Search strategy for identifying studies

With the assistance of an academic librarian, we conducted a preliminary search of MEDLINE, PROSPERO, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports for any relevant systematic reviews and found no reviews examining the predictors, facilitators, and barriers to refugee women’s employment, economic inclusion, and the impact of their social, cultural, political, and/or personal identities on their experiences. A priori protocol has been published in PROSPERO (Registration ID: CRD42023413388).

We executed a comprehensive and systematic search strategy using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines [20] and the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for mixed methods systematic reviews [21]. We searched the following databases: (1) Academic Source Complete, (2) Business Source Elite, (3) Business Source Complete, (4) Family and Society Studies Worldwide, (5) PsycINFO, and (6) Scopus. Boolean operators AND/OR were used to narrow or broaden the search using a combination of the keywords. Search terms included: (refugees or asylum seekers) AND (women or female or woman or females) AND (employment or jobs or work or career). The following limiters were used: publications in the English language, peer reviewed, and the date of publication between January 1^st 2011 and March 31, 2023. We also manually screened the reference lists of included studies for other relevant studies for inclusion. All search results were collated and uploaded into the bibliographic software, Endnote (V.20), and duplicates were removed before data extraction.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

We limited the review to empirical studies in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature published in English from January 1^st 2011 to March 31, 2023 to capture the recent refugee waves resulting from invasions, wars, and international conflicts including the Middle East, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and Southeast Asia. We utilized the PICO mnemonic (population, intervention, comparator, outcomes) for the quantitative component and the PICo mnemonic (population, phenomenon of interest, context) for the qualitative component. Participants in the quantitative and mixed-methods component were women with a refugee background (18 years old or older). Interventions were considered if they involved any vocational training program or employment models. Both active and passive comparison groups were included as comparator(s). Case reports, study protocols, discussion papers, editorials, and literature reviews, as well as any studies with a target population that were not refugee women, written in a language other than English, or published before 2011 were excluded.

Study selection and quality assessment

This review considered quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies. Two team members (AA and KM) independently screened titles and abstracts according to eligibility criteria. Next, the same two members assessed in detail full-text articles of all eligible studies against the eligibility criteria. The yields from the search results are presented in a PRISMA flow diagram with a clarification of various stages of article screening to reach the final included studies [20], including reasons for exclusion. The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist was used to appraise the selected articles with two reviewers independently appraising the included studies (AA and YY) using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for analytical cross-sectional studies [22] and qualitative research [23]. (See S2 File for the critical appraisal results). Any discrepancies or disagreements that arose during the review were settled through conversation or with the help of a third reviewer (KM) to confirm analyses and minimize biases and preconceptions.

Data extraction and data synthesis

Data were extracted using the JBI standardized quantitative and qualitative data extraction tool. Data were retrieved from studies and contained specific information about the populations, study procedures and methods, and results that were relevant to the review questions and aims. A research assistant and one reviewer (AA) carried out data extraction, and a second reviewer verified the extraction (YY). See the S1 File for the extraction table of the included studies The quantitative and qualitative extracted data were first analyzed and synthesized separately before integrated findings were prepared using a matrix approach for the comparison and to evaluate their complementarity [18]. The research team together with the two research assistants continually verified and validated the data extraction tools to ensure their completeness and clarity based on each team member’s experience or expertise in quantitative or qualitative research design.

Quantitative synthesis

This synthesis includes studies exploring factors affecting refugee women’s employment and economic inclusion, including barriers and facilitators. The standardized data extraction tool for prevalence and incidence available in JBI SUMARI was used to conduct the meta-analysis module, and the standard I2 tests were used to assess heterogeneity. The results of the meta-analysis were described using narrative.

Qualitative synthesis

Two reviewers (AA and KM) conducted the qualitative synthesis using a meta-aggregative approach using Joanna Briggs Institute System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information using JBI SUMARI [18, 24–27]. This process involved three steps: coding text and findings from eligible studies; developing categories based on similarities and constant comparison; and then combining the categories to produce synthesized findings. The Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (CERQual) approach was used to guide the overall assessment of the qualitative synthesis and to ensure confidence in the findings for informing decisions about guideline development and policy recommendations [28].

