1. Silvia Mugnano DSRS, University of Milan Bicocca; Italy
Italy one of the main refugees’ frontlines in Europe: From an adventurous landing to precarious housing
Silvia Mugnano
DSRS, University of Milan Bicocca; Italy
ENHR Conference Affordable house for all
Plennary Social Housing and Refugees
Tirana 6th September 2017

2. Outline Italy has changed the immigration issue
The Refugees crisis of the new millennium
The refugees’ trajectories to housing
3.1 The landing phase: the human right issue
3.2 The temporary accommodation: a controlling and security issue
3.3 The second level accommodation: housing and social provision
4. Some interesting local actions
5. Conclusion

3. 1. Italy from outgoing to incoming country
Italian migration in Argentina
7th March Port of Brindisi Apulia
Summer Lampedusa, Sicily

4. Migrants flow to Italy (2005-2010)
5 million migrants are residents in Italy ( 8% of the total population)
The migration flow in Italy is relatively recent ( early 90s)
Italy form outcoming to incoming migration flow
Source: The Global Flow of People (Sander N. , Abel G.  Bauer R. 2015)  

5. 2. The Refugees’ crisis of the new millennium: Data and Trends

6. Number of refugees in EU countries, 2016
In Sweden 23,4% of the population
In Italy 2,4% of the population
Source: Ministero degli Interni, 2017

7. What are the issues in the Italian case?
The refugees' number has increased from 2010 (4.500 arrivals) to 2015 ( arrivals)
An increasing number of refugees underage
Great mismatching between arrivals and asylum seekers’ requests (in arrivals and requests)
The housing’s responds is limited and precarious
Source: Msf, 2015 Fuoricampo

8. Socio-demographic profile of asylum applicants in Italy (2015)
The population is for the 63% from Africa, 27% Asia, 7% (East) Europe, 3% Others
The majority is Male (88%)
The 81% is aged between years old
An increasing number of under-aged migrants
Source: Commissione Nazionale per il Diritto di Asilo (2015)
Source: The Global Flow of People (Sander N. , Abel G.  Bauer R. 2015)  

9. The increasing refugees’ trend 2010-2017
94,982
(until 28 August 2017) +1%
Source: Ministero degli Interni, 2017

10. The phenomenon of the «migrant children»
July 2017
17.846
93% Male
more than half 17 years old
Source: Ministero degli Interni, 2017

11. 3.1 The refugees’ trajectories to housing The landing phase: the human right issue
«The European Door», by Paladino Lampedusa

12. SPRAR Refugees’ housing system 0 level 1 Level 2 level
HOTSPOTS or
CPSA
Arrivals’ places
First Medical Aids
1 Level
Reception Centres
(CARA etc)
Identification
Asylum request
2 level
SPRAR
Long term housing projects

13. Governance of the refugees’ housing system
Ministry of home Affairs
Region
International Organisations (like UNCHR)
Municipalities Italian Network
( ANCI)
Local Authorities
(n. of refugees)
No profit sector
Territorial agencies
Private organisations
ROAD MAP
Italian Law 142/2015
The system has been defined by the Italian Law 142/2015 implemented by 30 Sept 2015
Local Welfare

14. The “landing phase”: a territorial Issues
Augusta 25,624 arrivals (1° position)
Pozzallo 18,970 arrivals
(2° position)
Source: Italian Red Cross, 2016
Lampedusa 11,557 arrivals
(8° position)

15. A territorial issue High concentration in few areas
The most affected regions are in the South of Italy (Sicily, Apulia, Calabria)
The affected Italian regions are the most deprived in the country
High unemployment rate in the country (in Sicily the young unemployment rate is 58%)
Lower welfare services provision
Fragile political setting
Presence of organised crime ( the case of Misericordia, in Calabria)
Carrying Capacity of the leading areas (in terms of infrastructure but also from the social impact)

16. The case of the Hotspots: the emergency approach
HOTSPOT and CARA are the first protection centres at the arrivals
They are in charge of the newcomers’ identification
The have been established in 2014 according with the EU legislation
At the moment there are 4 hotposts
(Lampedusa, Taranto, Pozzallo, Trapani)
Overcrowding: official capacity (400/500 people) real occupancy (up to 1500/1700 people)

