Integration_processes_of_migrants_Research_finding

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/254917976
Integration processes of migrants. Research ﬁndings and policy lessons
Chapter · January 2006
CITATIONS READS
4 401
1 author:
R. Penninx
University of Amsterdam
280 PUBLICATIONS 3,442 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by R. Penninx on 04 April 2019.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

______________________________________________________________________________________________ 137
CHAPTER 8
INTEGRATION OF MIGRANTS: ECONOMIC, SOCIAL,

CULTURAL AND POLITICAL DIMENSIONS
Rinus Penninx
Introduction integration policies, their special relationship with

immigration policies, the different types of policies and
This paper discusses the integration processes of their possible convergence. Having mapped the field
immigrants and minorities with a recent immigrant roughly, I will then explore the nature of integration
background, and the policies related to the process of processes, their conceptualisation and lessons from
settlement of these newcomers in European societies. It empirical studies. The reason for devoting some space to
thus excludes what are often called ‘regional minorities’, these topics is the assertion that any integration policy
such as Frisians in the Netherlands, or Basques in Spain should be based on a thorough, scientifically-based
and France. As an initial premise, I would like to suggest knowledge of the processes of integration and exclusion:
that the experience and policies of different countries if a policy wants to steer such a process, it should have a
with integration reflects their experience and policies of clear idea of what instruments it can use to possibly
immigration. Significant post-war immigration in Europe intervene, in which part of the process, and at what
started early in the North-West European countries particular moment.
(1950s to 1970s), later in Southern Europe (1980s and
1990s) and even more recently in Central and Eastern Such knowledge is a solid starting point for policy-
European countries (1990s). Experience with integration making, but it is not enough. The processes of policy-
policies follows in the same sequence: we see the longest making and implementation follow their own set course,
experience with integration policies in (some countries which do not necessarily run parallel to the process of
of) North-Western Europe; limited and more recent integration. That is why, in the following section, I
efforts in the Southern European countries; and attempt to explain some of these processes.
practically an absence of such policies in Eastern and At the end of this paper I return to the core
Central Europe as yet. (At the time of the socialist questions of immigration and integration policies on the
regime, these latter countries were often confronted with one hand, and the relationship between local, national and
the integration of regional minorities: however, at that international integration policies on the other. What will
time the process of integration was dealt with quite the future hold for this field?
differently and many migrations were considered to be
‘internal’).
Overview of migration and integration policies
As a consequence, this paper will inevitably lean
heavily on the North-West European experience and the in Europe
lessons to be learnt from research and policy there.
The immigration-integration nexus
This paper will cover integration policies at all
relevant levels: from the local level of municipalities and International migration has become a major
cities, to the national level of states, and the international phenomenon worldwide in recent decades. Europe has
level of the European Union. Within this general received a significant share of it. According to the
approach, however, I will put a strong emphasis on the OECD, at the end of the 20th century there was a total of
local level, since that is the level where such policies more than 20 million ‘foreigners’ living in the countries
have to be implemented and are primarily felt, both by of the European Economic Area (OECD, 2001, p.12).
the immigrants themselves and by those parts of society That amounts to 5.3 per cent of the total population in
that are most affected by immigration. that area, and it does not include naturalised immigrants.
Nor does it include undocumented immigrants or those
To describe the current status of integration research waiting for asylum or other applications. The recent IOM
and policies, this paper will cover the following. In the report (IOM, 2003, p.29), apparently using somewhat
first section, I will outline the context of European broader criteria, estimates the ‘migrant stocks’ in the
138 ______________________________________________________________________ The new demographic regime
whole European continent at more than 56 million, or 7.7 immigration figures than the classical immigration
per cent of the total population. countries, measured simply by the percentage of foreign-
born within their total population. For example,
Migration movements into Europe have a variety of
Switzerland and Germany have higher percentages than
backgrounds and forms. On the one hand, uneven
the United States. So the facts of immigration are to a
development and political instability, combined with the
greater or lesser extent the same as in those countries, but
availability and affordability of new communication
the perception is not. This has pervasive consequences
media and transport, have generated greater migration
for how immigrants are perceived, and what place they
pressures and supply-driven migration movements. On
are attributed in society in general, and in the political
the other hand, demographic and economic developments
system in particularly, as we will see later. As a
within Europe itself have given rise to new demand-
consequence, integration policies at the national level
driven movements into some countries, and will
have generally been developed late or not at all, Sweden
presumably will do so into other countries in the near
and the Netherlands being exceptional cases here. And if
future.
such policies have been formulated, this was often done
While the figures mentioned for Europe as a whole as a consequence of a crisis situation relating to
may be impressive in themselves, they do not mirror the immigration or immigrants, and in most cases the result
real impact of the new phenomenon, because migration was piecemeal.
and settlement patterns of immigrants are uneven, both in
Within the emerging context of the European
space and in time. Some European countries, like
Union, such perceptions and ensuing policies of member
Switzerland, Belgium and France, had a long pre-war
states may change in the future. The fresh ideas
history of immigration which resumed again soon after
published by the European Commission (2000 and 2003)
WWII. Others experienced increasing immigration in the
on new immigration policies (‘Communication on a
decades following WWII – mostly against their stated
Community Immigration Policy’ of 22 November, 2000)
will of becoming an immigration country – these
and on integration policies for immigrants
included the United Kingdom, Sweden, Germany,
(‘Communication on Immigration, Integration and
Austria and the Netherlands. For a number of European
Employment’ of 3 June, 2003) could in the long run
countries, such as Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece and
promote more balanced, pro-active and comprehensive
Ireland, which used to be emigration countries until
policies within the EU. To be realistic, however, at
recently, immigration has taken off in just the last decade
present the situation is one that does not fit the present
or so. Obviously, such historical differences are reflected
and future state of migration, nor the situation of
in the size of the immigrant population: the order in
immigrants: policies relating to immigration within the
which the countries are mentioned above roughly
EU area are essentially ambivalent. On the one hand, the
correlates with a decreasing percentage of their
EU created essentially a fundamental right to migrate
population of immigrant origin.
within the EU area for citizens of its member states;
The impact, however, cannot be described only by furthermore a fairly lenient policy is practised in all states
figures. The perspective through which the phenomenon for highly skilled and company-linked migrants from
of immigration is perceived and defined is relevant. outside the EU. On the other hand, EU member states
During the last three decades a common feature of all have developed a restrictive and defensive - but largely
European countries has been their ad hoc, reactive and ineffective - immigration policy to keep out all other
control-oriented character, in clear contrast to the more unasked-for migrants. These policies have been more
explicit and pro-active policies of countries such as politically driven – through the perception mentioned
Canada, Australia and the United States. These classic above – than research-based. Integration policies at EU
immigration countries have a history in which level are still in their infancy.
immigration has been a crucial element of the growth of
European Union immigration policies are, in
their societies and they are aware of that. In those
principle but not always in practice, policies of the whole
countries, there is a basic acceptance of immigration and community – they are a competence of the European
they have developed elaborate institutional settings to Commission – but integration policies are not.
handle it. Of course, the merits of immigration are Integration policies, however, are not Communitarian
discussed there too, and both the discourse on migration policies: national authorities make their sovereign
and its factual development change over time, but still decisions on policies in this domain. Any common
that basic acceptance has not been fundamentally initiative can only be implemented by a unanimous
challenged. The common feature of Europe, on the decision of the Council of Ministers. As such policies are
contrary, is one of a basic non-acceptance of context-bound in content, and at the same time
immigration. procedurally non-binding, it will take much time and
Despite the fact that most North-West European effort to develop a common base for integration policies
countries deliberately do not call themselves immigration at the EU level.
countries, some of these countries actually have higher
Integration of migrants ___________________________________________________________________________ 139
A typology of integration policies FIGURE 1
In order to understand the present integration A typology space of migrant integration policies
policies of European countries and their differences, I INCLUSION EXCLUSION
will first develop a basic typology. This typology is
1 2 3 4 5 6
based on a simple analytical framework that centres
around the concept of ‘citizenship’. Recently political Type
theorists have contributed significantly to our thinking on Legal/political
