References of "Nienaber, Birte 50002761"
     in
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
See detailGrenze als überwindbares Phänomen in der Raumplanung?
Nienaber, Birte UL

in Heintel, Martin; Musil, Robert; Weixlbaumer, Norbert (Eds.) Grenzen (2018)

Grenzen sind in der Planungspraxis vielfältig vorzufinden. Vor allem nationale Grenzen definieren das Territorium, in welchen Planungsinstitutionen und -kulturen verankert sind und ihre Planungsbefugnisse ... [more ▼]

Grenzen sind in der Planungspraxis vielfältig vorzufinden. Vor allem nationale Grenzen definieren das Territorium, in welchen Planungsinstitutionen und -kulturen verankert sind und ihre Planungsbefugnisse gelten. Im Rahmen der europäischen Integration gibt es zwar verschiedene Instrumentarien einer grenzübergreifenden Raumplanung, da jedoch die Europäische Union keine Raumplanungskompetenz besitzt, sind diese stets im Kontext nationaler Raumplanungsgesetze und -kulturen zu verstehen. Der Beitrag zeigt, welche Maßnahmen die Europäische Union getroffen hat (z.B. INTERREG, Territoriale Agenda 2007 und 2020, makroregionale Strategien), um nationalen Grenzen in der Raumplanung weniger Gewicht zu geben und die territoriale Kohäsion zu fördern. Gleichzeitig zeigt sich aber auch die Definitionsmacht nationaler Grenzen in diesem Kompetenzfeld. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 137 (10 UL)
See detailCross-border vocational education and training as a process of cross-border learning. The example of the Saarland-Lorraine border region
Funk, Ines; Nienaber, Birte UL; Dörrenbächer, H. Peter

Scientific Conference (2018)

Detailed reference viewed: 39 (0 UL)
Full Text
See detailWas bedeutet jung und mobil? Ergebnisse aus dem Projekt MOVE
Bissinger, Jutta UL; Kmiotek-Meier, Emilia Alicja UL; Nienaber, Birte UL

Article for general public (2018)

MOVE (Mapping mobility - pathways, institutions and structural effects of youth mobility in Europe) dealt with intra-European mobility (May 2015 - April 2018). The text sets out recommendations for action ... [more ▼]

MOVE (Mapping mobility - pathways, institutions and structural effects of youth mobility in Europe) dealt with intra-European mobility (May 2015 - April 2018). The text sets out recommendations for action on youth mobility. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 79 (15 UL)
Peer Reviewed
See detailBorder Crossings: Border Studies in der Großregion lehren
Funk, Ines; Fellner, Astrid; Dörrennächer, H. Peter et al

Scientific Conference (2018)

Detailed reference viewed: 28 (2 UL)
Full Text
See detailYouth on the MOVE?
Nienaber, Birte UL; Bissinger, Jutta UL; Kmiotek-Meier, Emilia Alicja UL et al

Conference given outside the academic context (2018)

Detailed reference viewed: 52 (12 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailDemographie und Migration: Anziehung versus Schrumpfung
Nienaber, Birte UL; Hamez, Grégory; Mangels, Kirsten

E-print/Working paper (2018)

This working paper includes analyses of demography and migration in the Greater region. It has a special view on cross-border mobility, ageing and health infrastructure in rural areas.

Detailed reference viewed: 52 (3 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailCross-border vocational education and training as a process of cross-border learning. The example of the Saarland-Lorraine border region
Nienaber, Birte UL; Funk, Ines; Dörrenbächer, H. Peter

Poster (2018)

Cross-border vocational education and training (VET) becomes more and more important in the Saarland (DE)-Lorraine (FR) border region – even if so far there is only a small number of cases. It may be a ... [more ▼]

Cross-border vocational education and training (VET) becomes more and more important in the Saarland (DE)-Lorraine (FR) border region – even if so far there is only a small number of cases. It may be a solution for high youth unemployment rates in Lorraine and difficulties to find appropriated apprentices in Saarland. The main research questions of the research project are: 1. How does cross-border VET develop since the introduction of the Framework agreement on cross-border vocational and further training Saarland/Lorraine in 2014? 2. Which learning processes are related with the development of cross-border VET? [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 30 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailPartizipation in Großschutzgebieten - untersucht am Beispiel der Beteiligung an den Workshops zur Erstellung des Rahmenkonzeptes des Biosphärenreservates Bliesgau 2014
Nienaber, Birte UL

in Weber, Florian; Weber, Friedericke; Jenal, Corinna (Eds.) Wohin des Weges? Regionalentwicklung in Großschutzgebieten (2018)

