Sammanfattning av publikation

Jutvik & Robinson, 2018 🔗

Limited time or secure residence? A study on the short-term effects of temporary and permanent residence permits on labour market participation

Year: 2018

Type of text: Working paper

Published by:  Department of Economics, Uppsala University

Language: English

Author: Kristoffer Jutvik & Darrel Robinson

Pages: 32

Available at:

Short description of text 

The study is a quantitative quasi-experiment using the Migration Agency’s decision to grant all Syrians permanent rather than temporary residence permits in September 2013. The authors compare the labour market outcomes for Syrians that had been granted temporary residence permits in September 2012 with those that received permanent residence permits in September 2013.

Most important results

“Our conclusions are twofold. On the one hand, we conclude that temporary residents that are subject to a relatively less-inclusive situation earn more and are unemployed less. However, at the same time, they are less likely to spend time in education than are those with permanent residency.” (abstract)

“In our view then, the issue should be viewed as largely normative. Rather than debate whether one approach will lead to greater inclusion than the other, focus should be shifted to discussing the type of inclusion that the different approaches are likely to provide.” (4) 

Theoretical perspective/framework

“In short, responsibilities-based models argue that individuals need to make an effort to belong, whereas rights-based models perceive individual rights as the driver of inclusion. Of particular focus has been residency status. Responsibilities-based models argue that migrants should be given short-term permits subject to re-evaluation for which only those that succeed in integrating into the labour market should be given right to stay. Rights-based models on the other hand argue that migrants should be given permanent residency, and that this right to stay should not be conditional on labour market inclusion.” (2)


quasi-experiment [because of policy change] (3)

“We analyze the data through a simple difference-in-means as well as through comparison to groups unaffected by the policy in a difference-in-differences design and a synthetic control group approach.” (abstract)

“This group of individuals, those that applied before [September 2013] but for whom a decision was taken after the change in policy, make up our treatment group.” (8) All those granted asylum in September 2013 (9)

“We define our control group as all individuals from Syria that were granted residency in September of 2012, exactly one year prior to our treatment group.” (9)

“In general, the labour market conditions for our two groups were largely equal, if not slightly beneficial to the 2013 cohort of permanent residents. “ (10)

Suggestions for further research

“Our findings advocate for further research into how other outcomes are affected by the shift from temporary to permanent residency – or similar shifts in the rights – and responsibilities-based migration framework. While we study labour market inclusion in the short-term, migration policy is wide-ranging and its potential outcomes innumerable. So while our conclusions are drawn in relation to labour market inclusion, it is entirely plausible, and indeed likely, that other outcomes such as inclusion along social, political, or migrant well-being dimensions could be more clearly differentiated along empirical lines.” (19-20)

Summarized by: Josefin Åström