Meta-integration

After the separate quantitative and qualitative syntheses, we performed a meta-integration to juxtapose synthesized quantitative results with the qualitative synthesized findings [29]. No data transformation was conducted and we aimed to aggregate the studies so that statistical inference can be strengthened by qualitative synthesis and also aimed to provide meaningful and practical guidelines for practice and policymaking [29]. A matrix approach was adopted and revealed complex connections between quantitative and qualitative data [29]. The matrix strategy allows us to map the review findings and perform a side-by-side comparison to identify similarities and differences that were depicted in both quantitative and qualitative findings. If data from quantitative and qualitative synthesis relate to each other, we classify these as “complementary.” Otherwise, we classify the data as “conflicting” and requiring more investigation [29]. All authors contributed to the data synthesis and integration.

Methodological quality

Two reviewers (AA and YY) separately carried out quality assessments on the included studies, making use of the JBI critical evaluation checklists. These checklists had eight questions for analytical cross-sectional studies, 11 questions for cohort studies [22], and 10 questions for qualitative studies [23]. In cases where the reviewers did not agree, a third reviewer was brought in (KM), and then consensus was reached through discussion. If an answer was given as (not applicable) or (unclear), it was interpreted as the criteria not being fulfilled. Studies that garnered a score below 60 percent based on the quality assessment queries were not included. One mixed-method study warranted an evaluation using both cross-sectional and qualitative appraisal tools as a result of the study type. The methodological quality scores in detail, the questions, and the corresponding answer key for each study according to its design are provided in the S2 File for the critical appraisal of the included studies. The scores for the methodological quality for the 19 qualitative studies ranged from 70 to 90 percent and for the 11 quantitative studies ranged from 63.6 to 100 percent and 77 percent for the mixed method study.

Characteristics of included studies

This review involved 31 studies which include 11 quantitative, 19 qualitative, and one mixed-methods study. Of the included studies, the highest number of studies were conducted in the USA [8, 30–33], and one that involved both the US and the Netherlands [34]. Four studies were conducted in Sweden [15, 35–37], including one that spanned both Lebanon and Sweden [38]. Australia also had four studies [39–42]. Jordan was represented in three studies [43–45] and jointly with Lebanon in one study [46]. Two studies were conducted in Canada [47, 48] and South Africa [49, 50] respectively. Two studies involved multiple countries, including the Democratic Republic of Congo, Burundi, and Zimbabwe [51] and the Eurozone of the European Union [52]. One study was conducted in each of the following countries: Austria [53], Denmark [54], Ireland [55], South Korea [56], Turkey [57], and the UK [58].

The quantitative studies mainly employed a cross-sectional survey design (n = 6), and retrospective and prospective cohort designs (n = 5), though one study combined a cross-sectional survey with a phenomenological approach in a mixed-methods study. These studies covered an extensive sample of 29,255 women with a refugee background, with individual study samples ranging from 159 to 6,227 participants. The qualitative studies predominantly used descriptive designs (n = 10), incorporating in-depth interviews or a blend of interviews and focus groups. They engaged specific qualitative approaches such as feminist grounded theory (n = 1), narrative inquiry (n = 2), ethnography (n = 2), case study (n = 1), community-based participatory research (n = 1), phenomenology (n = 1), and hermeneutic research (n = 1) to delve into particular aspects of refugee women’s experiences. See S3 File for the PRISMA checklist.

Refugee women employment rate

Out of the 12 studies incorporated in the quantitative synthesis, seven either explicitly mentioned the employment rate or we deduced the rate. The employment rates for women with a refugee background depicted in these studies showed a substantial variation depending on the countries and demographics under study. Table 1 summarizes the refugee women’s employment rate based on the host country in the included studies. When pooling data from these seven studies (with one study contributing two separate data sources), we computed an average employment rate of 31.1 percent, with a 95 percent confidence interval ranging from 30.4 to 31.8 percent (refer to Fig 2 for details).

