A bevndorlk s azok beilleszkedsi modelljei Nemzetkzi Migrci

A bevándorlók és azok beilleszkedési modelljei Nemzetközi Migráció

Models of adaptation o Upward mobility and incorporation into the host o o o society – assimilation model (e. g. Gordon 1964) Pluralist model – (Klaff 1980, Peach 1997) Segmented Assimilation Framework (Portes and Böröcz 1989, Skop 2001, Portes-Zhou 1993) Segmented Assimilation Framework extended with place and time factors (Skop 2001, Woltman and Newbold 2009, Hardwick 1993) Heterolocalism (Zelinsky and Lee 1998) Acculturation strategies of ethno-cultural groups and larger society (Berry 2011)

The assimilation model o Significant numbers of immigrants initially occupy less desirable tracts near a large city center o Residental mobility (toward the more attractive zones) follows from the acculturation and the social mobility of individuals o Residental mobility is an intermediate step on the way to more complete assimilation o The model may have been temporally- and country -specific, a creature of a unique period in American history

The pluralist model o Mosaic of self-sustaining ethnic communities, each firmly engaged in the larger polity, economy and society but still retaining a traditional identity and complex of cultural practices in perpetuity o At the metropolitan level: population is both highly diverse and highly segregated o At the group level: there is strong spatial overlap among residential, economic and social spheres, influenced in only a minor fashion by upward mobility, English language acquisition.

Segmented Assimilation Framework (Portes and Böröcz 1989, Portes - Zhou 1993, Skop 2001) Segmented assimilation framework Nature of immigration (condition of exit) Voluntary Forced Resources and characteristics of immigrants (the class origin of immigrants) savings, human capital, culture, nationality, ethnicity, religion, race, etc. Host country reception (the contexts of reception) policy, immigration law, level of discrimination, racism culture, etc.

Segmented Assimilation Framework extended with place and time factors (Woltman - Newbold, 2009; Hardwick, 1993) Segmented assimilation framework Nature of immigration Voluntary Forced Resources and characteristics of immigrants savings, human capital, culture, nationality, ethnicity, religion, race, etc. Host country reception Time and spatial factors policy, immigration law, Period of arrival (regional, national forces: labor markets, economic opportunities) level of discrimination, racism culture, etc. Place of resettlement (rural or urban area)

Heterolocalism model o Immediate or prompt spatial dispersion o Spatial disjuncture between home and work, or home and sites of social activity o Absence of spatial propinquity, but strong ethnic community ties via telecommunications o Time-dependent phenomenon – technological conditions o Can be observed in both metropolitan and nonmetropolitan settings

IMMEDIATE OR PROMPT SPATIAL DISPERSION CAN BE OBSERVED IN BOTH METROPOLITAN AND NON-METROPOLITAN SETTINGS

QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY More than 76% of them came directly to this area More than 84% of them had friends or relatives in this area before they came Everyone has friends now in the area where they live Around 73% of them live in the area where other Russians live 7 months after they entered the US they found a job

Spatial disjuncture between home and work, or home and sites of social activity

ABSENCE OF SPATIAL PROPINQUITY, BUT STRONG ETHNIC COMMUNITY TIES VIA TELECOMMUNICATIONS TIME-DEPENDENT PHENOMENON – TECHNOLOGICAL CONDITIONS

Russian Speaking Students Unit

Russian Seattle

Heterolocalism Discussion What new factor(s) do Zelinsky and Lee identify in their model (spatial/socio-spatial behaviors)? Why do they consider this factor to be so significant? Do you agree with them? How does this new sociospatial behavior/factor impact the integration/assimilation process? What is the difference between a traditional “diaspora” and the new transmigrants? According to the authors, what is the relationship between heterolocalism, transnationalism and the changing role of technology? Does their model work without these technological changes? Is technology alone enough to predict that this “heterolocal” migration trend will become more widespread? What is the impact of time and/or generational factors on the strength and sustainability of transnational and/or heterolocal migrant communities? What role does privilege and access to resources play in the establishment and continued viability of transnational and/or heterolocal migrant communities? How might these communities be strengthened over time? Based on any or all of the following: internal logic of the argument, alternative theories, or evidence based on course materials, your own research or your own experiences, do you find any weaknesses in Zelinsky and Lee’s theory? On balance do you find their contribution useful in thinking and theorizing transnational migration?

Acculturation strategies of ethno-cultural groups and larger society (Berry 2011) Maintenance of heritage culture and identity Relationships sought among groups + - • Multiculturalism • Melting pot + - • Segregation Integration Assimilation Separation Marginalization • Exclusion

Migration Distance Place of Departure Place of Destination PE IG Political and Natural Borders

Model of migration and integration

Model of immigration and integration Time and space factors Effects on the migration: • Characteristics of the potential emigrants, • Perceived condition of the place of departure by the potential emigrants, • Bond with the place of departure and its people by the potential emigrants or immigrants (size of the group!), • Experience of immigrants in the place of destination • Existence and nature of relationship, and information exchange between potential emigrants of the place of departure and immigrants of the destination • Characteristics of the place of departure, • Characteristics of the distance between the places of departure and destination, • Permeability (politically and physically) of the border(s) between the places of departure and destination • Characteristics of the place of destination, • Macro level relationship between the places of departure and destination, • Information exchange between the places of departure and destination

