Ref. Ares(2018)3627889 - 09/07/2018
Ref. Ares(2018)3673025 - 10/07/2018
European Commission
Directorate-General Migration and Home Affairs
Border Management and Visas beyond 2020:
Scenarios and Implications
(HOME/2016/PR/MFF/0001, Lot 2)
ANNEXES
ANNEX METHODOLOGY
Figure 1: Logical framework of the scenario-building methodology implemented by the study team
Desk research
-
Identification of available historical information and
future studies and trends that shape the domain of
Detailed
study
descriptions of
-
Identification of major issues, questions, factors and
Uncertainties
drivers of change concerning the four uncertainties
and
Focus group on key
questions (identification
Key questions
of 2 to 5 per uncertainty)
Cross impact analysis
-
Cross-Impact
Creation, elaboration and reduction of combinations
of questions into paths of co-development
Table
-
Selecting of two leading uncertainties, based on
Clusters of
complexity of cross-impacts and direction of influence
combinations
-
Selecting of skeleton of scenarios based on cross-
impact table
Focus group and 5
scenarios elaboration
by study team
In-depth
interviews with
selected panel
Rank by
members
Panel
members
Elaboration of selected four scenarios
Elaboration of policy recommendations
Following the logical framework, and within the analysis of possible interplay between factors affecting
different uncertainties the study team identified macroeconomic and political characteristics, which could
affect co-existence or divergence between alternative developments in the four uncertainties, based on
the key questions. These characteristics (economic downturn, upturn, vital divergence between countries
and regions and different trends in euroscepticism) appear in the cross-impact analysis and scenario
description, together with more direct factors affecting the four main uncertainties.
The team constructed first smaller cross-impact tables focusing on key questions within one uncertainty
to identify possible correlations between alternative states of questions and then combined for all
uncertainties (a table of 26x26 cells). Table 1 presents a part of the table, exploring the relationships for
the key questions related to migration pressure and border management. The black square represents
existing causality or strong correlation. The focus group outlined
two paths of development for migration
pressure uncertainty (based on the upper left quadrant of 64 cells in the table),
four for border
management,
two for travel and visa and
three for technological innovations.
Table 1: Cross-impact table for migration pressure and border management integration
1a 1b 2a 2b 3a 3b 4a 4b 5a 5b 6a 6b 7a 7b 8a 8b 9a 9b
1a
1b
2a
2b
3a
3b
4a
4b
5a
5b
6a
6b
7a
7b
8a
8b
9a
9b
The cross-impact table reflects considerations like “if efforts of EU to engage third countries are
unsuccessful (2b) then we should admit that there will be lower cooperation with third countries and no
sustainable operations of EBCG in third countries (7b)”. Similarly, effective efforts of EU to engage
gatekeeper states or combat root causes of migration and implement effective readmission policies (2a
and 3a) entail involvement of EBCG in capacity building projects in third countries (7a). Specific
combinations of answers to the key questions are ruled out through this analysis. For instance, timely and
consistent deployment of new technologies (12a) entails improved control over the migration flow (13a)
and hence a combination 12a, 13b is not possible.
As a result, the following plausible combinations of answers to key questions have been considered:
Migration pressure:
-
1a, 2b, 3b, 4b (high migration pressure)
-
1b, 2a, 3a, 4b (low migration pressure)
Border management integration:
-
5a, 6a, 7a, 8a, 9a (highly effective border management and more integration within EU)
-
5b, 6b, 7b, 8b, 9b (ineffective border management and disintegration within EU)
-
5b, 6b, 7a, 8b, 9b (somewhat effective border management by working beyond the borders but
still disintegration within EU)
-
5b, 6a, 7b, 8b, 9a (effective border management for some countries, ineffective border
management for others)
Travel and common visa policy
-
10a, 11a (visa liberalization and effective ETIAS implementation_
-
10b, 11b(suspension mechanism for currently visa-free origins and legal battles and obstruction
to ETIAS)
Technological innovations
-
12a, 13a (all member states introduce new technologies and have improved control at borders)
-
12b, 13b (delayed deployment of innovations, no priority on facilitation of passenger flows)
-
12b, 13a (discrepancy of deployment of innovations but improved control at major countries)
Yet, not all combinations of combinations are possible. As stated above, 2a and 3a entails 7a, which makes
impossible to have consistently low migration pressure and ineffective border management and
disintegration within EU. Based on the possible combinations of alternatives for migration pressure and
border management integration we have 5 scenarios out of 2*4 = 8 theoretically. The scenarios are given
in Table 2.
