 So, as Christina said, today I'm going to talk about the labor market integration of immigrants and refugees to Sweden. And I will also present empirical study on the role of intermarriage in the labor market integration of immigrants to Sweden. But first I will present an overview of the latest migration facts and figures and some policy changes in Sweden that may have affected the employment and socioeconomic outcomes of immigrants and refugees. Let's look at some numbers first. This graph here shows the first-time residence permits in Sweden. And I focused on economic immigrants, family members and refugees. And as you know, the immigration policies in Sweden are based on humanitarian principles and this is reflected in the number of immigrants that they receive every year in each category. The last few years also reflect the Syrian refugees' arrivals. But as you can see, the number of refugees has big differences depending on the year and it's not a continuum increase and these differences reflect also conflicts in immigrant origin countries like Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, previously in the 90s, former Yugoslavian countries. In the second graph I'm showing the percentage of resettled refugees out of all the refugees received and accepted in Sweden and making a distinction of resettled refugees versus asylum seekers is important because there are policy differences that target these two groups and that can also affect their integration in the labor market. And what are these main differences? Resettled refugees are placed by the migration board in municipalities where they also attend integration courses. So they cannot choose where they want to live and they are often placed in smaller towns with less economic opportunities because cities are already crowded so they do try to disperse them a little bit. On the contrary, since 1994 asylum seekers can choose whether they want to live with friends and relatives if they have any in the country while their application is considered and about 50% of them choose to live with friends and relatives or they have the opportunity to live with them. This wasn't the case before 1994 and there is some research done on the effect of the policy change in 1994 and according to this policy change had a positive effect on the labor market integration of refugees, asylum seekers. And also after their application, if the application is accepted they can actually choose where they want to live and attend their integration courses. So just a note on these integration courses, in Sweden like in many other immigrant and refugee receiving countries, refugees are allowed to enroll these introduction courses or civic integration courses. In Sweden they are not compulsory but they are monthly allowance that they receive is subject to participation in this program. They started in 1985 when again there was a policy change and according to this change the migration board and municipalities to responsibility for the integration of refugees and immigrants whereas before it was the labor board who was responsible for that. These courses consist on language training, civic and labor market orientation and they are for refugees and they are reunited families and they can last for up to 24 months. Again there was another policy shift in 2010 and the responsibility of this program was given to the Swedish public employment agency at the state level. So they went back to the pre-1985 situation and they did that because they saw that the labor market integration of refugees was being very slow. So in order to promote a faster integration they allocated more resources and they focused on employment. Now the results of this policy change are still uncertain, it's too early to say if it has had a positive effect or not but again there is another paper that looked at the policy change in 1985 when the responsibility for integration of immigrants was given to the migration board when before it was again the employment agency and according to this paper in the long run refugees average income decreased by 25 percent. So it was according to that paper it was not a positive shift. Now what does the literature say about immigrant labor market participation in Sweden and other parts of the world while in general there is a consensus that immigrants have lower employment rates and income than native Swedes and scholars explained this by the lower human capital attributes of immigrants also Swedish immigration policies and discrimination. There's also a consensus that refugees have lower employment rates and job income than other immigrants and they explained this by the same reasons but there is also some additional challenges when it comes to refugees for example there is higher difficulties in recognizing their foreign credentials they also have some physical and mental issues etc. And finally studies also show that resettled refugees have lower employment rates than asylum seekers and they explained this mostly by Swedish integration and settlement policies that I just referred to. So again asylum seekers can choose where they want to live whereas resettled refugees are not allowed to do that and they also in relation to this dispersion policies they also talk about the social capital so those who live with friends and relatives their acculturation process in the country is supposed to be faster because they already have some references and people who can tell them how to behave in a job interview they may help them with language issues etc. Other factors that have been mentioned in the literature that increase the probability of employment for both groups are human capital, social demographics like younger people it's easier for them to get a job again employment rates for men or higher and for people who have children actually if it's women then they have lower employment rates if it's men having children increases their employment rates. And finally people who live in Stockholm sorry refugees who live in Stockholm have higher employment rates as opposed to the rest of Sweden and they explained this because the service sector is bigger in Stockholm as compared to other countries. Finally immigrants from Vietnam and Bosnia Herzegovina are apparently doing better than other immigrants. So as I said today I will also present an empirical study that I conducted with my co-author Peter Beverlander and we looked at the role of intermarriage in the labor market integration of immigrants. So there are two main hypotheses on this field and one is that well the scholars agree that intermarried immigrants are doing better than non-intermarried immigrants in the labor market and when I say intermarried I am referring to intermarriage with native Swedes in this case and when I say intra-married then it will be immigrants married to other immigrants. It doesn't matter if they are from the same country or not. So they all agree that yes intermarried immigrants are doing better but they do not agree on the