Internal Defense of Doctoral Thesis

1. Internal Defense of Doctoral Thesis Selma Muhič Dizdarevič M.A. Faculty of Social Sciences Department of Public and Social Policy In Prague, 14 January 2009

2. Basic information • Title: Immigration and Integration Policies of the European Union and the Czech Republic and their Relation to the Civil Society Organizations and Other Relevant Stakeholders in the Czech Republic • Supervisor: Prof. PhDr. Martin Potůček, CSc., MSc.

3. Structure of presentation • Goals of the thesis • Methodology • Results

4. Goals • The main goal of this dissertation is to find out if civil society organizations (CSOs) are able to influence interpretation of the problem of position of immigrants[1] in the Czech society concerning relevant policies. In order to answer this question I structured the work into four subfields and I will explain their relation to the main issue of this work[1]See further in the text for more sophisticated classification of the term immigrant.

5. Goals • 1. to describe and evaluate current theories of minority rights, where the major issue is how to reconcile values of individual rights with demands of collective rights. • This objective should be primarily seen as normative framework implicitly used by the CSOs as criterion for shaping and evaluation of the relevant public policy in this matter. • The other aspects of the dissertation should then show if they are successful or not in promoting the defined normative framework in their relation to decision-makers in political arena.

6. Goals • 2. to describe the current structure of relevant European Union (EU) and Czech Republic (CR) policies in the field of immigration and integration. In the latter case I will also analyze space given to civil society organizations (CSOs) in the defined field, namely which CSOs are seen as desirable partners for the Czech governmental bodies dealing with issues of immigration and integration and which project objectives are set for them in order to qualify for allocation of financial means. • This aspect of the work should display the mindset of the decision-makers concerning the given policies i.e. how they set up the rules of the game in relation to particular minorities I am dealing with in this work.

7. Goals • 3. to explore through qualitative empirical research the role of the selected CSOs in the process of integration and to set the role into the perspectives of the selected governmental representatives and selected refugees. • The main issue here is how integration process is defined by governmental bodies, how this concept is perceived or changed by the CSOs and what is the feedback of the subjects of the policy, namely of refugees. • The three set of stakeholders (governmental representatives, CSO representatives and refugees) form a certain agenda related to integration which is set into wider political arena.

8. Goals • 4. to explore through qualitative empirical research potential for political participation of refugees and asylum-seekers in the CR from the perspective of the CSO representatives and de facto or de iure refugees. • Although number of refugees and asylum-seekers in the Czech society is currently low, the question of their empowerment and integration through political participation will no doubt increase in importance considering the similar processes throughout the EU. • In both researches the question is how governmental policies are perceived and if CSOs think they can influence their shaping or change.

9. Goals • The four objectives therefore answer the questions why do we need minority rights and how do we justify them in order to expose normative framework the CSOs work with; • how concrete structure of policy related to specific minority group (i.e. immigrants, refugees, asylum-seekers and irregular migrants) looks like (levels of power, strategic and conceptual documents, allocation of financial means, cooperation and role given to the civil sector) i.e. what are the key features of the political establishment’s mindset; • how concept of integration works for the relevant stakeholders and can they influence it; • and is there potential in political participation in the future as mode to increase level of empowerment of the minority groups and CSOs which represent them. • In terms of the definition of the problem these four objectives are combined on macro and micro levels (EU and the Czech national policies and setting of the Czech civil society scene); the overall model of the main problems is conceptual (verbal); in theoretical part the model is normative and in practical perspective descriptive; and it bears signs of the dynamic model. (Veselý, A., Nekola, M. eds. 2007:214)

10. Public policy methodology • Model A-A-A understands public policy as “interactive process of combining various stakeholders in creating partial “stakes” and influencing public policy”. (Potuček et al. 2005: 47) Arenas are defined as a space in which individual stakeholders enter relations of cooperation/consensus and/or competition/conflict. • Therefore political agenda is created in communication of the stakeholders. This model sees creation of political agenda as dynamic or “liquid” process in which reactions of stakeholders and their different perspectives and arenas in which they meet constantly change, influence and define the agenda.