citizenship, particularly when they have tried to answer + + + - - -
dimension
the question of how basic democratic values can and
should be combined with the two essentials of any Socio-economic
+ + - + - -
dimension
integration policy: cultural and religious diversity on the
one hand and socio-economic equality on the other Cultural-religious
+ - - + + -
(Bauböck, 1994; Bauböck et al., 1996; Brubaker, 1989 dimension
and 1992; Hammar, 1990; Kymlicka, 1995; Soysal, 1994;
Young, 1990). different integration policies. To create a typology chart
For this typology, I distinguish, on the basis of of all combination of policies that countries may adopt,
current scientific literature, three different aspects or we give either a positive (+) or negative (-) score for each
dimensions of citizenship. The first is the legal/political of the three aspects of citizenship described above (figure
dimension: this refers to the basic question of whether (or 1). The different possible combinations of these scores
at what stage) immigrants are regarded as fully-fledged then defines the six possible models of approaches to
members of the political community. In practice the integration.
question is first of all whether alien immigrants have From this simple typology a number of things
secure residence rights - and if they have, how far become clear. The first and foremost distinction is the
immigrants and ethnic minorities have formal political one between inclusive and exclusive policies, based on
rights and duties, and if these differ from those of natives. the legal-political dimension: if migrants or immigrants
This also includes the question whether newcomers may are not regarded as (potentially) part of the political
(easily or not) acquire national citizenship and thus gain community of the country or local community, and if
access to the formal political system; it also includes the their legal/political position is essentially different from
granting (or not) of political rights to non-nationals, for national citizens, I call these exclusionist policies (types
example at the local administrative level. Also the 4, 5 and 6). Among these are the so-called ‘guest-worker
opportunities for less formal political participation, such policies’ introduced after the Second World War. Such
as through consultative structures for immigrants, would migration was defined as temporary, and thus
be part of this dimension. exclusionist, i.e. types 4, 5 or 6. Dutch policies until
The second is the socio-economic dimension of 1980, for example, fitted perfectly type 4, since they
citizenship: this pertains to the social and economic rights combined political exclusion and a special legal position
of residents, irrespective of national citizenship; these for these alien guest-workers with, in principle, equal
include industrial rights, and rights related to access to rights in the socio-economic sphere and a policy of
facilities (such as labour market mediation and training, encouraging them to ‘retain their cultural and religious
unemployment and other benefits) in the socio-economic identity’ in view of their anticipated return. Austrian and
sphere. Do they have (equal) rights to accept work and to Swiss guest-worker policies have fitted (and still do to a
use such institutional facilities to find it? Do they have great extent) to types 5 or 6, in the sense that they
the same rights as indigenous workers? Do they have combine political exclusion with unequal industrial and
access to work-related benefits, such as unemployment social rights.
benefit and insurance, as well as to state-provided social Policies of the North-West European countries have
security provisions, such as social housing, social moved over the course of time within the typology space.
assistance and welfare and care facilities. In the late 1970s and 1980s, for example, countries such
The third dimension pertains to the domain of the as Sweden, the Netherlands, Belgium and France
cultural and religious rights of immigrants: do they have explicitly acknowledged that most of their (former)
(equal) rights to organise themselves and meet together as labour migrants would be settling for good and that more
cultural, ethnic or religious groups? Are they recognised, inclusive policies were necessary (Vermeulen, 1997).
accepted and treated like other comparable groups and do These countries have, among other things, changed their
they enjoy access to the same or comparable facilities? naturalisation laws and/or practices in order to facilitate
access to formal citizenship, most prominently for the
These three essential dimensions of citizenship can children of immigrants. Sometimes they have given
be examined together for the purpose of evaluating the opportunities for formal political participation of legally
integration policies of national and local governments, resident aliens at the local level or have initiated group-
and they can be used as a yardstick for categorising specific forms of consultation and participation.
Not all European countries, however, have made one hand, the fact that a group (of immigrants) is part of
such a change in their definitions or policies, or at least the political community, and, on the other hand, that they
not to the same extent. Austrian and Swiss national have a specific place in that community in relation to the
policies, for example, still reflect to a large extent the dominant majority.
premises of guest-worker policies. Germany made a
Turning to the second and third dimension and
significant step towards a more inclusionist policy in
looking particularly at inclusionist policies, I will first
1991 with a relative easing its formerly tough
remark that type 3 theoretically does not exist in Western
naturalisation regulations.
Europe at present. Liberal democracies, in principle, do
Against this background of continental Europe, the not allow for inequality and unequal rights for any who
United Kingdom represents a different case: there is no are regarded as members of the political community.
tradition of a ‘guest-worker scheme’ and the great Type 3 policies may, however, exist in practice, in so far
majority of those who immigrated to the United Kingdom as racism and discrimination are tolerated and such high
were entitled to or already possessed a British passport principles of equality are ignored in practice.
upon arrival (as many came from the Commonwealth
In terms of official policies, however, we can
countries of India, Pakistan, Hong Kong and
distinguish the second major dichotomy within
Bangladesh). The formal definition of ‘alien’ or
inclusionist policies in Europe. Type 1 countries
nationality are not significant characteristics: it was and is
embrace multiculturalist and/or diversity policies, while
the racial or ethnic descent that is the paradigm that has
type 2 countries have forms of integration policies that
affected their subsequent integration. The British case,
are primarily based on the premise of assimilation. Type
being one that is inclusionist in the formal sense from the
1 multicultural policies presuppose not only political
beginning, makes us aware of the distinction between
inclusion and equality in the socio-economic domain, but
formal inclusion and inclusion in practice. Inclusion in
also aim at cultural and religious equity. The basic
the legal/political domain turns out to be a vital, but not a
premise of multiculturalism - defined as a set of
sufficient condition for attaining equality.
normative notions on how to shape a multicultural society
Although the legal and political aspects of national politically - is that immigrants cannot become equal
migrant policies in the legal/political domain have citizens unless the state and society accept that both
developed increasingly common elements across Europe individuals and groups have the right to be culturally
(see Weil, 2000), quite substantial differences remain. different. According to multiculturalists, the prevailing
Such differences reflect fundamental ideas about institutions and rules in society are historical and cultural
membership of the political community in different products that are not neutral for newcomers and thus may
countries: Germany, for example, defines its national need revision in order to accommodate newcomers. The
community in ethnic terms of ancestry, and thus United Kingdom, Dutch and Swedish policies in the
welcomes re-settlers (Aussiedler) – Germans returning to 1980s and early 1990s presented themselves as
the fatherland – but regards settled foreigners as multiculturalist policies, following that line of reasoning.
Ausländer, or ‘aliens’. The French republican concept, in Integration policies of type 2, in contrast, take the state
contrast, is based on a political contract between and society of settlement as ‘given’, both in the cultural
individual citizens and the state, a contract that anyone and normative sense. Newcomers are expected to adapt,
who subscribes to the principles of that political system at least to the public institutions of that society. This may
may enter into. The fact that such principles, in the lead to strong assimilation pressure. French policies have
French case, are strongly embedded in culturally defined traditionally been associated with this type, although in
institutions, however, makes things complicated for those recent years even in France the plea for ‘le droit à la
immigrants who have different cultural and religious différence’ (the right to be different) is gaining weight.
backgrounds. Here again, legal/political inclusion seems
to be a necessity, but not necessarily a sufficient Convergence of policies?
condition for full integration.
The definitions of the different types of policy
It follows that a different terminology goes with described above are idealised types. As mentioned
such different concepts: more exclusionist policies talk earlier, I have given one of only two scores on each
about ‘aliens’, ‘Ausländer’, ‘guest-workers’ and other dimension: positive or negative. In practice the divide
designations that accentuate the (supposed) temporary between them is much fuzzier and they develop over the
stay or the belonging of a person to another political course of time. An important question is then whether
unity. Terminology and content of such policies reflect positions have been moving in the same direction and
basically the non-acceptance of immigration and of whether there has been convergence in European
newcomers as permanent immigrants. In more integration policies.
inclusionist policies on the contrary, ‘immigrant’ is an
Looking again at the three domains, we have to
accepted term, like in France, or the term ‘ethnic
conclude that the extent of convergence that has occurred
minorities’ is adopted as in the case of the United
is not equally strong in each of these domains. There has
Kingdom and the Netherlands, the term reflecting, on the
been some convergence in the legal/political domain: for Defining integration and relevant levels and
example, in all member states, minimum EU rules apply actors in integration processes
to residence rights of many ‘third country nationals’.