reasons behind this better performance. So some of them say that there is an intermarriage premium hypothesis according to this again the social networks and the cultivation process of intermarried immigrants would be easier, faster because they have somebody who can advise them on several aspects related to not only the labor market but again language training etc. And then there is another group of scholars who claims that intermarried immigrants yes they have better labor market outcomes but this is basically because they were already doing better when they were single so they are basically self-selected and they may have certain characteristics that makes them more attractive both in the labor market and let's call it marriage market. So we wanted to test these two hypotheses and we wanted to see whether in Sweden intermarried immigrants were actually doing better than intermarried immigrants and why. If this was because of there is an intermarriage premium or because they were self-selected. So we looked at employment rates and job income before and after marriage with that 10 year gap and we looked at three groups immigrants married to natives, immigrants married to other immigrants and natives married to natives. And we asked these three questions are the differences in employment at job income between intermarried and intra-married immigrants and how can we explain this. And finally we also asked whether there were differences by type of migration and we looked into labor migrants, family migrants and refugees. We used Swedish individual registered data from 1997 and 2007 and this data comprises the whole population of Sweden. We first selected married and cohabiting people in the 2007 data and then we identified the same people in the 1997 data but only we only selected those who were single in 1997 in order to see if they were actually doing better or not when they were not married to their native or immigrant partners. So we selected 25 to 60 year old individuals and 11% of our final sample were immigrants, 80% of them were intra-married with Swedes, 13% were intermarried with immigrants and 6% were intra-married immigrants. So we looked at employment, job income and also changing employment and income growth between those two years, 1997 and 2007. And our explanatory variables include human capital, socio-demographic, migration-related variables and also environmental context-related variables. So we used different regressions to see whether being intermarried versus intra-married had an effect on immigrants' employment and job income and we have different models for men and women. We also ran additional tests in order to see, to analyze the reasons behind these potential differences. So what did we find? As expected, we found that the probability of being employed and their job income are lower for immigrants than for natives with the exception of immigrants from higher inequality-adjusted human development index, but there's only two countries that have higher index than Sweden and these are Norway and Australia. But it is interesting to see that actually it's not only immigrants can be put in the same group, but some of them are actually doing better than natives. And the same is true for immigrants. So intermarried immigrants were doing better than intra-married immigrants. And these findings were confirmed for men and women with the exception of intra-married women, but this is also not surprising because since the household income is lower for in immigrant households, so often immigrant needs to women work longer hours than native women. A number of hours work is something that we could not control for. Labor migrants are also likely to perform better than other type of migrants, as expected. And other minorities are that male immigrants and naturalized immigrants are likely to perform better than their counterparts. So are these differences due to selection or is there an intermarriage premium? The first table here shows the employment rates of single individuals who were later going to be intermarried, sorry, here, versus intra-married. And as you can see, 70% of to be intermarried single immigrants were already employed in 1997, and this number was only 41% for those who were going to marry other immigrants later. So we can see that there is some self-selection going on here. For refugees, we found the opposite. Only 29% of those who were going to be married to natives were working, whereas the number was higher for... We selected those who were 25 to 60 year old, yes. This table shows the mean income, differences in mean income in 1997 again for single immigrants who were later going to be either intermarried or intra-married. And again, as you can see, the number is higher for those who were going to marry Swedish-born people than for their counterparts, but not for refugees. For refugees, those who were going to be married to natives had a lower income, and this is a bit surprising. This table is a little bit more complicated, but it shows the mobility in employment situation between 1997 and 2007. And we have four categories. Those... Sorry. The first one shows upward mobility, so from non-employment to employment. The second one shows the percentage of those who remained employed. The fourth one shows the number of those who stayed out of employment. And the last row shows the number of those who lost their employment. So the numbers are slightly more favorable for intermarried immigrants, and the differences are significant, but the differences are not so visible, actually. Interestingly, it is more obvious for refugees. So there was higher mobility in employment for refugees than for the rest of immigrants. And the last two tables shows the income growth of intra-married versus intermarried immigrants between 1997 when they were single and 2007. And as you can see, for immigrants in general, intermarried immigrants had a bigger growth, but for refugees it's almost not significant. It's actually statistically not significant. So to conclude, I will sum up by saying that intermarried immigrants are more likely to be employed and earn more than the intra-married ones, even when they were single. So the selection hypothesis is supported, but it is rejected for refugees. They were actually doing worse when they were single than those who were going to be intra-married. Their employment status and income improved significantly after marriage relative to intra-married immigrants. So the intermarriage premium hypothesis is also supported for immigrants in general, but only unemployment for refugees. Finally, we found that immigrants from less wealthier countries than Sweden are not doing as well as natives like other studies have said before. And refugees are the most disadvantaged group, especially resettled refugees. And the literature has explained this by settlement policies, self-selection, and social capital. And our empirical study on intermarriage also supports this previous hypothesis. Thank you.