11. Public policy method • Therefore in terms of analysis and definition of the problem I selected the stakeholder analysis which strives to identify relevant groups and organizations that are affected by the given policies in order to understand their acting, intentions, mutual relations in order to define their influence, resources and interest in implementation of the given policy. • The stakeholder analysis is used in this work to define positions and attitudes of the relevant stakeholders towards the issue of integration and political participation and their mutual relations. • The stakeholders are chosen according to the given criteria: the problem concerns them, they have interest in the problem and they have active or passive influence on solving the problem. The stakeholder analysis should be seen as research stakeholder analysis (see Veselý, Nekola 2005:226).

12. Methodology • In theoretical part: • analysis of different approaches to the questions of public policy analysis, theories of multiculturalism and related issues of recognition, redistribution and representation. • the power opportunity structures (POS analysis) to define the field of analysis for the synergy and clashes between governing bodies and the civil society. This method defines what is and what is not possible within the given societal framework, not only from the legal point of view, which is basic, but also from the point of view of various practices of inclusion and exclusion. • Analysis of the different authors´ interpretations of civil society provides clues and guidelines for practical analysis of the given policies and developments in the field of immigration and integration.

13. Methodology • In empirical+policy analysis part: • In the case of empirical research of the team of researchers I managed, we used qualitative analysis of the NGOs active in the field of migration of selected minorities in the CR as well as semi-structured interviews and analysis of their programs according to given parameters and indicators of our analysis. • The second empirical research based on qualitative analysis and structured interviews with the respondents. • In the this part of my work I used primary and secondary analysis, statistical data interpretation, semi-structured interviews with parties involved and qualitative analysis of programs, proclamations, policy documents, legal framework, civil society organizations´ statutes as well as historical analysis.

14. Results of the normative framework analysis • The theoretical framework pointed me in the direction of finding balance between individual and collective rights i.e. incorporation of liberal and communitarian concerns and requests. In my view, the analysis of the theoretical framework showed that individual rights at least in the EU framework remain the crucial tool for assessment of justified claims of the various groups in the societies. But it also pointed out that collective rights are not necessarily limitations to the individual rights. On the contrary, collective rights properly formulated may lead to strengthening of individual rights. This also means that we cannot a priori reject the concept of collective rights or interpret them as detrimental for the concept of individual rights. • In terms of polity I proposed the framework of balance between the individual and collective rights with addition that where those clash, we follow the path of individual rights.

15. Results of the EU policy analysis • Through the analysis of the EU and the Czech policies set to tackle the issues of immigration and integration I came to the conclusion that the agendas are still easier to manage at the national than at the EU level. • In terms of immigration, the EU policy seems to be focused predominantly on restrictions, curbing the asylum migration and promoting context of security while the immigration policy for job migration seems to be much less worked out. The EU cooperation in this matter as well as the attempts to formulate a unified political formula are guided by the idea of finding a common path to restricting immigration not to managing it. The immigration is perceived in the principles of the common policy as a process which has to be restricted and in some cases even stopped. That is why the strongest elements of the EU cooperation can be found in the common asylum policy, which is the most structured part of the common policy. • The other elements are then related to combat against the irregular migration, restrictions on family migration, etc. • In case of asylum policy, its restrictiveness resulting in some cases to equalizing the position of an asylum seeker to potential criminal, I think it is necessary to reexamine the institution of asylum in the current EU formation and subsequent policies for integration of successful asylums seekers i.e. the refugees. The research carried out in the CR among the civil society organizations showed repeatedly that initial passiveness concerning integration may lead to permanent exclusion from the society.

16. Results of the EU policy analysis • Job migration: The EU currently profits from the presence of migrants in this sense because they cover certain gaps on the job markets but it seems that it is a random effect of the immigration policy rather than the goal of the long-term job migration policy • The question to what degree a common immigration and integration policy is possible based on the analysis of the policies at the EU and Czech level and given the different immigration history of the individual Member States. • As we have seen, the EU is perceived by the selected CSOs as major player in the field of financing but not in contributing to the adequate policies. The question of asylum, integration of refugees, undocumented migrants but also social stratification, urban ghettoization or challenges for secularism do not play an equally significant role in all the Member States. On the contrary in the CR we saw that both some state administration representatives and the CSO saw some of these issues (like asylum and refugee issues) as not having such an important role in the Czech public space. • I may add that here we arrive at the point where it is necessary to state that national minorities (i.e. the Roma) represent a bigger challenge in the CR than the asylum policy with very low recognition rates.