Also the wide disparities between French and German Newcomers in a given society are often perceived
naturalisation legislation have narrowed. In recent years, as the classic ‘other’: one who does not belong there.
there have been increasing calls in Germany to enable This observation has been the starting point of a long
children of immigrants to gain citizenship more easily. tradition of research initiated by early founders of
The jus sanguinis principle is thus being relaxed and the sociology like Simmel (1908) and refined by scholars
jus soli principle is being considered, while in France the such as Park and Burgess (1921) and Elias and Scotson
opposite is happening. (1965).
Definitions of the ‘other’ or ‘stranger’ may be based
The strongest pressure for convergence is in the on various attributes: on legal status (‘aliens’), on
socio-economic domain, particularly in work-related physical appearance (‘race’), on (perceived) cultural and
rights and benefits. Norm-setting laws, rules and religious differences, on class characteristics or on any
directives of the European commission, based on the combination of these elements. Such definitions do not
premise of equal rights and non-discrimination, and only have consequences for interpersonal relationships,
assisted by trade union pressure within national contexts, they also play out on the collective level, defining ‘in-
have contributed to much more uniformity than before in groups’ and ‘out-groups’. They may express themselves
work-related situations. This is much less the case, in discriminatory practices and lead to deteriorating inter-
however, when it comes to accessibility and equal rights ethnic relations and a weakening of social cohesion in
in the domain of welfare provision such as social communities, cities and states. At the political level the
assistance and benefits, social housing, education and concept of ‘other-ness’ may also be exploited, for
health. example by anti-immigrant movements or parties.
The largest disparities that still exist are in the As soon as immigrants arrive in their new country
cultural-religious domain. Policies related to the two they have to acquire a place in the new society, both in
most important elements in this domain – those of the physical sense (a house, a job and income, access to
language and religion – show little evidence of educational and health facilities, etc.), but also in the
convergence. British, Swedish and Dutch policies, social and cultural sense. Particularly if newcomers see
inspired by their multiculturalist ideologies, stand here in themselves as different and are perceived by the receiving
direct contrast to French, German and Austrian policies society as physically, culturally and/or religiously
that – for different reasons – do not give much room for ‘different’, they will aspire to acquiring a recognised
immigrants to demonstrate their cultural and religious place in that new society and becoming accepted. It is
heritage in the public sphere. Awareness of the need to from these observations that we deduce a basic and at the
have such policies varies significantly, and pressure from same time comprehensive definition of integration: the
the European institutions is not strong here. One of the process of becoming an accepted part of society. This
basic problems is that language and religion are often elementary definition of integration is – intentionally –
tightly bound up with notions of national identity. open in two respects. Firstly, it emphasises the process of
Diversity policies can easily be perceived as threatening integration rather than defining an end situation.
that national identity. Nevertheless some signs of Secondly, it does not state the particular requirements for
convergence can be seen, often at the local level, for acceptance by the receiving society (in contrast to the
example in the recognition of Muslims as negotiating normative models that have been developed by political
partners, and a rudimentary institutionalisation of so- theorists that we mentioned in the previous section),
called ‘new’ religions. But at the same time there are still thereby leaving different intermediate and final outcomes
wide disparities with regard to religious instruction in open. That makes the definition more useful for the
state schools and opportunities for religiously based empirical study of these processes, allowing us to capture
schools. more of its diversity.
The open, elementary definition of integration
covers at least three analytically distinct dimensions of
Processes of integration and exclusion: lessons becoming an accepted part of society, as described in the
from research which have a bearing on previous section where we discussed citizenship: the
policies legal/political, the socio-economic and the
cultural/religious dimensions. The first dimension affects
Having mapped out the field roughly, I will now migrants in two ways. From the perspective of individual
explore the nature of integration processes, their immigrants, the legal position and related rights allocated
conceptualisation and lessons from research. to them may have significant positive or negative
consequences on their behaviour and their efforts to
integrate. Long periods of uncertainty about application
for a residence permit (and dependency in the case of integration policies), or they may isolate themselves or
asylum seekers), and having no access to local and/or get excluded by the society of settlement.
national political systems and decision making, for
The second kind of institutions that are of particular
example, obviously have negative implications for the
relevance for integration comprise the ones that are
migrant’s preparedness and efforts to integrate. From the
specifically of and for immigrant groups, such as
perspective of the receiving society, such exclusion
religious or cultural institutions. The value and validity
policies are an expression of basic perceptions that see
of such institutions, in contrast to general institutions, is
immigrants as ‘outsiders’, an attitude that is not
limited to those who voluntarily choose to belong to
conducive for constructive policies in the socio-economic
them. Although their place is primarily in the private
and cultural-religious domain. Exclusionary policies thus
sphere, such specific institutions may also have a role in
have negative effects on integration processes. Turning
the public sphere as important actors of civil society, as
this reasoning around, there are solid indications that
the history of churches, trade unions, cultural and leisure
where inclusion of immigrants in formal and informal
organisations and professional institutions in European
channels of political participation does take place, this
cities and states has shown. Such specific – migrant
leads to a variety of beneficial policies in the socio-
related – institutions may become an accepted part of
economic and cultural-religious domain (for relevant
society at the same level as comparable institutions of
empirical material at the municipal level see for example:
native groups, or they may isolate themselves or remain
Alexander, 2003; Bousetta, 1997; Fennema and Tillie,
unrecognised and excluded.
1999 and 2001; Moore, 2001; Penninx et al., 2004; and
Rogers and Tillie, 2001). The mechanisms working at the individual, the
organisational and the institutional level are different, but
Having defined the key concept of integration and
the results at each of these levels are clearly interrelated.
its dimensions, the next question is: who are the actors
Institutional regulations determine to a great extent the
involved? There are basically two parties involved in
opportunities and scope for action of organisations. They
integration processes: the immigrants with n own
may also exert a significant influence on the development
characteristics, and differing levels of effort and
and orientation of immigrant organisations, as Fennema
adaptation, and the receiving society with its
and Tillie (in Penninx et al., 2004) have shown.
characteristics and varied reactions to these newcomers.
Institutions and organisations together, in their turn,
It is the interaction between the two that determines the
create the structure which defines the opportunities and
direction and intermediate and final outcomes of the
limitations for individuals. It is also possible that
integration process. However, these two are
individuals may mobilise and change the landscape of
fundamentally unequal partners in terms of (political)
organisations, and potentially contribute to significant
power and resources. The receiving society, its
changes in institutional arrangements. However, in view
institutional structure and its reaction to newcomers are
of the unevenness of power and resources that we
therefore much more decisive for the outcome of the
mentioned before, such examples are scarce, though not
process. Integration policies are part of the institutional
absent.
arrangements in a society, particularly since we should
define such policies broadly to include both general I will illustrate the interconnectedness of integration
policies and their effects on immigrants, and policies processes at different levels by comparing the
specifically concerned with the integration of immigrants. development of the position of Turkish Muslims in the
As such policies are defined politically by (the voting Netherlands and in (the Federal Republic of) Germany
majorities of) the receiving society, there is an inherent (Penninx, 2000). These immigrants came in the same
danger of the relationship being lopsided. Policies will period of the 1960s and 1970s, for the same reasons and
tend to represent the expectations and demands of the with roughly the same characteristics, but policy
society, or the dominant parts of it, rather than being reactions to Islam and the Turks differed markedly in the
based on participation, negotiation and agreement with two countries. The Netherlands introduced an ‘ethnic
immigrant groups themselves. minorities policy’ in the early 1980s, which granted,
among other things, official recognition of Islam on the
The foregoing discussion indicates that the process
same footing as other religions, thus opening
of integration is thus not – as is often supposed – only
opportunities for its public manifestation (Rath et al.,
taking place at the level of the individual immigrant,
2001). It also involved the recognition of (Islamic)
whose integration can be measured in terms of his/her
organisations, which could act as potential partners in
housing, job and education, and his/her social and
integration policies. In turn, this implied ongoing
cultural adaptation to the new society. It is also taking
relations and negotiations between these organisations
place at the collective level of the immigrant group.
and the authorities, both for the public regulation of
Organisations of immigrants are the expression of
specific facilities for Islam in the Netherlands (halal
mobilised resources and ambitions, and may become an
slaughtering, mosque building, public call for prayer,
accepted part of civil society (and a potential partner for