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Fig 2. Refugee women employment forest PlotDemographic and well-being factors.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0305463.g002

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Table 1. Employment rate per country.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0305463.t001

Several demographic factors were associated with employment such as age, health perception, household size, dependent children, and education. For instance, six studies found that older age is a constraint to employment [8, 30, 32, 41, 57]. One study reported that child-bearing age and parenthood at age 30 have a significant negative impact on employment [35]. Furthermore, mental and physical health were both significant predictors for employment opportunities [33, 58]. For example, Government Assistance Refugee (GAR) were less likely to have opportunities to demonstrate their skills in the workforce, which could have a negative impact on their mental health [48]. Additionally, the skill development programme to foster employment has a considerable positive impact on the participants’ health and personal growth [45]. The structure and characteristics of a family also wield substantial influence on the employment status of women with a refugee background. For instance, marital status was found to be a facilitator of employment among refugee women in Sweden because marital status can provide additional social and economic support, easing integration into the job market [32, 35]. Conversely, having a larger household size was identified as an impediment to employment [57], while having more children posed significant barriers to employment [41]. Cheung and Phillimore [58] reported that in the UK, women with a refugee background with dependent children were less likely to be employed, a fact that was echoed by studies in the United States [8], and South Korea [56], where researchers found that having young children adversely affected refugee women’s employment prospects.

Education was a crucial determinant in refugee women’s employment. Research conducted across various countries, including Turkey [57], Sweden [35, 36], Australia [41], and the US [8, 33] indicates that higher levels of education are positively correlated with improved employment prospects for women with a refugee background. However, despite possessing advanced educational qualifications, refugee women often encounter challenges in capitalizing on their education to secure economic opportunities. Stempel and Alemi [33] highlighted that such difficulties in converting educational attainments into economic capital could pose constraints on the employment opportunities available to women with a refugee background. The employment of refugee women has profound implications for their overall wellbeing, including their mental health [42, 45, 48, 58]. Securing meaningful and appropriate employment not only facilitates economic stability but also enhances self-esteem and social integration, which are crucial for mental health [48]. However, when refugee women find themselves in jobs that do not match their qualifications or previous experience, it can lead to underemployment, which often results in stress, anxiety, and a diminished sense of self-worth [48]. The constant challenge of navigating a new cultural environment and facing workplace discrimination can exacerbate feelings of isolation and depression [48].

Societal and cultural factors

Several societal and cultural factors played pivotal roles in affecting refugee women’s employment prospects. The region of origin and cultural background of refugees were significant determinants that can influence their integration into host countries and their ability to secure employment [33, 35, 41]. Additionally, the geographical location within the host country itself can offer varying employment opportunities to women with a refugee background, as studies conducted in Turkey [57], Australia [41], and the United States [30, 32] found. Refugee women’s employment experiences were significantly shaped by their region of origin and cultural background. In developed areas like Europe, North America, and Australia, they faced challenges such as cultural and language barriers, unrecognized qualifications, and restrictive gender norms, all of which can limit their job opportunities. In other regions, less stringent regulations may exist, but social integration and acceptance still present substantial hurdles. Furthermore, the employment prospects of refugee women varied based on cultural background; those from conservative cultures often struggle more due to strict gender norms, while women from cultures with higher female labor participation may find it easier to adapt to work environments.

Work experience in the host country [41] and the duration of stay were also significant factors, with studies demonstrating that these attributes enhanced the employment prospects of women with refugee background [8, 30, 33, 35]. In contrast, host countries’ societal attitudes regarding refugee women’s rights and roles served as obstacles to their employment [46].

Language proficiency was another critical issue. Proficiency in the host country’s language has been found to facilitate employment among refugee women [8, 32, 33, 57, 58]. Building a network of personal contacts, especially with locals in the host country, has also been shown to positively affect employment opportunities for refugee women [56].