Table 2: Five scenarios determination by two uncertainties
MOTS
MSEU
STEU
NMWS
ICEU
Migration
Pressure
1
a
b
b
a
a
2
b
a
a
b
b
3
b
a
a
b
b
4
b
a
a
b
b
Border
Management
Integration
5
a
B
a
b
B
6
A
b
a
b
a
7
A
a
a
b
b
8
a
b
a
b
b
9
a
b
a
b
a
Travel and Visa
10
b
b
a
b
b
11
b
b
a
b
b
Technological
Innovations
12
b
b
a
b
b
13
b
b
a
b
a
The remaining answers to questions related to the uncertainties of travel and visa are direct consequence
of the already answered questions. For instance, if visa liberalization continues to grow and the European
Travel Information and Authorization System is uniformly implemented, this means that many if not all
answers to questions for migration pressure or border management integration should be ”a”-s. For
instance, it cannot happen without proper readmission mechanisms and the ETIAS will expedite the
border checking process and so on. The only difference in the last two uncertainties is the fact that
effective border management for some countries and ineffective for others allows for partial fulfilment of
13a (richest countries), while the other questions remain negative (disparities in technology adoption,
limitations on travel, etc).
Figure 2: Key uncertainties as axes to the five scenarios
ISOLATED CAMPS
Scenario 5 could be depicted on two non-connected places on the coordinated system (bottom right and
bottom left, as there are camps which are far more stable in the core/north than those in the periphery,
where the pressure is higher). While the overall pressure (measured by numbers of immigrants per EU
citizens or per square kilometer) is decreasing, those isolated camps in the periphery would require much
more attention and policy action because of significantly higher migration pressure. The upper right
quadrant is empty of scenarios because of the underlying assumption that higher EU border management
integration required overall stronger and more integrated Europe, which limit the effect of migration
pressure due to strategic shocks, simply because stronger Europe means also stronger foreign policy,
efficient foreign aid and limiting the sources of migration.
The selection of scenarios and validation of the overall logic and rationale behind the scenarios was
conducted using a panel of experts. Some of them have been interviewed in addition to responses on
scenarios over skype, telephone calls or face to face meetings to solicit practical recommendations based
on plausible scenarios.
The expert panel have been constructed in three steps.
-
At the first, project partners nominated experts with academic, professional or diplomatic
expertise in areas of migration, border management and international affairs.
-
Then, a list of experts provided by DG Home was added.
-
Then, experts have been asked to join the panel and to recommend someone knowledgeable on
the subject matter to join as well.
The resulting more than 100 experts from most of the EU 28 countries were approached to assess and
rank scenario outlines, its coherence, importance, effect on domains of interests, rapid increase of
complexity or significant change, which would require specific preparation by policy makers. The invitees
included former ambassadors in countries of origin of migrants; current and former border security
officials, police officers, former deputy ministers of economy, interior and other areas, civil society
activists, researchers and investigative journalists with expertise in the Home Affairs policy areas.
The response rate was about 25% and ranged between 1 and 10 pages of comments each. While there
were conflicting assessments concerning scenarios proximity between each other and different
assessments of probabilities of scenarios, there were no major opposition to scenarios or critiques that
critical factors for uncertainties have been missed. So, the participating panel members validated the
scenarios as the most important from policy planning perspective.
