaps, made worse

by lower immigration due to COVID-19, will fuel even less restricted, skills-based policies

P a g e | 89

targeting immigrants as workers. To fight the effects of aging population, and to boost economic

recovery from Covid-19 impacts, Canada launched its new 2021-2023 Immigration Levels Plan

accepting the Afghan refugees. Future policies in Europe on the other hand will be a careful

attempt at both addressing economic migratory necessities and pressures in the direction of

restrictive and securitized policies. North America is generally more supportive of immigration

than other regions and new challenges in the social and economic spheres, directly connected to

the growth of the pandemic, may increase pressure on this consensus. More visa processing pile-

ups can also affect the immigration system’s ability to adapt to constantly shifting post-COVID

circumstances. All in all, the effects of COVID-19 on mobility have led to overarching policy

measures that will inevitably help determine the course of future immigration. Immigration