Financial_instruments@2x-8.png

Expanding the use of financial instruments for inclusion by cities   

Action Leader: DG Migration and Home Affairs (European Commission), European Investment Bank and Council of Europe Development Bank. 

What is the specific problem?

In recent years, many European cities have been confronted with significant numbers of new arrivals and a growing diversity of profiles and needs in local populations. This has increased the pressure on local authorities to invest in social infrastructure—e. g. improving the provision of education, or creating spaces and opportunities for community building—to promote migrant and refugee inclusion and prevent long-term (financial and social) costs of marginalisation. However, the long tail of the 2008 financial crisis took a high toll on city budgets over the following decade, curtailing forward-looking investments and innovation. At present, the COVID-19 crisis looks set to further tighten public spending for years to come. Yet without targeted investments, the crisis risks condemning vulnerable groups, including many migrants and refugees, to durable marginalisation, isolation, and destitution—ailments that will put a strain on social cohesion and will be difficult and costly to reverse. 

In this context, the rapidly evolving landscape of financial instruments can provide opportunities to address societal challenges faced by cities and to promote sustainable and inclusive urban development. The aim of using financial instruments with revolving nature is to implement a win-win approach for every entity participating in financial public-private cooperation of different kind. In particular, cities and other administrations could leverage (additional) resources to provide needed services and realise social impact investments, expand and improve the impact of these investments, and develop overall economic growth of local communities and their social cohesion. 

The potential of the use of financial instruments is undermined by some challenges, namely:

1) knowledge gaps regarding target groups and possibilities of intervention; 2) expertise on the financial instruments; and 3) administrative and organisational capacities and cooperation between actors. 


What action was needed?

Through this action, the Partnership aimed to raise awareness and build capacities with regard to the means and opportunities available for cities to pool resources and to complement local, national and EU funds that are allocated to address various integration challenges faced by migrants. In particular, it aimed to provide cities and other administrations with the knowledge and tools to benefit from financing provided by private and public financial institutions and other intermediaries.

In addition, the action provided distinct advantages for other entities involved. Financial institutions and intermediaries could invest in more viable projects and schemes of interventions, de-risking or sharing the risk of financial operations and potentially generating returns commensurate to the risk undertaken, as well as operating under market terms while pursuing social objectives.

mAIN TAKEAWAYS

The action convened several meetings with Action Group members and key stakeholders to discuss practical cases of investments in the area of migrant and refugee inclusion, access to microfinance, and social economy, among others

Main takeaways include:

  • Authorities at different levels should explore the use of grant resources (blended, used as guarantees, etc.) with other public and/or private funding to advance long-term migrant integration and allow national authorities to ‘do more with less'

  • The EU should support through EU grants knowledge-sharing and capacity-building for national/local authorities and other public and private actors (e.g. social enterprises, microfinance institutions, migrant led CSOs), which are key to the effective deployment of financial instruments

  • As demonstrated by migrants’ uptake of various innovative financial instruments made available by public and private institutions, migrants are ‘job-creators,’ and not ‘job-takers.’ In addition, migrant-led organisations can play a key role in meeting existing gaps in social services provision (e.g. long-term and medical care).

  • Local/national authorities should support migrant entrepreneurship by liaising with financial institutions and providing training and advisory support to migrant entrepreneurs

In addition to information sharing, activities under this action resulted in two agreements between the European Commission’s Directorate General for Home Affiars (DG HOME), the European Investment Bank, and the Council of Europe Development Bank to test and promote the use of financial instruments by national and local authorities for integration purposes. More details can be found here: The Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) | fi-compass, and here – Promoting the integration of migrants in Europe | CEB (coebank.org).

Which partners?

Action leader: DG Migration and Home Affairs (European Commission), with the European Investment Bank and the Council of Europe Development Bank. 

Members: European Committee of the Regions, Eurocities, City of Amsterdam, European Investment Fund, Joint Research Centre, Portugal, European Council of Municipalities and Regions, Committee of the Regions