public Islamic broadcasting, state funded Islamic schools,
etc.) and for integration activities by Islamic
organisations for their rank and file. In contrast, lifestyle in which they combine the roles, identities and
Germany (although different in the different Länder and loyalties of both these different worlds. Ways to do this
municipalities, as shown in Berlin, Cologne and are manifold, which makes for more and more
Frankfurt) has been in general much less engaging. differentiation within the original immigrant group. At
the group level this means that the litmus test for
The interesting result of these divergent policies
integration, and for the success or failure of policies in
relating to the specific institutional arrangements for
this field, is the status and success of the second
Islam and to Islamic organisations is that, on the
generation.
individual level, attitudes towards the receiving country
and towards integration, particularly as measured among
young and second generation Turks in the Netherlands
Plurality of outcomes, diversity of policies
and Germany, seem to differ markedly. The results of If the integration process results from the interaction
Heitmeyer’s research in Germany (Heitmeyer et al., of two parties which takes place at different levels, as I
1997) and a comparable survey done by Sunier in the have posited so far, and if we add the differentiating
Netherlands (Sunier, 1996 and 1999) illustrate this point. effect of time and generations, what can we expect in
While the German study reports inwardly-oriented and terms of outcomes? Comparative studies provide clear
even fundamentalist attitudes on an alarming scale, the answers on this point, namely that a plurality of outcomes
Dutch study signals a much more positive attitude is the rule. A first category of studies compares the
towards integration and involvement, particularly in local integration process of different immigrant groups within
society. (Sunier’s observations in Rotterdam in the mid- the same institutional and policy context of a nation or
1990s are confirmed by a recent study of Canatan et al. locality: these reveal that different immigrant groups
(2003) on the role of mosques in Rotterdam in the wider follow different patterns of integration and assimilation.
social context of the city and their integration activities.) For the Dutch case, for example, Vermeulen and Penninx
This is supported by more critical and independent views (2000) have shown that Moluccan, Surinamese,
concerning established Islamic umbrella organisations Antillean, Southern European, Turkish and Moroccan
such as Milli Görüş, which has its headquarters in immigrants differ in the speed of their integration and in
Germany (see also for Germany Karakasoglu, 1997; the tracks they tend to follow. The consequence of the
Karakasoglu and Koray, 1996; Oezbek and Koray, 1998; design of such studies, however, is that the explanation
for the Netherlands, see Doomernik, 1991; Landman, for such differences is found primarily in the particular
1992; Rath et al., 2001). characteristics of the immigrant groups, simply because
Finally, I want to highlight another important the (national or local) context in which they are being
integrated is the same.
element influencing integration processes: the time
factor. Processes of integration of newcomers are long A second category of cross-national comparative
term by their very nature. At the individual level, an studies, which looks at the integration of the same
adult immigrant may adapt significantly in the cognitive immigrant group in different national contexts, does
dimension of his behaviour: it is both pragmatic and pays exactly the opposite: such studies also find differences in
off rather quickly if you learn how things are done, by outcome, but these are primarily ascribed to the
whom etc. The adaptation of adults in the cultural and differential functioning of the context into which the
normative dimensions of their behaviour, however, tends group is trying to integrate. Here again differences turn
to be less easy: knowledge may change, but feelings and out to be significant, as was discussed earlier with regard
preferences, and moral evaluations are quite persistent to Penninx’s observations on Muslims in Germany and
during an individual’s lifetime. This is a general rule for the Netherlands. It is additionally illustrated by two
mankind, but it becomes more manifest in those who studies carried out by the Institute for Migration and
change their home environment through migration. Ethnic Studies of the University of Amsterdam. The first
one compared the institutionalisation of Islam in the
The situation of the descendants of the ‘first
Netherlands, Belgium and the United Kingdom in the
generation’ of migrants generally differs in this respect.
post-war period (Rath et al., 2001), which found
Through their primary relationships within their family
markedly different outcomes as a consequence of the
and the network of the immigrant community, they are
institutional arrangements and traditions of public
familiar with their traditional culture, and possibly its
acceptance of religions in these societies, and the
background elsewhere. At the same time, however, they
subsequent difference in interactions. The second study
become thoroughly acquainted with the culture and
was on the attitudes and actions of trade unions in
language of their society of settlement, through informal
relation to immigration, and the position of immigrants in
contacts in the neighbourhood from early childhood
society, in seven European countries (Penninx and
onwards, and particularly through their participation in
Roosblad, 2000). Once again remarkable differences are
public institutions, the educational one in the first place.
evident. For example, the high degree of membership of
If this double process of socialisation takes place in
favourable conditions (in which policies play a major trade unions of Turkish immigrants in Sweden (above 90
per cent) and the low degree of this same group in France
role), this second generation develops a way of life and
(around 15 per cent) turns out to be basically the integration policy is transparency of admission of
consequence of how trade unions are organised and are immigrants and a clear definition of their residential and
incorporated (or not) in the socio-economic decision- legal status. Expectations of, and actual long-term
making at the national level. residence should be acknowledged by a secure legal
position and opportunities to participate in politics and
A recent empirical research project on
policy-making, especially in policies that affect their
‘Multicultural Policies and Modes of Citizenship’
position. Local authorities are, in this legal/political
(MPMC) in 17 European cities shows the heterogeneity
domain, to a great extent dependent on (immigration,
of the two parties on an even wider scale. Looking at the
integration and naturalisation) policies at the national
immigrants first, the background of their migration, and
level, but not completely. They may develop effective
selectivity that goes with it, are very diverse in both time
alternative channels for participation, thereby creating a
and space. Part of the migration movements towards
local form of inclusion and citizenship, as was shown in
Europe’s cities has a background in the colonial
the MPMC project (Penninx et al., 2004).
relationship with the country of destination, and this is
clearly visible in cities like Amsterdam, Birmingham, Secondly, integration policies should be
Lisbon and Marseille. Another part goes back to – again comprehensive in the dimensions and domains covered,
selective – demand-driven migration of mainly low thereby signifying that they do not only represent the
skilled workers. Some of these immigration flows have a interests of the native majority, but also the needs of the
long history, as seen in Swiss, Belgian and French cities, immigrant. The economic and social domains,
while others are of more recent origin dating from the particularly the labour market, education, housing and
post-war decades. And all countries and cities have health are priority domains. Policies in the political and
received a different mix of immigrant flows of the last cultural domain (including religion), however, are
three decades: significant supply-driven movements of indispensable over the long term for integration. The
refugees, asylum seekers and undocumented immigrants, forms that such policies may take in practice depend very
often along with highly skilled cosmopolitan much on the existing institutional arrangements in
professionals and company-linked migrants. The total receiving societies, and on the political willingness to
picture emerging from this is not only a significant change these to gradually become more inclusive.
growth in diversity of origin (from mainly European to
Thirdly, (local) integration policies should follow
more and more global nowadays), but also of marked
strategies and tactics that engage the partners in the
differences in the social and cultural capital that
integration process at different levels. It should combine
immigrants bring with them and/or have developed
‘top down’ political guidelines with ‘bottom up’
during their stay.
mobilisation. It should define the process of integration
Variability is also strong, if we now study the other as ‘open’, within the rules of liberal-democratic societies,
partner involved, the receiving community. The 17 cities leaving room for a more diverse, but cohesive society as
show a great variety in their institutional settings and a result. The diversity reached in this way is neither
their policies and reactions to immigrants (see Alexander, predetermined nor static, but negotiated, shared and ever-
2003). Some of this variance can be explained by changing.
differences of the national institutional systems in which
cities are embedded, but there are a great many local The organisation of politics and policy-
factors and circumstances that increase the variability of making
local reactions and policies. These include: the local
political composition that may work for or against Policies intend to steer processes in society, in our
inclusion; the physical layout of the city and its relation case the integration processes of immigrants in society.
with the neighbouring area (compare Paris and Berlin As stated in the introduction of this paper, we need not
before 1991); the historical experience with earlier only a thorough insight into the processes of integration
immigration and diversity; the specific instruments and in order to formulate and implement effective policies,
resources available to local policy makers to steer we also have to get such policies politically approved and
processes in the vital domains of (social) housing and supported. The way that politics and policy-making
urban regeneration; the labour market and work, however, is often problematic in relation to
entrepreneurship; and the education and health services. immigrants.
Policy lessons Majority-minority relationships and political

