twitter   facebook   facebook
← Overview Database of Innovative Social Policies in Europe

Introducing the National Action Plan for the Integration of Migrants (Nationaler Integrationsplan)

Country of implementation
General short description of the innovation
In 2006, chancellor Merkel called for an integration summit; and in 2007 the National Action Plan for Integration was issued. It is mainly a soft law instrument of co-ordination within Germanys complex multi-level governance. The relevant departments of the national government, the governments of the 16 federal states, and the roughly 440 municipalities (through their national umbrella organizations) commit themselves to better inclusion of the migrant population. The social partners have been included in this consensus, too.
Target group
Policy Field
  • equal opportunities
Type of Policy
  • public
Duration of the policy
2006; open-ended
Scope of innovation
  • Scope: The creation of an overarching consensus on integration (rather than a particula r programme) can be regarded as structural.
  • Budgets: no specific budget attached, though several initiatives with budgets may be seen as having originated from this
  • Number of intended beneficiaries: Not specified
  • Spatial coverage: national
General description of (intended) objectives and strategies
The overall objective is the improvement of social inclusion of the population with foreign roots. The principal operational strategies regard education (improving language skills being a principal aim) and overcoming segregation on the labour market
Nature of the innovation-long-term perspective
The change is programmatic insofar as Germany, after decades of regarding immigration as an exception and a potential threat, now openly defines itself as a ethnically and culturally diverse country open for further immigration.
Type of innovation
  • new policy, practice or measure
New outputs
  • governance (attempting to co-ordinate a complex multi-level governance system through committment )
Intended target group
Working age population
  • main source of income: paid work
  • main source of income: social protection (please specify; e.g. unemployment benefits/disability benefits/social assistance/other benefits)
Actors involved in policy-making/implementation and/or evaluation
  • making/implementation and/or evaluation-agency or national social insurance body (Federal Employment Agency)
  • making/implementation and/or evaluation-central state
  • making/implementation and/or evaluation-employees (organised or individual) (Federal Trade Union Confederation)
  • making/implementation and/or evaluation-employers (organised or individual) (Federal Association of Employers )
  • making/implementation and/or evaluation-municipal government (440 municipal governments)
  • making/implementation and/or evaluation-regional government (16 governments of federal states)
Intended output
    Intended and unintended outcomes
    not possible to quantify
    Clarification of outcomes in terms of impacting resilience and labour market inclusion
    Outcomes in terms of educational achievement and labour market position of the migrant population have / actually deteriorated in the sense that gaps between migrants and the autochthonous population have widened. Migrant have not participated in the improvement of the labour market situation so the same extent as the autochthonous population. This does not, however, prove that the policy was ineffective. It could well be that the widening of gaps would have been worse without this policy.
    Share this page: