EU-MIDIS II Main results Q&A

European societies are ethnically and culturally diverse. This enriches society but can also challenge social cohesion and respect for fundamental rights. To assist the EU and its Member States develop evidence-based policies to combat social exclusion and discrimination, as well as to promote free and pluralist societies and social justice, the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights’ (FRA) conducts surveys to collect experiences and views of people belonging to ethnic minorities and migrants groups who live in the EU.

These surveys provide the most extensive dataset available on minorities and immigrants  in the EU. The survey findings and the recommendations help assess the effectiveness of a wide range of measures in the areas of integration, non-discrimination and hate crime.

The survey was based on face-to-face interviews in 2016 with over 25,000 people from different immigrant and ethnic minority groups in all 28 EU Member States.

All respondents were selected randomly (except in Luxembourg). The survey results are representative for the selected ethnic minority and immigrant groups. This  includes immigrants born outside the EU (first generation) and descendants of immigrants with at least one parent born outside the EU (second generation). More detailed information can be found in the technical Q&A.

This survey builds on the first EU-MIDIS survey in 2008.

Respondents were asked about their experiences of discrimination, crime victimisation (including hate crime), profiling and policing as well as rights awareness. They were also asked for information about civic and political participation, their personal situation and living conditions, as well as basic socio-demographic characteristics.

The survey is based on interviews with people belonging to ethnic minorities – Roma and Russians – as well as people who have arrived from outside the EU (1st generation immigrants) or people with at least one parent born outside the EU (2nd generation). The selected immigrant target groups included those from Turkey, North Africa, Sub Saharan Africa and (South) Asia. In Poland and Slovenia recent immigrants were surveyed (people born outside the EU and who immigrated to these two Member States in the 10 years before the survey). Between one and three target groups were selected per country.

This report presents results for all survey groups from the EU-MIDIS II survey. It covers: discrimination and rights awareness; hate crime including harassment and violence; police stops; citizenship, trust and tolerance; and socio-economic situation.

• 38% felt discriminated against because of their ethnic or immigrant background in the five years before the survey.
• North Africans (45%), Roma (41%) and Sub-Saharan Africans (39%) are particularly affected.
• Those who felt discriminated against indicate that this happened, on average, at least five times a year, which shows that discrimination can be repetitive.
• Discrimination happens across many areas of life but is greatest when looking for work (29%), looking for housing (23%), at work (22%) or when dealing with public administrations, on public transport or shopping or going out (22%).
• 59% of those discriminated against when receiving healthcare, and 50% of those discriminated against when looking for work, felt that discrimination was due to their skin colour or physical appearance.
• 44% of those discriminated against when looking for housing, and 36% of those discriminated against when looking for work, felt that they had been discriminated against because of their first or last names.

• 67% know that discrimination based on ethnicity, skin colour or religion is unlawful in their country.
• 71% do not know any organisations offering support to victims of discrimination. 62% did not recognise any of the equality bodies in their country.
• Among respondents who reported their experience of discrimination, only 4% reported it to their national equality body.

• 24% experienced harassment because of their ethnic or immigrant background in the year before the survey.
• Roma have the highest rate (30%) of hate-motivated harassment in the year before the survey, followed by immigrants and their descendants from North Africa (29%).
• Harassment motivated by hatred was more widespread among second generation respondents (32%) when compared with first generation immigrants (21%). In addition, 50% of second generation victims had been harassed six or more times in the year before the survey.
• Women victims of hate-motivated violence are more likely to know the perpetrator, compared with men. For example, 20% had been attacked by a neighbour compared with  9% of men.
• 25% know someone in their circle of family or friends who has been insulted because of their ethnic or immigrant background in the year before the survey.

• 12% of respondents who felt discriminated against reported the most recent incident. In the 2008 survey the rate was 18% .
• 10% reported hate-motivated harassment to a relevant authority or service.
• 28% reported hate-motivated violence to the police or another organisation.
• This is consistent with findings of other victimisation surveys. FRA’s research has consistently shown that victims of hate crime – LGBTI people, Jews, women who have been victims of gender-based violence – are often reluctant to report incidents to the police.

• North Africans (45%), Roma (41%) and Sub-Saharan Africans (39%) indicate the highest levels of discrimination based on ethnic or immigrant background in the five years before the survey.
• Substantial differences in experiences of discrimination can be found between certain countries and people living in particular EU Member States. For example:
  • The lowest rates are experienced among respondents from the Russian minority in Estonia (7%), Latvia (6%) and Lithuania (4%).
  • The highest 12-month rates of ethnic discrimination are experienced by respondents from Sub-Saharan Africa in Luxembourg (50%) and Finland (45%), from North Africa in the Netherlands (49%), and by Roma in Greece (48%) and Portugal (47%).
• The highest 12-month prevalence of hate-motivated harassment was recorded among Roma in the Czech Republic (56%), Roma in Greece (50%), Sub-Saharan Africans in Finland (47%), South Asians in Greece (41%) and North Africans in the Netherlands (40%).

