slide1 l.
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Host Countries and the Immigrant Experience: Do Destinations Matter? Suzanne Model University of Massachusetts

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 34

Host Countries and the Immigrant Experience: Do Destinations Matter? Suzanne Model University of Massachusetts - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 74 Views
  • Uploaded on

Host Countries and the Immigrant Experience: Do Destinations Matter? Suzanne Model University of Massachusetts. Technological Change + Economic Change --->. More international migrants (213,943,812 in 2010)*

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Host Countries and the Immigrant Experience: Do Destinations Matter? Suzanne Model University of Massachusetts' - clifton


Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

Host Countries and the Immigrant Experience: Do Destinations Matter? Suzanne ModelUniversity of Massachusetts

technological change economic change
Technological Change+ Economic Change--->
  • More international migrants(213,943,812 in 2010)*
  • More destinations(Europe, Middle East, Asian Tigers)*http://esa.un.org/migration/p2k0data.asp
do conditions at destination affect the integration of international migrants
Do conditions at destination affect the integration of international migrants?
  • "integration” - participation in the major institutions of a receiving society
  • “institutions” - economy, polity, social welfare system, schools, etc. Entziger & Biezeveld 2003
some scholars say that conditions at destination matter less now because of
Some scholars say that conditions at destination matter less now because of
  • GLOBALIZATION (Sassen 1996)
  • TRANSNATIONALISM (Glick-Schiller et al. 1992)
i agree that conditions at destination remain very important
I agree that conditions at destination remain very important

But I also contend that

the characteristics of groups interact with conditions at destination to create group differences in levels of integration within and among destinations.

plan of lecture
PLAN OF LECTURE
  • Reasons to expect conditions at destination affect integration.
  • Reasons to expect that characteristics of groups interact with conditions at destination to affect integration.
  • Implications for theory & research.
slide8

I. Variations in Immigration HistoryClassic regions of immigration(North America, South America, Australasia) versus‘New’ regions of immigration(Europe, Middle East, East Asia)

slide9

II. Variations in Duration of StayCountries that Accept International Migrants Mainly as Permanent Residents(Canada, France, Brazil)versusCountries that Accept International Migrants Mainly as Temporary Residents (Switzerland, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan)

variations in ideology of integration
Variations in Ideology of Integration
  • Multi-culturalism (Australia)
  • Assimilationist (France)
  • Exclusionist (Japan)
slide11
IV Variations in Policies Concerning International Migrantsvisa regulationscitizenship ruleslaws against discrimination
slide12

“No state possesses a truly coherent incorporation regime. Instead, one finds ramshackle, multifaceted, loosely connected sets of regulatory rules, institutions, and practices in various domains of society that together make up the frameworks within which migrants and natives work out their differences. Divergent outcomes are likely if some of these institutional patterns are more effective, influential or durable than others.”(Freeman 2004)

slide13

Therefore, a more appropriate strategy is to evaluate policies regarding each dimension of integration separately, country by country. This exercise is called

‘BENCHMARKING’

loi legal obstacles to integration index 1997 8 countries 5 policies
LOI (Legal Obstacles to Integration Index 1997)8 Countries; 5 policies

MIPEX (Migration Integration Policy Index 2010)31 Countries; 7 policieshttp://www.mipex.eu/

slide16

Survey Research Shows Variations in Feelings about the number of “immigrants”, “foreigners” or “minorities” in the receiving country Feelings about the economic or social effects of international migration

slide17

Percent agreeing that “our government should allow people from other countries to come here to work (as long as there are jobs available)”? World Value Survey1995-7 (Mayda 2004)

slide18

BUT developing hypotheses about destination effects by looking only at the characteristics of destinations is insufficient becauseconditions at destination do not affect all migrant groups in the same way.

slide19
In many host countries, some international migrant groups are received relatively well; others are received relatively badly.
slide20

I. Migrants from ex-colonies are received relatively poorly ex. Former colonials who settle in their “mother country” will encounter more obstacles than other international migrants.John Rex

slide21

II. Migrants whose ethnicity is the same as the dominant group are received relatively well. (Lahav 2004)Jews to IsraelAusliedlers to GermanyJoseonjok to Korea

slide22
IIIa Migrants whose ethnicity is “African” are received relatively poorly in the UK, US and Canada.Bashi & McDaniel 1997
slide23

IIIbMigrants of African or Latino ancestry to the U.S. are in danger of integrating into “the underclass”Segmented Assimilation Hypothesis(Portes and Zhou 1993)

slide24
IV Diplomatic Relations Between Sending and Receiving Countries Affect Policies toward Specific Groups
  • Cuban Refugees to the U.S. +
  • Tibetan Refugees to India +
  • Mainlander Brides in Taiwan -
vi the selectivity of migration affects the ability of migrants to integrate
VI. The selectivity of migration affects the ability of migrants to integrate
  • Positive Selection --> more resources

--> easier integration

  • Negative Selection --> less resources

--> harder integration

Selectivity -

Migrants are not a random subset of a population. Selectivityrefers to the ways in which migrants differ from non-migrants. (Lee 1966)

migrants are likely to be positively selected when
Migrants are likely to be positively selected when
  • ‘Costs of migration’ are high
    • travel a long distance
    • few compatriots at destination
  • Income inequality is lower in sending country than receiving country (Borjas 1985)
slide29

Gini Coefficients (Income Inequality) among Persons

UNU-WIDER World Income Inequality Database, Version 2.0c, May 2008

theories about the integration of international migrants need to specify
Theories about the integration of international migrants need to specify:

which migrants?

in

which destinations?

slide32

A Useful Research Strategy would be tocompare the integration of culturally similar migrants from the same sending country across several destinations.visa status, citizenship, voting rates, residential location, employment outcomes, crime rates, education of later generations, etc.

slide33

Potential Hypothesis:Perhaps the integration of some migrant groups is less sensitive to conditions at destination, while the integration of other groups is more sensitive to conditions at destination

the end
The End

感謝你們關注