In 2014 a process of public participation was initiated in order to produce a framework concept for the future configuration of the “Biosphere Bliesgau”. This paper presents characteristics of ... [more ▼]

In 2014 a process of public participation was initiated in order to produce a framework concept for the future configuration of the “Biosphere Bliesgau”. This paper presents characteristics of participation, both in general and in large-scale protected areas in particular, and discusses what various forms of participation (ranging from pure information as non-participation to bottom-up partnerships as the strongest form of participation) are possible. The empirical-analytical section of the paper investigates the 2014 process of participation in Biosphere Bliesgau, using publically available protocols and interviews. It can be seen that the top-down process – e. g. involving concrete agreements between individuals or groups – involves the selection of participants – intended or otherwise – and that the highest level of participation could therefore not be achieved. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 51 (4 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailLuxembourgish implementation of the Common European Asylum System: Insights from a small-scale country
Paraschivescu, Claudia UL; Oesch, Lucas UL; Nienaber, Birte UL

Scientific Conference (2018)

Within the so-called migration crisis, the focus of media and research has been mainly on Mediterranean countries, which were the first impacted by the arrival of refugees, as well as big recipients of ... [more ▼]

Within the so-called migration crisis, the focus of media and research has been mainly on Mediterranean countries, which were the first impacted by the arrival of refugees, as well as big recipients of asylum seekers such as Germany. Less attention has been directed toward small-scale countries such as Luxembourg, where the number of registered refugees arriving has more than doubled in 2015 and 2016 compared to 2014. In 2016, Luxembourg had 3582 registered first time applicants, which represents one of the highest numbers relative to its population in the European Union. Against this background, this presentation will focus on how Luxembourg has dealt with the implementation of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) and the ways in which it has been affected by the so-called migration crisis. This paper will particularly focus on the question of reception of asylum seekers and refugees. Given the large number of applicants relative to the small size of the country, and the limited number of administrative levels, how was reception implemented, and what are the lesson to be learned? It will do so by mapping the main actors involved in the refugee scene. It will then move on to the contextualization of the reception of refugees in the housing and employment market. Finally, it will critically examine the stakeholders’ involvement in order to find the gaps in the asylum seeker/refugee reception. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 78 (20 UL)
Full Text
See detailL’IDENTIFICATION DES VICTIMES DE LA TRAITE DES ÊTRES HUMAINS LORS DES PROCÉDURES DE PROTECTION INTERNATIONALE ET DE RETOUR FORCÉ
Sommarribas, Adolfo UL; Nienaber, Birte UL

Report (2017)

La note de synthèse présente les principaux résultats de l’étude réalisée en 2013 et actualisée en 2017 par le point de contact luxembourgeois du European Migration Network sur «L’identification des ... [more ▼]

La note de synthèse présente les principaux résultats de l’étude réalisée en 2013 et actualisée en 2017 par le point de contact luxembourgeois du European Migration Network sur «L’identification des victimes de la traite des êtres humains lors des procédures de protection internationale et de retour forcé». [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 87 (13 UL)
Full Text
See detailMigration internationale au Luxembourg - SOPEMI Report 2017
Tüske, Annamaria UL; Sommarribas, Adolfo UL; Nienaber, Birte UL

Report (2017)

Suite au pic constaté en 2015, le nombre de demandes de protection internationale a légèrement diminué en 2016, passant de 2 447 en 2015 à 2 035 en 2016 (soit une baisse de 16,8 %). Malgré le ... [more ▼]