Availability of government and nongovernmental resources

The effectiveness of governmental support stands as a significant predictor for employment among women with a refugee background. Extended case management was found to facilitate employment among refugee women in the US [32]. Extended case management, spanning two years, can significantly enhance refugees’ employment prospects. This comprehensive support model provides ongoing guidance, which helps refugees navigate complex job markets, overcome language barriers, and acquire necessary local qualifications [32]. Consistent assistance over two years allows for sustained personal development and skill acquisition, fostering a better alignment between refugees’ capabilities and job opportunities [32]. While public employment agencies bolster the probability of refugee women securing employment, receiving governmental benefits tends to diminish the vigor of the women’s job search activities [56]. For example, Social Security Benefits for north Korean female refugees in South Korea have a negative impact on wages [56]. Refugee women anticipating these benefits tend to avoid pursuing jobs with higher wages to remain eligible for the benefits [56]. This behavior makes it challenging for North Korean refugees to secure employment with wages significantly exceeding the threshold for receiving the benefits [56]. Governmental initiatives can also result in diverse employment outcomes, including work-first policies, which are often influenced by gender [41, 54]. The work-first policy in Denmark that mandates refugees to actively search for jobs and participate in on-the-job training upon arrival has implications that are often influenced by gender due to stigma. This policy assumes that all refugees can immediately enter the workforce, which overlooks the distinct challenges faced by many women [54].

When it comes to nongovernmental resources, an increase in employment has been associated with certain factors including the engagement in mass media and associations. For instance, Demirci and Kırdar [57] found that membership in the host country associations positively impacted employment among women with a refugee background. Additionally, engagement with mass media, such as job announcements in the public domain and internet searches, served as instrumental avenues for employment opportunities for this population [56].

Synthesized finding 1: The meaning and significance of employment

The synthesized finding discusses the meaning of employment as a significant factor for refugee women’s health, well-being, and autonomy [42, 45, 55]. Employment fosters dignity, personal growth, and shifts in gender roles [44, 55]. Moreover, it’s seen as an empowering mechanism that helps overcome language barriers and achieve financial independence [38, 43]. Practical achievements such as acquiring a driver’s license have the potential to enhance refugee women’s agency, mobility, work prospects, and community ties [15]. Simultaneously, employment facilitates local interactions, language acquisition, and understanding the host country’s social norms [42]. Huq and Venugopal [40] emphasized the significance of entrepreneurial journeys among women with a refugee background, underscoring their resilience and capacity for self-reconstruction. However, not all findings were positive. Ghorashi [34] noted that the distinct feeling of being “other” and the underappreciation of refugee women’s skills often create emotional barriers to assimilation. Additionally, refugee women’s focus tends to be on immediate survival needs rather than long-term professional advancement [50].

This synthesized finding reveals employment’s critical role in enhancing refugee women’s personal growth, empowerment, autonomy, well-being, and cultural integration. Although it is typically an economic necessity, employment also aids in overcoming language barriers and understanding the host country’s norms. However, feelings of alienation and overlooked skills often impede emotional connection to the host culture and eventually affect refugee women’s interest in seeking employment and economic integration.

Synthesized finding 2: Barriers to employment

This synthesized finding presents an analysis of the barriers that women with a refugee background face in gaining employment in their host countries. Multiple studies identify language barriers and lack of recognized credentials as key obstacles [30, 40, 47, 48, 51, 55]. Systemic obstacles, such as allocation policies, inefficient resettlement agencies and interpretation services, and lack of overall support, have also been recognized as substantial challenges to employment [30]. Spehar [37] shed light on the devaluation of refugee women’s skills and the psychological barrier of “starting over” as additional obstacles.

Experiences of xenophobia, violence, and issues with document accessibility, sexism, and work-life balance impede refugee women’s employment [50]. Their dependency on public benefits, and their social isolation, family separation, and limited support further compound the problems, restricting their employment opportunities [30]. Kikulwe, Massing [47] noted the impact of the loss of security and autonomy on refugee women’s employment, while Darawsheh, Bewernitz [30] and Smit and Rugunanan [51] brought attention to the host country’s discriminatory practices.

Structural and patriarchal cultural factors also present barriers to refugee women’s employment including community expectations of women to have a caring attitude and to work with children and the elderly [15]. During the COVID-19 pandemic, these challenges were amplified by gender and racism-based arrangements in fragmented and limited labor markets [52]. These arrangements highlight how structural inequities in the labor market rooted in gender and racial discrimination can lead to unequal economic impacts, which were particularly pronounced during the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, domestic violence experiences have also been identified as detrimental to refugee women’s employment prospects [39].

