 |
 |
|
|
Immigrant Integration: Building to Opportunity
By Brian Ray
Migration Policy Institute
|
|
Would you like to see more articles on this topic?
|
|
|
October 2002
Countries that receive immigrants today confront a migration context that in
many ways is different from that experienced in earlier decades. The frequency
and speed with which people can move between countries and continents means
that many can simultaneously maintain social, political, and even economic ties
in two or more societies. Transportation and communication technologies have
thrown into question the "permanence" of leaving a society of birth behind, and
have transformed the ways in which newcomers build new economic, social, and
cultural lives in the societies where they choose to settle. What does this
much more fluid context mean for understanding "integration" as a process that
can extend over generations? What are the challenges entailed in developing
integration policies in a dynamic and culturally diverse socio-political
context? What kind of integration is most desirable and useful, and for whom?
Social and Cultural Diversity
Unlike earlier eras, migrants today come from every region of the world and
represent an incredible array of linguistic and cultural heritages. Moreover,
the places that receive them, which are overwhelmingly cities in North America, Europe, and the
Asia-Pacific region (Australia, New Zealand, and the countries of East and
Southeast Asia), quickly become kaleidoscopes of
cultures, identities, and histories. These cities are the bedrock of integration
-- the places where the cultural diversity of today's newcomers, as well as the
challenges of living together as a community, are brought together in
neighborhoods that are truly multiethnic rather than homogeneous urban
villages.
The diversity of today's migration flows, however, does not end with culture,
language, or social class. While the vast majority arrive as legal migrants,
some skirt around immigration laws and management systems, and experience a
precarious life defined by an absence of legal status with respect to the
economy and social institutions of the receiving society. The vast majority of
newcomers make an active choice to build a life in a new country but others,
due to political and military turmoil or persecution, are forced into migration
and a state of "statelessness" that may last for years. For refugees, the
experiences of persecution and long-term forced displacement pose particular
challenges for reconciliation with the imposed status of being a migrant and
successful settlement in a new society.
To understand the ways in which immigrants and their children build lives in a
new society means that we conceive of integration as something more than simple
characterizations of the "melting pot" predicated upon a process of
unidirectional assimilation orchestrated by the receiving society. Integration
now is understood as a sustained mutual interaction between newcomers and the
societies that receive them; an interaction that may well last for generations.
Dealing directly with the complexities inherent in these interactions has
tremendous importance for the ways that groups live together, the quality of
public debate about migration, and especially the public policy goal of "good
governance" with respect to immigration for the benefit of newcomers and
long-time residents alike.
Symbolic and Social Integration: The Challenge of Fluid Concepts
There are, however, significant challenges inherent in understanding
integration as a process based on sustained interactions and mutual change, not
the least of which is the language we use to describe it. Our vocabulary seems
wedded to a normative vision of societies as culturally homogeneous, in which
residents born in other places are exceptional rather than customary
participants in economic, social, and cultural life. Moreover, terms such as
"minority" and "majority" connote fixed blocks and work on an implied
association between numerical dominance and social power that may not actually
be the case in multiethnic neighborhoods, cities and/or societies. In several
North American cities, "white" residents who are not foreign-born may be a
numerical minority but control the major economic and socio-cultural
institutions.
The Importance of the Symbolic: Cultural Integration
The cultural and/or symbolic dimensions of integration are in some ways the
most hotly debated because they are so closely associated with the quality of
interactions between newcomers, their descendents, and the receiving society, as
well as the adoption and/or rejection of cultural norms by newcomers and
long-established residents alike. In addition, the cultural dimensions of
integration are subject to re-invention, especially as later generations
re-discover and re-interpret an ancestral heritage in light of the positive
social values attached to "ethnic" heritages and identities in many societies.
Balancing cultural identities and a sense of belonging is a highly complex
process. For example, most studies acknowledge that cultural integration or
"acculturation" or "symbolic integration" -- the adoption by newcomers of the
cultural patterns of the receiving society -- often is already well underway
among all but the most isolated of cultural groups long before they set foot in
North America or Europe. Although it is readily assumed that newcomers begin to
"become American or European" only post-arrival, the global reach of western
culture, lifestyles and consumption patterns means that most newcomers are
already "western" to some degree before they arrive. Conventionally, cultural
integration is measured in terms of a sense of belonging to the receiving
society, the occasions and qualities of cultural contact between groups,
convergence of child rearing practices, and inter-group marriages, as well as
by the degree to which groups remain apart -- for example, separate religious
institutions and schools, or the intent to return one day to a home country.