Suite au pic constaté en 2015, le nombre de demandes de protection internationale a légèrement diminué en 2016, passant de 2 447 en 2015 à 2 035 en 2016 (soit une baisse de 16,8 %). Malgré le ralentissement de la tendance, ces chiffres restent supérieurs aux niveaux de 2013-2014. Les ressortissants syriens sont toujours la première nationalité de demandeurs de protection internationale (14,3 %), les ressortissants irakiens chutent à la 4ème place (7,9 %), après les ressortissants albanais (11,2 %) et kosovars (10,2 %). Le Luxembourg continue d’occuper la 4ème place parmi les Etats membres en termes d’accueil de demandeurs de protection internationale par rapport à sa population nationale. Le taux de reconnaissance de protection internationale est passé de 228 (200 statuts de réfugiés et 28 protections subsidiaires) en 2015 à 790 (764 statuts de réfugiés et 26 protections subsidiaires) en 2016. Ces chiffres représentent une augmentation de 246,5 % des décisions positives par rapport à 2015. Le Luxembourg continue de démontrer sa solidarité à l’égard de la relocalisation et de la réinstallation des demandeurs de protection internationale. En 2015, le Luxembourg s’est engagé à relocaliser 557 personnes sur son territoire dans le cadre de la décision du Conseil européen de relocaliser 160 000 demandeurs de protection internationale depuis la Grèce et l’Italie. Dans ce contexte, 197 réfugiés ont été relocalisés fin 2016. Entre janvier 2017 et août 2017, le Luxembourg a relocalisé 186 personnes. Sur le plan de la réinstallation, 52 réfugiés ont été réinstallés depuis la Turquie en 2016, suite à l’engagement du Luxembourg de réinstaller 194 réfugiés en provenance de Turquie dans le cadre de l’accord UE-Turquie du mois de mars 2016. 115 personnes ont été réinstallées entre le 1er janvier 2017 et le 18 août 2017. De nouvelles lois sont entrées en vigueur en 2016/2017 qui concernent la situation migratoire du Luxembourg. Des évolutions politiques d’envergure ont porté sur la mise en œuvre de changements apportés à la législation et aux procédures d’asile, à l’éducation et à la réforme linguistique ainsi que sur des mesures d’intégration révisées en réponse à l’évolution des profils de migration au Luxembourg. L’accent mis sur la migration économique a permis de promouvoir la diversification économique et le repositionnement du centre financier. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 160 (16 UL)
See detailIntegration und Migration im ländlichen Raum
Nienaber, Birte UL

Conference given outside the academic context (2017)

Detailed reference viewed: 33 (1 UL)
See detailWieder-Errichtung von Grenzkontrollen in Europa? Einige Gedanken zur Großregion
Nienaber, Birte UL; Evrard, Estelle UL; Sommarribas, Adolfo UL

Conference given outside the academic context (2017)

Detailed reference viewed: 42 (3 UL)
See detailKontaktraum für die einen, Filter für die anderen
Nienaber, Birte UL

Article for general public (2017)

Detailed reference viewed: 48 (1 UL)
Peer Reviewed
See detailGrenzüberschreitende Berufsausbildung als Prozess grenzüberschreitenden Lernens
Funk, Ines; Nienaber, Birte UL; Dörrenbächer, H. Peter

Scientific Conference (2017, October 03)

Detailed reference viewed: 43 (1 UL)
Full Text
See detailInternational Migration in Luxembourg - SOPEMI Report 2017
Tüske, Annamaria UL; Sommarribas, Adolfo UL; Nienaber, Birte UL

Report (2017)

While the proportion of Luxembourgish nationals among the resident working population was above 50.3% in 2015, it dropped below 50% in the first quarter of 2017. Some 44% of the working population were ... [more ▼]

While the proportion of Luxembourgish nationals among the resident working population was above 50.3% in 2015, it dropped below 50% in the first quarter of 2017. Some 44% of the working population were EU28 nationals and 6% non-EU nationals. Luxembourg’s economy is reliant on its employment of cross-border workers. In 2016, French nationals maintained and increased their proportion of over 50% of the cross-border working population, reaching 51.4% in Q1 2017, at the expense of both Belgian (24.4%) and German (24.2%) cross-border workers. They mainly work in sectors such as construction, administrative/support service, accommodation/food service, as well as in the financial/insurance sector or professional, scientific and technical activities. Between 2010 and 2017, the number of foreign salaried workers showed the greatest continuous increase in sectors such as professional, scientific and technical activities, administrative and support services, and financial and insurance services. Regarding specific permits, nationals of China (119 permits), India (70 permits) and Montenegro (40 permits) accounted for 31% of all first issues of residence permits for salaried workers. Indian nationals were the single largest nationality group receiving their first issue of EU Blue Cards, with 90 issued during 2016. This was followed by US nationals (58 permits) and Russian nationals (36 permits). After reaching a peak in 2015, the number of applications for international protection slightly decreased in 2016, from 2447 in 2015 to 2035 in 2016 (decrease of 16.8%). Even if the trend slowed down, it remains higher than the levels of 2013-2015. Syrian nationals remain the first nationality of applicants for international protection (14.3%), Iraqi nationals dropping to 4th place (7.9%) after Albanian nationals (11.2%) and Kosovars (10.2%). Luxembourg remains the Member State hosting the 4th highest number of applicants for international protection applicants in relation to the national population. The international protection recognition rate increased from 228 (200 refugee status and 28 subsidiary protection) in 2015 to 790 (764 refugee status and 26 subsidiary protection) in 2016. This represents an increase of 246.5% of positive decisions year-on-year. Luxembourg continues to demonstrate its solidarity in respect of the relocation and resettlement of international protection applicants. In 2015, Luxembourg pledged to relocate 557 individuals to Luxembourg in the framework of the EU Council decision to relocate 160,000 international protection applicants from Greece and Italy. Within this framework, 197 refugees had been relocated by the end of 2016. From January 2017 to 18 August 2017, Luxembourg relocated 186 people. With regards to resettlement, 52 refugees were resettled from Turkey in 2016 as a result of Luxembourg’s pledge to resettle 194 refugees from Turkey in the context of the EU-Turkey agreement of March 2016. 115 people were resettled between 1st January 2017 and 18th August 2017. New pieces of legislation were enacted during 2016/2017 to assist with the specific migration situation in Luxembourg. Major policy developments related to the implementation of changes to asylum legislation and procedures, education and language reform, and revised integration measures in response to changing migration profiles within Luxembourg. A focus on economic migration took place to promote economic diversification, start-ups and the repositioning of the financial centre. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 125 (16 UL)
See detailImmigration und Integration
Nienaber, Birte UL; Willems, Helmut UL