17. Results of the CZ policy analysis • The Czech immigration and integration policies, as should be obvious from my analysis, are much more detailed and worked out than the corresponding policies of the EU. • If we make conclusions about the Czech policies from the point of view of strategic documents that the Czech government adopted, we might say that the field of the relevant policies is well covered. All the relevant aspects of the policies i.e. asylum, irregular, legal migration and refugee are covered by the corresponding policy documents. • Asylum, irregular and refugee migration/integration are more under the EU influence than the legal migration and integration. However, we do not always find concrete supporting policies in place. The whole direction of the development of the policies follows the general restrictive line of the EU policies, but we must stress the autonomousefforts to establish the programs for labor migration. • Lack of efficient policy in the field of education.

18. Results of empirical researches • All the respondents stressed the low number of refugees and a relatively low number of asylum seekers as relevant for invisibility and sometimes indifference in the given field. The CSOs in the field are focused mostly on the provision of legal or social help both in the cases when the state does not provide this and as supportive activities where the state does provide such help. • It is important to understand that the CSO sector is predominantly financed by the Czech ministries or from the EU funds administered by the relevant Czech governmental bodies or (less frequently) foundations. This and the indifference towards the subject of immigration and integration both in public and political discourse lead to the situation in which the relevant governmental bodies and the CSOs are much interconnected forming almost a closed group as stated by all sets of stakeholders. Within this group they sometimes have similar problems (as in the case of lack of independence of refugees) but sometimes they stand on the opposite sides (mainly in the case of introduction of new restrictive legislation). To some degree, this also brings about the question of independent position of the CSOs towards the governmental sector. The independence is problematic because of financial sources but on the other hand we should not forget that in many aspects the CS sector became indispensable for the governmental sector in the integration process. • Therefore we may say that CSOs do not have power but their influence is undisputable.

19. Results of empirical researches • The CSOs have to follow the general framework of the policies. However they try to influence them mainly through initiatives of the legal nature. There is a strong presence of legal experts in the field followed by the social workers. It seems that provision of the feed back to the governmental policies is crucial for the governmental bodies. Due to the close contact with clients and the trust the clients have in the CSOs, their role is crucial. They do provide a perspective, which cannot be obtained through the instruments of the governmental policies.

20. Results of empirical researches • The EU policy is seen mainly in the context of its reflection in the national policies. The CSOs have no direct access to the EU policies or civil society structures mainly due to the lack of financial means and staff to develop such activities. • They tend to see efforts for the single policy in the field of integration as unnecessary since they see the local conditions for the policy as the most important. In terms of the influence upon the national policy they tend to see their own work as a very slow and gradual process of developing pressure and surveillance over policies and their possible change. This applies both to the EU and the national level. • The CSOs monitor the transmission of the EU legislation into the Czech legislation but fail to influence such policies at the EU level when they see them as unfair. On the other hand, when the EU policies are seen as positive for the migrants, the CSOs tend to develop pressure for their implementation.

21. Results of empirical researches • Both researches showed that the CSOs fail to include into their activities migrants as activists and tend to see them as clients. As one of the respondent of the research on political participation stated, the NGOs are currently for the refugees not by the refugees. This is the space for future development of the third sector in this field. • Civil society participation can be used as a channel for the future political participation, which would increase both rights but also responsibilities of the refugees once they reach the status of citizens. But currently, as the research showed, the potential of political participation is not used.

22. General conclusion • In terms of public policy analysis discourse the most fundamental answer to the basic question of the thesis namely if CSOs can influence shaping and implementation of the relevant public policies in the field of immigration and integration can be in my opinion best described through Lindblom´s concept of incremental variation (Veselý, Nekola eds. 2007:257). • The CSOs are unable to put through their differences from the political establishment view in shaping and implementing policies, nevertheless since they are de facto indispensable in implementation of some aspects of the policies they do apply method of step-by-step minor changes and pressures in the given field.