One limitation of equating integration with acculturation is an implicit, and
sometimes explicit, expectation that immigrants will be incorporated directly
into the unwavering norms, values, and interests of the established receiving
society. This is clearly problematic given the numerous internal differences
that exist within most societies. For example, there are variations in American
culture from region to region, as well as across social classes. In the United
States, it is not reasonable to assume that immigrant cultural integration
occurs in relation to a single, middle-class cultural standard. Although
cosmopolitanism is often regarded as one of the defining qualities of western
culture, the recognition of plural influences and traditions within one society
seems to fall away in analyses of immigrant cultural integration. Contemporary
approaches to integration recognize that culture is an amalgam of different
influences and has evolved, and will continue to evolve, over time.
Running parallel to acculturation is the retention of some aspects of ancestral
cultural identities, norms, values, and traditions among individuals and groups
even generations after migration. The majority of Americans and Canadians, for
instance, readily acknowledge a non-North American ethnic ancestry that may be
rich in symbolic significance but holds little practical consequence. Through
analysis of the constituent elements of identity, it has been suggested that
ethnicity can be thought of as a cultural construction that is re-created or
"invented" by immigrants and their descendents in response to particular
economic, social, or structural conditions within the receiving society. The
fact of living in a neighborhood with other people from the same ethnic
background, for example, may furnish a critical mass of adherents to support
local religious institutions, mutual aid associations, or schools. Likewise, a
niche in the labor force dominated by one ethnic group may allow members to
utilize their language on a daily basis outside of the home or follow paths of
social mobility that demand less sustained interaction with the receiving
society. The "re-invented" ethnic identity and institutions that emerge out of
these conditions in the country of reception, however, may look, feel, and
function in a distinctly different manner compared to those found in the
country of origin or even those "re-invented" by earlier waves of newcomers who
came to the "new world."
Becoming acculturated into, or feeling a part of, a receiving society, and the
ways in which this is balanced against an ancestral heritage, is one important
dimension of the integration question. Although the strength of a simultaneous
attachment to a receiving society and an ancestral heritage may wax and wane
with time and across generations, it is generally assumed that feeling part of
the receiving society's culture is fairly rapid, especially as newcomers
improve their facility with the host society's language and exposure to the
popular media. Social integration, however, is seen as a much longer process in
part because it entails changes in socio-economic status from often a
relatively weak starting position in the labor market of the receiving society.
Making It: The Challenges of Social and Civic Integration
Social integration, and its synonyms "socio-economic," "instrumental," and
"functional" integration, is usually examined in North America, Europe, and the
Asia-Pacific region by measurable dimensions of status change such as education
levels, competency in the receiving society's language(s), type of occupation,
and household income. One of the benefits of these indicators is that they are
readily available in censuses or large-scale surveys, and correspond to
conventional understandings of how to measure upward social mobility. Regarded
as "instrumental" measures of integration, these indicators are frequently
positioned next to measures of "civic" integration such as participation by
newcomers in political parties, unions, churches, and voluntary associations.
Social and civic integration are frequently analyzed in tandem because they can
be mutually reinforcing -- for example, participation in the civic life of the
community can have 'tap on' benefits in terms of language acquisition and
information about employment and education opportunities. Like cultural
integration, the constituent elements of social and civic integration furnish a
snapshot of the meaning and quality of interactions between newcomers and the
receiving society.
- Linguistic Integration: e.g., language used in public interactions,
competency in a new language, language used in the home, language used in
inter-generational communication.
- Labor Market Integration: e.g., education level, labor force participation of
men and women, unemployment rate, labor market segmentation, socio-professional
mobility, individual and/or household income.
- Civic/Political Integration: e.g., participation in political parties,
unions, neighborhood associations, religious institutions and/or community
groups, registration to vote, voting behavior.
- Educational Integration: e.g., school performance, school drop-out rates,
choice of schools, post-secondary education attainment, interaction with
students from receiving society, parent-teacher communication.
- Residential Integration: e.g., degree of residential
concentration/segregation, residential mobility, homeownership rates, dwelling
size/crowding, discrimination in rental markets.
|
|
|
|
The degree of social integration and socio-economic mobility of immigrants has
typically been examined using an array of indicators from large-scale surveys
and censuses. Listed in the sidebar box are some of the variables used to
assess the principal trajectories of social integration and civic
participation. It should be noted, however, that it is difficult, if not
impossible, to identify the second generation in most data sources. In addition, there is
a general lack of good longitudinal analysis to assess effectively the
integration progress and experiences of newcomers and their descendents.