17. The case of the Hotspots: in and out side issues
Outside of the hotspots
Strong impact of the hotspots on the local contexts
Urban conflicts and opposition of the local community
Forms of racism and low forms of integration
(ex: Lampedusa island residents – 1300 refugees )
Inside the hotspots
Low level of hygiene and living conditions
Micro-criminality
Security and guarantees for woman safety
Source: Lampedusa’s Hotspot

18. 3.2 The refugees’ trajectories to housing Reception Centre a controlling and security issue
Cara in Mineo, Sicily

19. Reception Centre: long lasting procedures

20. The post-landing phase: a process «out of control»
In refugees left the reception centres
34,5% time expired
31.6% voluntary drop-off
Source: Ministero degli Interni, 2015

21. Illegal refugees’ settlements
Self-organised settlements
Open area camps/ Abandoned buildings, containers
Very low living conditions (no water, toilets etc)
No heath conditions screening Permanence (1 year and half)
Presence Illegal under-aged migrants
Source; MSF, 2015

22. 3.3 The refugees’ trajectories to housing The second level accommodation: housing and social provisions

23. Social service support
SPRAR model: second level housing provisions
Objectives
Provide assistance and protection measures to the migrants
Building an integration process leading to their autonomy
Types of interventions
Accoglienza diffusa (widespread housing system)
Scattered housing system and social welfare provisions
Small or micro accommodation structures (flats or reconversion of unused public structures or hotels etc.)
Activation of local resources
Accoglienza diffusa
Working support
Training, research
Social integration
Social service support
Legal support
Housing

24. The role of the Local Networks
According to research Mapping the Sprar (2015):
Level of collaboration varies
9.2 % very high level
20,4% high level (11 to 20 agreements)
37,2% medium level (3 to 11 agreements)
13,3% very low (1 to 2 agreements)
19,9% no collaboration
Network
Local
Local schools/ training courses
Cultural social and sport local association
(local enterprises, trade Unions)
Work Training
Local public health centre
The level of collaboration might depend also from the type of local welfare, the civicness of the context etc.
Policies and politics frame (strategies, resources and planning)

25. SPRAR accommodation: Number of beneficiaries (2003-2015)
In 2017
SPRAR projects
beneficiaries
(2.865 under-aged migrants)
More than Local Authorities
(582 Municipalities,
21 Provinces,
17 Municipalities Network,
5 Mountain Communities, etc.)
Source: Ministero degli Interni, 2015

26. Geographical distribution SPRAR in Italy
Municipalities host SPRAR on a voluntary basis
It is regulated by an agreement between Municipalities network organisation (Anci) and the Interior Ministry.
2.5 migrants per thousand inhabitants
(the number varies if small municipalities, the capital cities of metropolitan cities and the
earthquake areas)
Source: Ministero degli Interni, 2015

27. Reception centre and Hotspots
The cost of the refugees’ housing system
SPRAR
35 Euro per person
Reception centre and Hotspots
(Cara, CDA. CSA)
30-35 Euro per person
242,5 million
Euros
918,5 million Euros
Source: Ministero degli Interni, 2017
TOTAL COST 918,5 million Euros

28. 4. Some interesting local actions

29. SPRAR PROJECT: «Forced Highlanders»
artichoke
SPRAR PROJECT: «Forced Highlanders»
Areas: Alps areas ( Piemonte, Dolomite etc)
Suffering of:
Depopulation problem
Lost of the traditional jobs (ex. agriculture, sheep-farming)
«Force highlanders» projects
22 SPRAR project in Piemonte
Promoters: Bank foundation, Region and local ONGs
EX:
Cuneo: 200 refugees employed as Forest guards regional park
10 SPRAR in Dolomite (Cadore)
Ex: 20 refugees employed in mountain artichoke production

30. Riace: local money for refugees
Riace small village in Calabria
1500 residents and 500 migrants
165 migrants are hosted in SPRAR project
Riace Municipality has issues local currency (budget 35 euros per day) for refugees that can be spent in the local shops

31. Strengths of the SPRAR projects
Municipalities network
Multilevel governance (Regions, Private foundations and local NGOs)
Micro- interventions
No «cut and paste» strategy- intervention embedded into the local context

32. Conclusion Italy is one of the frontlines
Shifting from emergency to long term policies
in terms of
public opinion
Interventions
Investments
The need of an EU network for second level housing for refugees
The role of ENHR network

33. Thank you for your attention!
Lampedusa, Murals by Amnesty International 2016