participation
In my view, there are some important lessons to be
drawn from these general observations on the outworking Above I have stated that a key condition for
of integration processes. Reformulated as lessons for effective policies is that actual long-term residence
policy-making – and here I combine research findings should be acknowledged by a secure legal position, and
with normative assumptions - I see three essential that there must be opportunities to participate in politics
lessons. The first is that a key condition for an effective and policy-making, especially in policies that affect long-
term immigrants. Here I observe that the existing introduction of local voting rights for aliens (Sweden in
political system often blocks such a condition. The 1976, the Netherlands in 1985) and easier access to
political demise of the report of the Süssmuth naturalisation for (a significant proportion of)
Commission (2001) in Germany is an outstanding newcomers. Such novelties (at that time) were
example, but surely not the only one. But this also introduced with the conviction and awareness that forces
applies to local policies, as is aptly shown by Hans within migrant groups need to be mobilised to have
Mahnig (in Penninx et al., 2004) in his comparison of the policies accepted and implemented and cohesion created.
cities of Berlin, Paris and Zurich. The conundrum here is Naturalisation and local voting rights were seen as means
that decisions on integration policies and their content to promote integration, rather than as final testimony of
and orientation are taken within a political system in acquired integration.
which the majority vote decides. In such a system,
The trajectories and achievements described above
majority-minority relationships, and the actual or
for certain cities in the United Kingdom, Sweden and the
perceived clash of interests connected with them, are
Netherlands, however, do seem to be the exception rather
played out at both the national and local level. This may
than the rule as yet. In most other cities studied by the
lead to outright exclusion of most immigrants (aliens)
MPMC project, the preconditions mentioned above were
from the formal political system, or it may – if they are
absent. The question of when and what kind of policies
(partially) included - marginalise their voice. Perceptions
are developed in these cities, seems to be closely related
about immigrants turn out to be important in such a
to the urgency of the situation, crisis situations often
process, often more than facts (see the observations on
leading to actions and policies that are strongly biased to
national immigration policies in an earlier section). This
reflect the perceptions and interests of locally dominant
is emphasised even more if issues of immigration and the
groups.
position of immigrants become politicised questions.
This mechanism leads either to an absence of integration If integration policies are accepted as being
policies and an avoidance of immigrant issues, or to necessary, an additional aspect of the process of policy-
lopsided and patronising policies reflecting mainly making emerges. In contrast to the long-term nature of
majority interests and disregarding the real needs and integration processes discussed above, the political
opinions of immigrants. process in democratic societies requires policies to bear
fruit within a much shorter time scale, i.e. between
Although this is the rule in Europe, both at the
elections. There can be a backlash with failures from
national and local level, exceptions exist at both levels.
unrealistic promises and demands derived from this
Some British cities serve as local examples. Most of
‘democratic impatience’ (Vermeulen and Penninx, 2000)
their immigrants, being of ex-colonial origin, have British
– that is the political desire to have quick solutions for
citizenship, and so have a voice in the political process.
problems and processes of a long-term nature. The recent
This does not prevent significant polarisation of majority-
vigorous debate on the (supposed) failure of integration
minority relationships, as a wealth of literature in the
policies in the Netherlands is a good example.
United Kingdom and the case study of Garbaye on
Birmingham testifies (in Penninx et al., 2004). However, More difficult than democratic impatience,
over the course of time, the significant concentration of however, is the situation in which the political climate
immigrants in certain districts, when they work in prevents well-argued policy proposals from being
political coalition with the mainstream parties, may lead accepted. Anti-immigrant sentiments have become
to substantive participation in local and even national increasingly translated into political movements and the
politics. Crises in such cities have reinforced this topics of immigration and integration have become
process. Thus local government, rather than national extremely politicised. Unfortunately, this trend can be
government, may play a prominent role in establishing seen in several European countries and cities, the Zurich
new practices of political participation. example, as described by Mahnig (in Penninx et al.,
2004), being an extreme example of this. It means that
A different trajectory towards more political
much more attention should be given to the question of
participation and inclusive integration policies is seen in
how to frame immigration and integration policies
Swedish and Dutch societies and their cities. In both
politically in such a way that they are acceptable and
these countries, quite comprehensive integration policies
accepted by the ruling political system.
were introduced at the national level in a period in which
immigration and immigrant integration was much less
Implementing policy: contents and strategies
politicised: in Sweden in the mid-1970s and the
Netherlands at the beginning of the 1980s. In both cases All the foregoing observations relate to the political
there also existed at that time an active and fruitful process that may or may not lead to the establishment of
relationship between research and policy-making in this explicit integration policies. I will add here some
field. These conditions promoted the early establishment observations on the form and content of such policies,
of liberal and inclusive measures and policies in these where they have been established. First of all, as I have
countries leading, among other things, to the early indicated earlier, integration policies are, by necessity,
context bound. It is implicated by the answer to the integration at the national level are applied to these
question ‘In what immigrants are supposed to integrate?’ policies.
At the level of states, differences between countries in the
One paradigm defines the immigrant principally as
ideologies and practical models through which they
an alien and outsider, one who is only temporarily part of
incorporate (alien) immigrants have received quite
that society. That society emphatically does not see itself
systematic attention (see for example Bauböck et al.,
as an immigration country and migrants are therefore
1996; Brubaker, 1992; Castles and Miller, 1998; Favell,
only temporary ‘guests’. At best, in such a society,
2000; Freeman, 1995; Guiraudon, 1998; Hammar, 1985;
measures may be taken to make that temporary stay
Soysal, 1994).
comfortable and profitable for both parties and to
But apart from such specific migrant-related facilitate their anticipated return, but there is no logical
differences, the general characteristics of states and basis for inclusive policies that would incorporate these
societies matter. In the socio-economic sphere, for immigrants as full citizens or political actors. Such an
example, integration mechanisms in societies with a exclusionary definition leads to the kind of policies that
strong liberal market orientation (and hence limited Michael Alexander (2003) in his typology calls either
welfare and social facilities) differ from those in caring ‘non-policy’ or ‘guest-worker policy’. The forms and
welfare states that are more based on solidarity and which instruments of such policies are variable and accidental,
redistribute a much greater proportion of their national being mostly ad hoc reactions to concrete problems.
income. Similarly in the cultural and religious domain,
In contrast to such exclusionary views, other
historical peculiarities of institutional arrangements create
countries embrace a paradigm that includes immigrants
significant differences in the feasibility of policies in
over the course of time. In the way this inclusion is
certain domains. By consequence the scope, actors and
envisaged, however, two distinct concepts of immigrants
instruments of policy design differ widely.
and their integration can be discerned. The first one is
This context-bound nature is illustrated by that typified by the French, republican vision. France has
Vermeulen (1997), who compares immigrant policies in a particular vision of the state, its relationship to its
five European countries since the 1960s. These relate citizens, and the ensuing political system and institutional
specifically to a) integration and labour market policies; arrangements in the public sphere. Following this vision,
b) policies relating to immigrant languages; and c) the distinction between citizens and aliens is crucial, and
policies in relation to religious systems introduced by alien immigrants should ideally become citizens and thus
immigrants. It shows basically that the actual content of be recognised as individual political actors. Immigrant