ANNEX STUDY TEAM
Name
Organization
Title
Mois Faion
CSD Group (BG)
Project Manager
Tihomir Bezlov
CSD Group (BG)
Senior Fellow
Todor Yalamov
CSD Group (BG)
Senior Fellow
Anton Kozhuharov
CSD Group (BG)
Junior Researcher
Mirja Gutheil
Optimity Advisors (UK)
Senior Researcher
Aurelie Heetman
Optimity Advisors (UK)
Junior Researcher
Andrea Ricci
ISINNOVA (IT)
Senior Researcher
Silvia Gaggi
ISINNOVA (IT)
Junior Researcher
Katherine Dufour
CSD Group (BG)
Junior Researcher
ANNEX EXPERT PANEL
NAME
SHORT DESCRIPTION/AFFILIATION
RELEVANT STUDY AREA
Associate Director at Control Risks Europe, expertise in analysis of
Anna Walker
political, operational, integrity and security issues across Europe and
STRATEGIC SHOCKS
the former Soviet Union.
Bernd Kasparek
Researcher at bordermonitoring.eu, expertise in migration and
IMMIGRATION
borders
Brian Jenkins
RAND, foreign policy expert
STRATEGIC SHOCKS
Caitlin Katsiaficas
Research Assistant at the Migration Policy Institute, expertise in
IMMIGRATION
border management, EU migration, asylym policy
Research Fellow at the Centre for European Reform, expertise in
Camino Mortera-Martinez
free movement of persons, counter-terrorism policies, migration
IMMIGRATION
policies
Dr. Aspasia Papadopoulou
Sr. Policy Officer, European Council on Refugees and Exiles
BORDER MGMT
Dr. Dobromir Hristov
Sector Manager, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine
STRATEGIC SHOCKS
Dr. Giacomo Orsini
Senior Reseach Officer at the University of Essex, expertise in
BORDER MGMT
migration, borders, border management in the Mediterranean
region
Dr. Kai Boehme
Director, Spatial Foresight
FORESIGHT
Dr. Luisa Marin
Assistnat Professor of European Law, expertise in border
TECHNOLOGY
surveillance, dual-use technologies (drones)
Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Security Studies - ETH
Dr. Matthias Leese
Zürich, expertise in surveillance, border control, security
BORDER MGMT
technologies
Dr. Philip Gounev
Former Vice Minister of Interior, Bulgaria, responsible for border
BORDER MGMT
management policy
Policy Analyst at the European Policy Center, expertise in EU
Frank McNamara
BORDER MGMT
migration control and border management
Jennifer Cassingena Harper
Malta Council for Science & Technology
FORESIGHT
Professor of Political Science at the Univeristé Libre de Bruxelles,
Julien Jeandesboz
expertise in border security, border management, EU security
BORDER MGMT
politics
Monika Szulecka
Affiliate at the Centre of Migration Research of Warwaw University,
IMMIGRATION
expertise in irregular migration, migration policy in creating,
preventing or combating it, strategies of functioning of irregular
migrants.
Envoy to the Balkans during the Clinton administration, member of
Robert Gelbard
STRATEGIC SHOCKS
the American Academy of Diplomacy
Lieut. Gen. (ret) Ambassador
Senior Fellow at the Center for the Study of Democracy, expertise in
BORDER MGMT
Chavdar Chervenkov
North Africa, border security, Former head of military intelligence,
former Minister of Interior
Senior Fellow at the Center for the Study of Democracy, expertise in
Dr. Emil Tsenkov
North Africa, Middle East, Syria, DCM in the Embassy of Bulgaria in
STRATEGIC SHOCKS
Libya, expertise in terrorism, organised crime, anticorruption
Susanna Ferreira
Researcher at the Instituto Protugees de Leracoes Internacionais,
BORDER MGMT
expertise in EU migration, border management
DG HOME EXPERTS WHO PROVIDED EXTENSIVE COMMENTS ON THE SCENARIOS
Antoine Savary
DG Home
MIGRATION
Birgit Kowalewski
DG Home
BORDER MGMT
Graziella Rizza
DG Home
BORDER MGMT
Oliver Seiffart
DG Home
BORDER MGMT
Peter David
DG Home
BORDER MGMT
Philippe van Triel
DG Home
BORDER MGMT
Richard Rinkens
DG Home
BORDER MGMT
Wojtek Kalocinski
DG Home
BORDER MGMT
ANNEX BIBLIOGRAPHY (SELECTED STUDIES AND DOCUMENTS)
Acadia, Rym and Carlo Sessa. "Scenarios Assessment and Transitions towards a Sustainable Euro-
Mediterranean in 2030."