Integration Challenges & Policy Paths
Recent North American and European research indicates that immigrants quickly
adopt many conventional norms and values of the receiving society, while still
maintaining a strong positive valuation of their culture and language.
Socio-economic integration and mobility, however, may be proceeding at a slower
pace, especially relative to earlier generations.
A large-scale American study led by Alejandro Portes and Rubén Rumbaut
examining the education experiences, aspirations, and socio-economic mobility of
the children of immigrants confirms that the vast majority, regardless of
ethnic origin, aspire to college degrees and professional-level occupations. In this, they mirror the aspiration profile of American-born youth overall.
However, a large proportion of these children grow up under conditions of
severe disadvantage and face major impediments to attaining their goals. In the
United States, this is especially true for Mexicans, Haitians, Laotians,
Nicaraguans and Cambodians, who find their futures blocked by a lack of
resources and suitable training, as well as by racial discrimination. This
strong mismatch between aspirations and the resources for attaining goals has
led some researchers to suggest that the second generation may be trapped
between the low-skill/income jobs and education histories of their parents and
their own American-style aspirations.
The disappearance of many well-paid, if relatively low-skill, middle-class jobs
due to economic restructuring in essence has created an hourglass employment
profile in which most job opportunities are clustered at either the low- or
high-skill/paid ends of the employment spectrum. The "disappearing middle" has
left the children of immigrants with the daunting challenge of leaping in a
single generation from the low-paid menial service employment opportunities
occupied by their parents to well-paid professional and technical jobs
requiring advanced education and training. Although second-generation success
stories can be identified, for many young people these experiences are the
exception rather than the rule. The blocked social mobility and integration of
the second generation, spawned by accelerated immigration policies in the 1980s
and 1990s, as well as limited integration assistance programs in many cities,
may well over time become manifest as social fragmentation rather than
inclusion.
There are numerous integration challenges that newcomers and their children
face in immigrant receiving countries, blocked social mobility of the second
generation being just one. Meeting challenges in part demands effective social
and economic policies that can address the circumstances that immigrants
encounter in the places where they settle. Immigration is a public policy that
is largely regulated at the national level in terms of who enters a country and
in what numbers, but the effects of immigration and the integration issues
raised by national-level decisions are largely felt at a very local level.
Unlike other social needs, such as health care and education, where demand is
fairly consistent in all places across a nation, immigrant integration is a
highly localized policy issue due to the fact that immigrants show a strong
propensity to settle in places with good employment opportunities and "built
in" ethnic community social ties that are available to assist in initial
settlement.
Not only do immigrants settle overwhelmingly in some large "gateway" cities
(e.g., New York, Los Angeles, Toronto, London, Paris, Sydney, Melbourne), they
also tend to concentrate in particular inner-city neighborhoods and, increasingly,
in suburban districts. In order to undertake effective public policy
development and service delivery, this "uneven geography" of settlement will
challenge national-level governments to develop effective relationships with
local municipal governments and non-governmental organizations. Integration
policies and programs ultimately will succeed when they are grounded in the
particular socio-economic, cultural, and political circumstances of communities
that receive immigrants and refugees. Neighborhoods and cultural communities
within cities are the crucibles of integration, and it is extremely important
that their capacity to undertake this important work is strong. We need to ask
critical questions about whether communities are as capable of integrating
newcomers as they were in earlier times and if not, what accounts for changes
in their integration capacity.
There is, of course, tremendous variation across North America, Europe, and the
Asia-Pacific region in the ways national and local governments communicate,
share power, and deliver programs, as well as in how governments at all levels
interact with the non-governmental sector that often does a large share of
integration work. To achieve an inclusive society, research indicates that
structures supporting aspirations and upward mobility are fundamental.
Likewise, it is necessary to examine seriously the dynamics of a society that
is culturally pluralistic and abandon simplistic assumptions that assimilation
to a nebulous "western" cultural standard is the only path to social cohesion.
To meet these challenges, innovative strategies that unite state and civil
society institutions will be necessary to ensure that policy and programs can
be truly responsive to the on-the-ground realities of migration and the
integration challenges faced by newcomers in contemporary urban economies and
culturally pluralistic neighborhoods and workplaces.
Back to the top
|
|
Press
Room
Need an interview?
Go straight to The Source. |
Archives
Missed a story?
Find it here. |
Links
External resources
and data sites. |
Site
Map
Find your way to the news you need. |
Copyright @
2009 Migration Policy Institute.
All rights reserved.
MPI · 1400 16th St. NW, Suite 300 · Washington, DC 20036
ph: (001) 202-266-1940 · fax: (001) 202-266-1900
source@migrationpolicy.org
|
|
 |