integration policies is to a great extent dependent on, or associations, however, are not recognised as such.
inspired by, the pre-existing institutional arrangements in French republican terminology avoids notions such as
these domains within the different countries. For a ethnicity, ethnic minorities and multiculturalism that
country that traditionally had different recognised suggest groupings and institutionalised difference of any
languages within its territory (or religions for that matter), sort, be they based on origin, culture, religion or class.
it is, in principle, easier to make additional provisions for Formal equality at the individual level is the overriding
newcomers in this domain. This aspect has been studied political principle. In this sense this definition should
by Vermeulen and Slijper (2003), who analysed the depoliticise the issue of immigrants and their integration
outworking of multicultural policies in Canada, Australia (which has not, however, prevented immigration
and the United States. They found that multiculturalism becoming a huge issue for the political parties in France).
differs, not only in terms of its historical development in
The second inclusionary paradigm is the Anglo-
each of these countries, the practice of it turns out to be
American one, in which immigrants are also expected to
clearly context bound. Their examples pertain to the
have or take up citizenship individually. However,
national level of states, but the same rule holds true for
having done so, the political system leaves much room
the local level, as the MPMC study (Penninx et al., 2004)
for ethnic organisations and activities of immigrants.
and the comparative analysis of city policies by Michael
Ethnicity and ethnic minorities are perceived as relevant
Alexander (2003) has shown.
notions, even to the extent that (for example) the ethnic
In their turn, local variations may, to a significant background of the total population is officially registered
extent, be explained by different national policies, in censuses. Although equality is an important principle
institutional settings and their underlying concepts, as the in this political vision too, there is the additional notion
body of cross-national research suggests. These include that substantive equality may in practice be supported by
both local institutional arrangements, and the membership of cultural, ethnic, immigrant or
opportunities for local policies on integration and the disadvantaged groups. Political dialogue between groups
participation of immigrants. Embedded as cities are in on issues of multiculturalism is thus an explicit part of
their national contexts, they necessarily reflect national politics (irrespective of the outcome of such political
policies and paradigms. I will demonstrate this on the dialogue).
basis of the political conception of immigrants as a
‘problem’ and, and how the ensuing strategies for their
The reasoning behind these different paradigms of Europe. Thirdly, Vermeulen also sees some
leads to different strategies employed in integration convergence by the use of a common terminology that is
policies. The French republican system leads principally particularly being encouraged by supranational
to strategies that emphasise equality within the given organisations. He warns, however, that simple use of
system as priority. There is an avoidance of designating such common vocabulary as ‘integration’ and
fixed ethnically formulated target groups and a non- ‘multicultural’ may be deceptive: “Using the same words
recognition of ethnic organisations as important actors, as does not necessarily mean people agree in their ideas. It
they would be seen as counteracting integration. The could even serve to create the illusion of agreement”.
inherent problem with such a definition is that of
Obviously, there are specific forces at work at the
mobilising and having dialogue with leaders from within
local level that lead to convergence. It seems that the
immigrant groups in the implementation of policies. The
strong local character of the settlement process of
Anglo-American paradigm tends to be more inclined to
immigrants itself acts as a force towards convergence of
designate target groups and formulate group-specific
policies. Whatever the institutional arrangements are,
policies, even to the extent of giving certain groups
local authorities have to find answers to the same
positive discrimination or affirmative action. It is more
questions. These obviously include how to provide
prone to recognise, if not stimulate, forms of
immigrants with adequate housing and jobs and how to
representation of such groups, for example by giving
make educational and health facilities available for them;
subsidies directly to immigrant organisations, or
but they also include how to react to their demands to
indirectly by subsidising certain activities of such groups.
fulfil religious obligations or how to provide facilities to
This vision is also more inclined to combine the
use and teach their mother tongue. They furthermore
promotion of equality together with an acceptance of
have to deal with very similar reactions of the native
cultural differences, implying a recognition of the cultural
population to immigrants, i.e. discrimination and social
and religious aspects of integration processes.
exclusion. Neglecting and avoiding these questions is
We have intentionally outlined these two models of easier at the more distant level of national policies, but at
inclusion as contrasting ones in order to illustrate their the local level the questions make themselves felt
internal reasoning. However, in practice we see many concretely, the more so if the number of immigrants and
variations and eclectic bricolage of the elements of both their concentration in certain localities increases. If local
the theoretical models and the instruments of policies. authorities do not address such questions on their own
This is the case both at the national and the local level initiative, they may be forced to do so by emerging crises.
(see Penninx et al., 2004). The elements of this ‘Inner city riots’ as they are often called in the United
bricolage, moreover, may also change over the course of Kingdom, or the banlieues problématiques in France are
time. illustrations of triggers that may lead to (new) local
policies. In this sense such crises may be seen as ‘bottom
Differences in (national and local) contexts will lead
up’ forces for convergence.
to divergence and to many different integration policies,
so runs the argument in the preceding section. But how A logical consequence of such local policies, which
does the picture look if we attempt to bring together have been designed to defuse specific crises, is that these
evidence and arguments for convergence? policies are often framed as space-specific policies in
which housing, concentration and segregation are central
Several cross-national studies indicate some level of
issues. The ‘Inner City Policies’ in the United Kingdom
convergence, though rather hesitant or partial.
developed since 1968 and the ‘Politique de la Ville’ in
Vermeulen (1997, pp. 150-152) lists a number of issues
France since the 1990s illustrate this. (As I described
that show at least some convergence. Firstly, in
earlier, the convergence of urban policies and integration
immigration policy, the European Commission has issued
policies in Sweden and the Netherlands have a different
a number of directives in recent years that aim to
background).
harmonise member state policies. These concern, in
particular, the residential status regulations for These forces of convergence do not only stimulate
immigrants from non-EU countries. Secondly, some the emergence of policies and influence the content of
convergence has also occurred in naturalisation policies. them, their implementation also tends ultimately to
For example, the wide disparities between French and encourage similar strategies. In some cases, the
German legislation and practice in this field have consultation of immigrants, and engagement of
narrowed: the jus sanguinis element in the German individuals and organisations in the implementation, is
legislation is thus being relaxed and the jus soli principle part of policies from the beginning, as in the case of
has been introduced to enable children of immigrants to Manchester described by Moore (in Penninx et al., 2004).
gain citizenship more easily; at the same time in France If this is not the case, however, it often quickly becomes
the jus soli principle has lost ground in recent years. The clear that it is impossible to effectively implement
recent studies of Weil (2000) and Hansen and Weil immigrant policies without linking into the immigrant
(2001) on methods of awarding nationality to aliens groups themselves and engaging them in their
confirms the increasing convergence across the countries formulation and implementation. The Marseille and
Toulouse examples of Moore (in Penninx et al., 2004) migration policies have primarily been defensive and
effectively illustrate how the city authorities there have control-centred instead of pro-active, and integration
found informal ways of linking in to immigrant groups by policies for immigrants reactive, if not absent. These two
recruiting mediators from them. The Oeiras example - a reinforce each other: the lack of a consistent and
suburb of Lisbon with a high concentration of immigrants transparent immigration policy is an impediment for
- shows another form of solution to the same problem: to effective integration policies. The lack of consistent
improve dialogue with the immigrant community, the integration policies, and the (real or perceived) failure of