WP9 - Scenarios for regional integration and cooperation with the EU. 2013.
Clingendael, Netherlands Institute of International Relations,
At the gate: Civil and military protection of
Europe's borders, (Policy Brief, February 2017)
Collett, Elizabeth. "The Paradox of the EU-Turkey Refugee Deal."
Migration Policy Institute. 2016.
COM (2015) 185.
The European Agenda on Security. European Commission. 2015.
COM (2015) 240.
A European Agenda on Migration. European Commission. 2015.
COM (2015) 671.
European Border and Coast Guard. European Commission. 2015.
COM. (2016) 205.
Stronger and Smarter Information Systems for Borders and Security. European
Commission. 2016.
Directive (EU) 2016/681 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016, on the use of
passenger name record (PNR) data for the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of
terrorist offences and serious crime
ESPON.
ET2050: Territorial Scenarios and visions for Europe. 2012.
European Commission.
Global Europe 2050. Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. 2012.
European Commission.
Strategic Foresight: Towards the 3rd Strategic Programme of Horizon 2020. 2015.
European Council on Foreign Relations. "The Future of Schengen."
European Council on Foreign Relations.
2015.
European Environment Agency.
Assessment of global mega trends - an update. 2016.
FRONTEX.
Annual Risk Analysis 2016; Annual Risk Analysis 2017
Heiskamen,Markus. "Militarization of Border Control - Why Not?"
Armed Forces for 2020 and beyond:
Roles, Tasks, Expectations. Eds. Walter Freichtinger and Benedict Hensellek. 2015.
High-level expert group on information systems and interoperability: Interim Report, December 2017
Iglesias, Sold and Luk Van Langenhove.
Foresight in 20/20: Scenario Building for Policy Analysis and
Strategy Development. 2012.
Internal Security Fund of the European Union.
Smart Borders Pilot ProjectL Report on the technical
conclusions the Pilot. 2015.
Jolly, Cecile and Macarena Nuno. "The Mediterranean in 2030: routes to a better future."
Tomorrow, the
Mediterranean - Scenarios and projections for 2030: growth, employment, migration, energy, agriculture.
2011.
Lehne, Stefan. "How the Refugee Crisis Will Reshape the EU."
Carnegie Europe. 2016.
Madsen, Bjarne and Jie Zhang.
Scenario analysis for Territorial attractiveness and mobility flows:
Documentation ATTREG-future model. Centre for Regional and Tourism Research.
MapAction and Assessment Capacities Project. Refugee/Migrant Crisis in Europe: Scenarios. 2016.
National Intelligence Council.
Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds. 2012.
Regulation (EU) No 1051/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013,
amending Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 in order to provide for common rules on the temporary
reintroduction of border control at internal borders in exceptional circumstances
Regulation (EU) No 513/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014,
establishing, as part of the Internal Security Fund, the instrument for financial support for police
cooperation, preventing and combating crime, and crisis management and repealing Council Decision
2007/125/JHA
Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016, on a Union
Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code)
Ricci, Andrea.
Europe in a changing world - Perspectives on 2050. Institute of Studies for the Integration
of Systems. 2015.
Rietig, Victoria and Andreas Muller. "The New Reality: Germany Adapts to Its Role as a Major Migrant
Magnet."
Migration Policy Institute. 2016.
SWD (2016) 299.
Mid-term review/revision for the multi annual financial framework 2014-2020: An EU
budget focused on results. European Commission. 2016.
Techau, Jan. "Four Predictions on the future of Europe."
Carnegie Europe. 2016.
Tocci, Nathalie. "Turkey and the European Union: A Journey in the Unknown."
Brookings. 2014.
Vezzoli, Simona.
Exploring Future International Migration: A Scenario Approach. International Migration
Institute.