The data provide a perspective on the systemic, cultural, and personal challenges that these women encounter when pursuing employment. Key barriers for refugee women’s employment included: language difficulties, unrecognized qualifications, and systemic inadequacies, like resettlement policies and insufficient support. Experiences of discrimination, violence, and societal expectations further compound these issues. The COVID-19 pandemic added more strain, further marginalizing women with a refugee background in the workforce.

Synthesized finding 3: Facilitators of employment and coping strategies

The studies for this synthesized finding highlighted the resourcefulness women with a refugee background who adapt to their circumstances and leverage various personal and social assets to secure employment. These resourcefulness initiatives include entrepreneurship initiatives, like opening hair salons or street vending [49] and specific career choices such as teaching [38]. Networking also emerged as a significant employment facilitator [43]. Furthermore, opportunities to develop postmigration human capital, including language proficiency, personal agency factors including personal motivation and goals and professional skill sets, digital literacy, and skills development programs, positively affected employment outcomes [38, 53]. Language, education, and work experience upon arrival also provided flexibility for labor market entry [48]. Access to transportation, such as having a driver’s license, broadened refugee women’s work prospects [15]. There’s an intricate relationship between employment and education, with each aspect reciprocally influencing the other to enhance refugee women’s employment [42].

The data revealed a range of strategies that women with a refugee background employ when they’re faced with employment constraints. These livelihood strategies included engagement with social media, part-time or sporadic work [51], and employment in traditional female roles such as in hospitality, retail, and performing menial tasks [31, 49]. Adaptive cognitive reasoning and behavior modification (e.g. activity scheduling, psycho‐education, problem‐focused and mindfulness) after women experience domestic violence also assisted in enhancing their employment prospects [39]. Engaging in career development, language proficiency, and digital literacy foster refugee women’s social engagement, employment, and economic inclusion to meet individual and family needs [38].

Review implications

The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis have critical implications across the domains of policy and administration, practice, and research. From a policy and administration perspective, the evidence underscores the need for responsive and targeted policies that address the specific barriers that women with a refugee background encounter in their journey toward employment. These might include gender-sensitive and inclusive policies that facilitate the recognition and validation of foreign qualifications, language acquisition, and the development of skills relevant to the host country’s job market. Administrative procedures need to be mindful of the intersectional issues that refugee women face, which necessitate cross-sectoral collaborations to provide comprehensive support. Host governments must enact and enforce policies that combat xenophobia, discrimination, and violence against women with a refugee background, ensuring their safety and protection in the workplace. They also should raise awareness and provide training to employers, communities, and service providers on gender equality, cultural sensitivity, and the rights and contributions of refugee women.

In terms of practice, the findings highlight the crucial role of health and social practitioners working with refugee women to understand the barriers and facilitators to their employment. Settlement agencies and organizations working with refugees may need to take proactive steps to help women navigate these complexities, whether that involves arranging language classes, providing resources for credential recognition, or offering career advice and guidance. Developing language training programs specifically tailored to the needs of women with a refugee background, and focusing on improving their language proficiency to facilitate employment opportunities will also be crucial. We also need to establish streamlined processes for recognizing and validating the educational credentials of refugee women, ensuring that their qualifications are acknowledged and utilized in the host country’s job market.

Finally, in terms of research, the findings highlight the need for further exploration of the intricate dynamics influencing refugee women’s employment rates. Future studies should aim to unpack the mechanisms underlying the factors we’ve identified, examine the efficacy of different interventions and employment models, and prioritize comprehensive designs that encompass diverse geographic locations and study populations. Longitudinal studies might offer valuable insights into the long-term trajectories of refugee women’s employment and the factors influencing their progress. Ultimately, continued research in this area is vital for informing effective, evidence-based policies and practices to improve the employment prospects of women with a refugee background.

Review limitation

While our mixed-method systematic review, based on Sandelowski’s (2006) segregated approach, provides unique insights into refugee women’s employment, it also has inherent limitations. The use of only English-language studies and studies published from 2011 onward could have excluded potentially relevant research. In particular, valuable insights might be overlooked from non-English-speaking countries where the refugee situation is significant. Our review may also be impacted by publication bias, where studies showing significant results are more likely to be published and therefore included in our review. Finally, meta-integration, while a strength in revealing complex connections, still depends on the quality and relevance of both quantitative and qualitative syntheses.