local authority simply uses existing neighbourhood, sport integration of newcomers, who now come from
and leisure organisations, though these happen to be increasingly diverse origins, leads in turn to
made up mainly of immigrants (Marques and Santos in predominantly negative perceptions of migration and
Penninx et al., 2004). These and other examples suggest immigrants, and hence to the reinforcement of defensive
that conditions for effective implementation lead to a immigration policies.
certain convergence in the strategy used, although the
This situation pertains particularly to North-West
forms may differ.
European countries that have a longer (post-war) tradition
of immigration. This is reflected in the cumbersome
Policy lessons process of establishing migration and integration policies
Moving on from specific examples, it is now time to at the EU level. An EU migration policy (as decided in
generalise from these observations to the process of the Amsterdam Treaty of 1997) is often felt as running
policy-making and determine what lessons can be learnt counter to (perceived) national interests or is even seen as
from them. The first is, that to get policies established, a threat. One Dutch politician expressed it explicitly,
we not only need a solid scientific knowledge of the thus: “If we have more lenient immigration policies than
processes of integration, we also need to know what our neighbours, the Netherlands is going to become the
makes such policies politically acceptable and endorsed. waste pipe of Europe”. That leads to the danger that such
What is needed is a balanced framework which does not policies will come down to the lowest common
hide the problems to be solved, but primarily stresses the denominator of the EU countries involved. The
common interests of all. There is much to be gained consequence of such perceptions is that integration
here: crises can be avoided, which are inevitable if policies at the EU level have, up until now, mainly been
problems are consistently neglected; but also the expressed in a negative way: combating exclusion,
cohesiveness of cities and states could be restored and racism, xenophobia and discrimination. In most member
promoted. It would then be possible to reap the potential states, significant and comprehensive integration policies
fruits of immigration and immigrants. Acceptance of are absent, with a few exceptions as mentioned earlier.
immigrants and their active participation in society is an
Formulated in this way, this is a gloomy picture
essential condition for success. Negotiated new forms of
indeed. On a more positive note, however, I see two
diversity would result from it. On this front there is still
important forces at work that may contribute to a way out
much work to do, for all the parties involved, but for
of this stalemate. The first force is that of growing
politicians primarily.
economic and political integration within the European
A second lesson is that the viability of integration Union. This integration of the separate states may have
policies in the long term depends heavily on realistic worked as a negative force in the first phase, reinforcing
targets of such policies being attained, together with an the negative spiral by taking away borders within the
adequate analysis of the institutional setting on which to Union. Gradually, however, an awareness has grown that
build such policies. Applying a less ideology-driven, the only way out is common, comprehensive and pro-
practical approach, combined with the active active policies for migration and integration. The two
participation of immigrants and their organisations, will dominant problems of today - unsolicited immigration
not only avoid backlash effects among the majority and demographic decline - can only be handled
population, it will also result in a process of dialogue in effectively by a common EU stance. The Amsterdam
which immigrants are involved and feel recognised. Treaty and Tampere Summit were the first steps to tackle
these problems. These have been followed by
suggestions for a framework for comprehensive and pro-
Immigration and integration policies in active policies, as expressed in the ‘Communications on a
Europe: pressures for new approaches? Community Immigration Policy’ (European Commission,
As I explained earlier, European states still 2000) and on ‘Immigration, Integration and Employment’
predominantly try to handle international migration in a (European Commission, 2003). Furthermore, agreement
framework that is essentially based on the notion of the has been reached on a number of concrete directives. One
nation-state. In such a framework, the world is divided cause for optimism is that several new immigration
into separate nation-states each with its own national countries of the EU, not hampered by long traditions of
citizens and territory: migration across political borders is reactive national policies in this field, have been acting as
seen as an anomaly in such a system. As a consequence, a significant supportive force for such EU initiatives.
The Greek presidency at the Thessaloniki summit of June is the broader message – is that the interests at stake in
2003 stands as a witness to this. Admittedly, the EU formulating national integration policies, and its practice
process is slow and will probably take several more years at the local level of cities, may be substantially different.
of debate and negotiation, but it stands a good chance of Integration may also be perceived quite differently at the
acting as a catalyst for future policies of member states. local and national level. At the city level the day-to-day
consequences of immigration are much more obvious
The second major force for change of national
(and the implications of policies are felt by immigrants
policies comes from within. As has become clear,
more directly). If any serious attempt to cope with these
European cities are the places where globalisation is
problems - or to put it more positively, to attempt to get
clearly visible, both in its general consequences (the high
the best gains of it - is taken at that level, it will put
profile of multinational corporations) and in terms of the
pressure on the higher and more abstract national level.
changing population. New immigrants are arriving as a
Many European metropoles and cities are becoming
direct or indirect consequence of globalisation; they tend
aware that they need long term, consistent integration
to settle in these cities, and local politics and policies
policies in order to remain viable as communal entities,
have to cope with the consequences. This may lead to
liveable for all residents. They realise that the absence of
tensions between the national arena and the local one, and
such policies would be nothing less than a recipe for
may increase the pressure for comprehensive integration
disaster.
policies. This pressure may take several different forms.
In countries such as Switzerland, Germany and Austria, Finally the foregoing observations lead us to a more
where national integration policies have been piecemeal general conclusion as to the relation between policies at
or absent, the pressure to formulate adequate policies, and the local, national and supranational level. In our view,
demands for greater responsibility and increased local authorities should be given more resources,
resources, have come from their big cities. The cities of instruments and room to act in locally appropriate and
Zürich, Bern and Basel in Switzerland, for example – in effective ways. National policies on integration, and by
the absence of such policies at the national level - took implication EU policies also, should set a general
the initiative of developing local policies (‘Leitbilder’) in framework and rules, and provide support to local
the late 1990s. Berlin, Frankfurt and Vienna developed policies and actors. The real work has to be done locally
such policies even earlier when there was an absence of and it has to be done creatively by a coalition of all
national policies and resources. interested parties.
In countries where integration policies were
initiated rather early at the national level, such as the
Netherlands and Sweden, such tensions take a different
form. The major cities in these countries, being
confronted with immigration on a quite different scale to
the rest of the country, joined forces to claim more
executive power and resources from the national
government to cope with their problems. They were
facing pressures in areas common to many immigrant
communities: the housing system (segregation and
degeneration of neighbourhoods); the labour market
(disproportionate unemployment, high levels of social
benefit costs); the educational system (concentration of
pupils of immigrant origin in certain areas); and public
order (racial harassment, crime and tension between
groups). These two countries have built a single
framework in recent years covering both general policies
for metropolitan areas and integration policies for
immigrants; this has created, in principle, a new and more
comprehensive approach.
It has often been tensions with the immigrant
community that have led to a critical dialogue between
the big cities and national governments; this has
highlighted the areas where national and local policies
have been contradictory. Cities do not always win these
battles. However, city authorities may use their
discretionary power (and avoid public national debate) to
gain more room to manoeuvre in favour of (certain)
immigrants. What such examples make clear – and this
References Fennema, M. and J. Tillie. 2001. “Civic Communities in