Speeches/Talks (2017)

Detailed reference viewed: 50 (9 UL)
See detailMaster in Border Studies - ein Praxisbeispiel
Nienaber, Birte UL

Speeches/Talks (2017)

Detailed reference viewed: 46 (1 UL)
Full Text
See detailThe effectiveness of return in EU Member States: challenges and good practices linked to EU rules and standards
Sommarribas, Adolfo UL; Petry, David UL; Nienaber, Birte UL

Report (2017)

The impact of EU rules on Luxembourg’s return policies and practices is substantial. This is not least a result of the transposition of Directive 2008/115/EC on return into national law by the Law of 1 ... [more ▼]

The impact of EU rules on Luxembourg’s return policies and practices is substantial. This is not least a result of the transposition of Directive 2008/115/EC on return into national law by the Law of 1 July 2011, which was then further developed through amendments in 2014 following the conclusions of the European Commission that Luxembourg was not fully in line with the directive. With regards to the European Commission Recommendation of 7th March 2017 ‘on making returns more effective when implementing the Directive 2008/115/EC’, Luxembourg did not introduce any specific legal or policy change. Most of the referenced provisions already form part of the national legal and/or policy framework. The government’s efforts to conclude and apply readmission agreements with third-countries to better organise returns have continued throughout 2016. The Benelux Member States concluded a readmission agreement and a protocol of implementation with the Republic of Kazakhstan on 2 March 2015, which was approved by Law of 31 August 2016. As a result of the relatively high influx of asylum-seekers in 2015/2016, a backlog in the processing of applications for international protection occurred and could only be properly addressed by the Refugees and Return Department of the Directorate of Immigration through an increase and a reorganisation of its administrative staff. On the other side, the impact of the migration situation 2015/2016 did not significantly affect the functioning of the Detention Centre nor its maximum occupation limits. However, the Detention Centre took over the management of the SHUK (Structure d’hébergement d’urgence Kirchberg) a new semi-open facility established for Dublin cases (single men) with a view of transferring them to the responsible Member State. Although vulnerable groups are generally not detained in Luxembourg, the permitted period of detention of families with children was recently (March 2017) extended from 72 hours to 7 days with a view to enhancing the organisation of their return. The controversial extension through law amendment was largely criticised by civil society organisations and hence debated in parliament. The definition of guarantees to avoid the risk of absconding remains a major challenge in the field of return and (alternatives to) detention. In most cases, the applicant fails to provide evidence enabling the reversal of the legal presumption of the existence of a risk of absconding, allowing the Minister to use a detention measure instead of another less coercive measure. As long as the concerned third-country national is unable to indicate a fixed address of stay (reception facilities are not taken into account), the competent authorities cannot rule out the existence of a risk of absconding. The practical implementation of ‘home custody’ as an alternative to detention is therefore considered problematic, with most potential candidates not having a fixed address in Luxembourg. The substantial amount of the financial guarantee, 5.000€, make it also difficult to practically implement release on bail as an alternative. Although the Law foresees the possibility of combining home custody with electronic surveillance, the electronic tag has not yet been implemented. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 42 (8 UL)