• Substantial differences in experiences can be found between certain countries. For example:
  • High discrimination rates for respondents with Sub-Saharan African backgrounds over the past year are observed in Luxembourg (50%) and Finland (45%). The lowest rates were noted in Portugal (17%) and the UK (15%). For North Africans the highest rates are in the Netherlands (49%) and the lowest rates in Spain (21%). Roma respondents indicated feeling most discriminated against in Greece (48%) and Portugal (48%) and least discriminated against in Bulgaria (14%).
  • The highest 12-month hate-motivated harassment rates for Roma are in Czech Republic (56%) and Greece (50%). They are much lower in Bulgaria (12%), Hungary (18%) and Portugal (20%). There is also a large difference among respondents from Sub-Saharan Africa ranging from highs in Finland (47%), Ireland (38%) and Luxembourg (38%), to lower rates in the UK (13%), Malta (14%) and Portugal (15%).

• In some Member States discrimination in the past year can vary substantially between the target groups in the same country. For example:
  • Other notable differences are found between respondents from Sub-Saharan Africa and Turkey in Austria (42% vs 28%), Denmark (41% vs 26%), Sweden (38% vs 19%) and Germany (33% vs 18%) and between respondents from North Africa and Turkey in the Netherlands (49% vs 39%).
  • The biggest difference between groups can be observed in Portugal between Roma (47%) and Sub-Saharan Africans (17%).
• Hate-motivated harassment can also vary within countries:
  • In Belgium, in the past year, there was a marked difference between respondents from North Africa (38%) and those from Turkey (16%)
  • Similar differences were found between respondents from Sub-Saharan Africa and Turkey in Germany (35% vs 22%), Denmark (33% vs 23%) and Sweden (32% vs 19%).

• 14% of all respondents were stopped by the police in the year before the survey.
• Of those who had been stopped, 40% felt it was because of their immigrant or ethnic minority background.
• North Africans and Sub-Saharan Africans indicate they were stopped by the police more frequently than the other groups surveyed.
• Police appear to stop men more often than women across all groups.
• Young respondents are more frequently stopped. Every third young immigrant from North Africa and Turkey was stopped by the police in the five years before the survey.
• 58% were stopped while in a car.
• 59% of those who were stopped by the police during the past five years before the survey say that they were treated respectfully.

• 77% feel strongly attached to their country of residence.
• 74% of first-generation respondents are national citizens or have residence permits valid for at least five years.
• Respondents’ trust in public institutions is often higher than the trust among the general population. Immigrants and ethnic minorities have the highest trust in local authorities, followed by the police and the legal system.
• Trust in public institutions is lower among the second generation in almost all countries and target groups, but especially in France and the United Kingdom.
• 95% indicate they are comfortable or neutral with respect to having neighbours with a different religion or ethnic origin.
• However, respondents who have been victims of discrimination, harassment or violence because of their ethnic or immigrant background feel considerably less attached to the survey country than those who have not been in these situations.

• Fewer respondents aged 16‑64 had completed at least upper secondary education (61%) compared with the general population aged 15-64 (74%) in 2016.
• Roma respondents across nine Member States report the lowest level of education compared with other groups interviewed in the survey. Roma also have the highest levels of not continuing in education.
• 71% of all respondents say that they are proficient in speaking, reading and writing the national language of their country of residence; 4% of respondents cannot read in the language of the country where they live.
• 61% of working age respondents were working in the four weeks before the survey. This is below the average EU-28 general population employment rate of 71% in 2016.

• The results show little progress compared to the first EU-MIDIS survey in 2008 despite the numerous laws and policies in place: many immigrants and ethnic minorities experience discrimination, physical violence and harassment motivated by hatred, and many are unaware of relevant laws to protect them, and how to seek help.
• Overall, Roma respondents and respondents with Sub-Saharan or North African background – and in particular second generation respondents – continue to experience higher rates of discrimination, harassment and violence motivated by hatred, compared with other groups.
• Non-reporting of discrimination and a lack of awareness of organisations to turn to also remain issues.

• Taking legal action to combat ethnic and religious discrimination and hate crime in all areas of life such as employment, housing and healthcare.
• Reducing the barriers ethnic minorities, immigrants and their offspring face when looking for work and at work. This includes combatting potential unconscious bias through for example introducing name-blind recruitment policies; monitoring discriminatory and anti-discrimination training for employers.
• Supporting outreach activities and work with minority groups to, for example, reinforce trust in the police, and to better address the needs of victims of hate crime, particularly women.
• Further strengthening a sense of belonging by actively involving minorities in consultations and decision making, and by bringing local communities closer through sports and housing associations etc.
• Strengthen equality bodies and raise awareness of anti-discrimination laws and redress possibilities, targeting particularly groups more likely to be victims of discrimination.
• Address the issue of discriminatory stops to foster trust in law enforcement through police training and community policing.