a Multicultural Democracy”, Connections 24 (1) 26-
Alexander, Michael. 2003. Comparing Local Policies 41.
Toward Migrants as an Expression of Host-Stranger
Relations. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam. Freeman, G. 1995. “Modes of immigration politics in
liberal democratic states”, International Migration
Bauböck, R. (ed.) 1994. From Aliens to Citizens: Review 29: 881-902.
Redefining the Status of Immigrants in Europe.
Aldershot: Avebury. Guiraudon, V. 1998. “Citizenship rights for non-citizens:
France, Germany and the Netherlands”, in C. Joppke
Bauböck, R., A. Heller and A.R. Zolberg (eds.). 1996. (ed.), Challenge to the Nation-State: Immigration in
The Challenge of Diversity. Integration and Pluralism Western Europe and the United States. Oxford:
in Societies of Immigration. Aldershot: Avebury. Oxford University Press.
Bousetta, Hassan. 1997. “Citizenship and political Hammar, T. 1985. European Immigration Policy. A
participation in France and the Netherlands: Comparative Study. London: Cambridge University
reflections on two local cases”, New Community 23 Press.
(2) 215-231.
Hammar, T. 1990. Democracy and the Nation State.
Brubaker, R.W. (ed.). 1989. Immigration and the Politics Aliens, Denizens and Citizens in a World of
of Citizenship in Europe and North America. Lanham: International Migration. Aldershot: Avebury.
University Press of America.
Hansen, R. and P. Weil. 2001. Towards a European
Brubaker, R.W. 1992. Citizenship and Nationhood in Nationality. Citizenship, Immigration and Nationality
France and Germany. Cambridge: Harvard Law in the EU. Houndmills, New York: Palgrave.
University Press.
Heitmeyer, W., J. Müller and H. Schröder. 1997.
Canatan, K., C. H. Oudijk and A. Ljamai. 2003. De Verlockender Fundamentalismus. Türkische
maatschappelijke rol van de Rotterdamse moskeeën. Jugendliche in Deutschland. [The Seduction of
[The Societal Role of Mosques in Rotterdam]. Fundamentalism. Turkish Youth in Germany].
Rotterdam: COS June. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Castles, S. and M. J. Miller. 1998. The age of Migration. IOM. 2003. World Migration 2003. Managing
International Population Movements in the Modern Migration; Challenges and Responses for People on
World. Houndmills, New York: Palgrave (second the Move. Geneva: International Organization for
edition). Migration.
Doomernik, J. 1991. Turkse moskeeën en Karakasoglu, Y. 1997. Türkische Muslime in Nordrhein
maatschappelijke participatie. De institutionalisering Westfalen. [Turkish Muslim Women in North Rhine-
van de Turkse islam in Nederland en de Duitse Westphalia]. Duisburg: Ministerium für Arbeit,
Bondsrepubliek. [Turkish Mosques and Societal Gesundheit und Soziales NRW.
Participation. The Institutionalisation of Turkish Islam
in the Netherlands and the FRG]. Amsterdam: Karakasoglu, Y. and S. Koray. 1996. Islam and Islamic
Instituut voor Sociale Geografie. Organizations in the Federal Republic of Germany. A
Short Summary of Study of the Zentrum für
Elias, N. and J. Scotson. 1965. The Established and the Türkeistudien on Islamic organizations in Germany.
Outsiders – A Sociological inquiry into Community Birmingham: Centre for the Study of Islam and
Problems. London: Sage Publications. Christian-Muslim relations.
European Commission. 2000. Communication on a Kymlicka, W. 1995. Multicultural Citizenship. A Liberal
Community Immigration Policy. 22nd November Theory of Minority Rights. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
2000.
Landman, N. 1992. Van mat tot minaret. De
European Commission. 2003. Communication on institutionalisering van de islam in Nederland. [The
Immigration, Integration and Employment. 3rd June Institutionalisation of Islam in the Netherlands].
2003. Amsterdam: VU-uitgeverij.
Favell, A. 2000. Philosophies of Integration: Moore, D. 2001. Ethnicité et Politique de la Ville en
Immigration and the Idea of Citizenship in France France et en Grande-Bretagne. [Ethnicity and local
and Britain. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Macmillan. politics in France and Great Britain]. Paris:
Fennema, M. and J. Tillie. 1999. “Political participation L’Harmattan.
and political trust in Amsterdam. Civic communities OECD. 2001. Trends in International Migration. Paris:
and ethnic networks”, Journal of Ethnic and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Migration Studies 25 (4) 703-726. Development.
Oezbek, Y. and S. Koray. 1998. Muslim Voices. A eine Neuorientierung der Forschung im Umgang mit
Stranger Within? Section on Germany, Part I and II. allochtonen Jugendlichen, [The Fundamentalism
Essen: Zentrum für Türkeistudien. Accusation. Plea for a New Research Perspective on
Immigrant Youth]. Opladen: Leske und Budrich, pp.
Park, R. and E. Burgess. 1921. Introduction to the
85-97.
Science of Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press. Süssmuth Commission. 2001. Zuwanderung gestalten –
Integration fördern [Structuring immigration –
Penninx, R. 2000. “Het dramatische misverstand”, [The
Fostering Integration]. Berlin: Federal Ministry of the
Dramatic Misunderstanding] in J.E. Overdijk-Francis
Interior.
and H. M. A. G. Smeets, Bij nader inzien. Het
integratiedebat op afstand bekeken. [On Closer Vermeulen, H. (ed.). 1997. Immigrant Policy for a
Inspection. The Integration Debate Scrutinised]. Multiultural Society. A Comparative Study of
Infoplus minderheden, Houten, Lelystad: Bohn, Integration, Language and Religious Policy in Five
Stafleu & Van Loghum/ koninklijke Vermande, pp. Western European Countries. Brussels/Amsterdam:
27-49. MPG/IMES.
Penninx, R. 2001. “Immigrants and the dynamics of Vermeulen, H. and R. Penninx (ed.). 2000. Immigrant
social exclusion – Lessons for anti-discrimination Integration. The Dutch Case. Amsterdam: Het
policies”, in Flip Lindo and Mies van Niekerk, Spinhuis.
Dedication and Detachment. Essays in Honour of
Vermeulen, H. and B. Slijper. 2003. Multiculturalisme in
Hans Vermeulen. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis, pp. 193-
Canada, Australië en de Verenigde Staten. Ideologie
211.
en Beleid, 1950-2000. [Multiculturalism in Canada,
Penninx, R. and J. Roosblad (eds.). 2000. Trade Unions, Australia and the United States. Ideology and Policy
Immigration, and Immigrants in Europe, 1960-1993. 1950-2000]. Amsterdam: Aksant.
A Comparative Study of the Attitudes and Actions of
Weil, P. 2000. “Access to citizenship: a comparison of
Trade Unions in Seven West European Countries.
twenty-five nationality laws”, in A. Aleinikoff and D.
New York and Oxford: Berghahn Books.
Klusmeyer (eds), From Migrants to Citizens:
Penninx, R., K. Kraal, M. Martiniello and S. Vertovec. Membership in a Changing World. Washington DC:
2004. Citizenship in European Cities: Immigrants, Carnegie Foundation.
Local Politics and Integration Policies. Aldershot:
Young, I.M. 1990. Justice and the Politics of Difference.
Ashgate.
Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Rath, J., R. Penninx, K. Groenendijk and A. Meyer.
2001. Western Europe and its Islam.
Leiden/Boston/Köln: Brill.
Rogers A. and J. Tillie. 2001. Multicultural Policies and
Modes of Citizenship in European Cities. Aldershot:
Ashgate.
Simmel, G. 1908. “The stranger”, in K. H. Wolff (ed.),
The Sociology of Georg Simmel. New York: Free
Press.
Soysal, Y. N. 1994. Limits of Citizenship. Migrants and
Postnational Membership in Europe. Chicago:
Chicago University Press.
Sunier, T. 1996. Islam in beweging. Turkse jongeren en
islamitische organisaties. [Islam on the Move.
Turkish Youth and Islamic Organisations].
Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis.
Sunier, T. 1999. ‘Niederländisch-Islamische
Staatsbürgerschaft? Ansichten über Islam,
Bürgerschaft und Bürgerrechte unter türkische
Jugendlichen in den Niederlanden’, [Dutch Islamic
Citizenship? Observations on Islam, Citizenship and
Citizen Rights among Turkish Youthe in the
Netherlands] in W.D. Bukow and M. Ottersbach
(eds), Der Fundamentalismus-verdacht. Plädoyer für
View publication stats

Integration_processes_of_migrants_Research_finding

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Integration_processes_of_migrants_Research_finding

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Integration_processes_of_migrants_Research_finding

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Integration processes of migrants. Research ﬁndings and policy lessons

Chapter · January 2006

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

INTEGRATION OF MIGRANTS: ECONOMIC, SOCIAL,

Introduction integration policies, their special relationship with

A typology of integration policies FIGURE 1

Policy lessons Majority-minority relationships and political

References Fennema, M. and J. Tillie. 2001. “Civic Communities in

View publication stats

You might also like