Model of immigration and integration Time and space factors

Characteristics of respondents (immigrants). Attitude: happiness and national identity Perceived condition of and bond with the place and its people to live in their countries of origin How happy they were/are (scale 1 -5) when they entered now Russian American Russian with Jewish roots Their national identity (%) Ukrainian Estonian No Proud of their nationalities (scale 1 -5) Washington State 3. 43 3. 63 4. 22 66. 7 3. 7 5. 6 7. 4 3. 56 Scotland 3. 61 4. 11 73 2. 7 18. 9 4. 19

Perceived condition of and bond with the place and its people Statistics, scale 1 -5 (1= the worse, 5=the best) better future for their children bad economic situation in their home countries all economic related reason better economic situation in the new places ethnic discrimination in their home countries religious discrimination in their home countries family reason 1. happiness level of living in their home country 2. satisfaction when they arrived at the USA/UK 3. how they like living in the USA/UK now difference between 2 -1 difference between 3 -1 3. 35 3. 62 4. 49 0. 27 1. 14 3. 46 3. 64 4. 42 0. 18 0. 96 3. 51 3. 67 4. 36 0. 16 0. 85 3. 52 3. 69 4. 35 0. 17 0. 83 2. 80 3. 53 4. 31 0. 73 1. 51 3. 27 3. 45 4. 09 0. 18 0. 82 3. 86 3. 48 3. 95 -0. 38 0. 10

How distance and the permeability of the borders could have effects on the migration and on immigrants integration? Know people (relatives/friends) in the area before they came here no Would they like to return their Country of Origin? yes maybe Washington State (%) Scotland (%) 77. 8 45. 9 63 43. 2 7. 4 13. 5 27. 8 37. 8

The foreign born population from 1850 to 2007 – former USSR source: US Census Bureau: http: //www. census. gov/population/www/documentation/twps 0029/tab 04. html

Perceived condition of and bond with the place and its people Live in the area where other people from their countries of origin live They have friends among them Only people with the same nationalities than they are Their friends’ nationalities Closest friends among local Americans, Scottish, British people Their closest friends’ nationalities The same nationalities than they are Washington Scotland % State % 68. 5 64. 9 53. 7 51. 4 11. 1 10. 8 26. 2 27 65. 6 64. 9

Characteristics and reception of the place of destination Supporting émigrés Received help when they moved to the USA / UK Received help to settle down, financial support family Financial support from government friends, company Social network of the local Americans/Scottish people They have friends in their neighbourhood Their friends are only Americans/Scottish people Sc+Br+En Closest friend’s nationality is American/Scottish people Sc+Br+En (Sc=Scottish; Br= British; En= English) Washington Scotland % State % 66. 7 29. 7 50 18. 9 13 2. 7 16. 7 5. 4 5. 6 - Washington State % 84. 3 Scotland % 86. 7 11. 8 36. 7 - 63. 7 78. 4 86. 7 - 96. 7

Characteristics of immigrants: education 90 80 70 50 40 30 20 10 2000 has a degree older than 20 U zb ek l to ta is kh st za Ka 2006 -08 has a degree older than 20 source: U. S. Census Bureau. 2006 -2008 ACS 3 -year PUMS files and 2000 PUMS files ta n an R SS U U kr ai ne ia R us s a do v M ol ia G eo rg s ru la Be er ba i ja n ia Az en m Ar Li th ua n ia ia La tv to n ia 0 Es percent 60

How religion could have effect on immigrants integration? o Russians have not been typical of other Euroamerican immigrant groups in North America (Hardwick, 1993) n Russian residential enclaves have been relatively slow to disperse through time – slow assimilation p p because of their religion (Orthodox, Old Believers, Doukhobors, Molokans, Baptists, Pentacostals) because of their experience at home (persecution, discrimination, etc. )

Characteristics of respondents: making decision about leaving their country Why did they leave their home countries? Unfavourable economic circumstances in the Co. O (Country of Origin) Religious discrimination Ethnic discrimination Better economic situation in the USA /UK Better future for their children Family reason Washington State % Scotland % 24. 1 29. 7 22. 3 26 37 38. 9 18. 5 2. 7 5. 4 62. 2 43. 2 29. 7

Reception of the place of destination: discrimination Scale 1: never – 5: always discrimination because of their nationalities uncomfortable feeling because they are foreign feeling that they are not welcome because of their nationalities disadvantages because of their English Washington State 1. 37 1. 98 Scotland 1. 35 2. 0 1. 77 1. 57 2. 59 2. 37

Reception of the place of destination: attitude toward immigration in Scotland What benefits/difficulties are there in Scotland in receiving immigrants Cultural diversity Regarding employment Regarding qualification Growing population Increasing housing costs Having problem to provide additional support Some immigrants only use benefits but cannot give anything back to the country Increasing crime level 56. 7 13. 3 30 10 - Disadvantage s 16. 7 60 3. 3 16. 7 - 3. 3 Benefits

How micro-environment could have effect on immigrants integration? o “We have lots of help. Lots of people, American people around offering help like once a week, twice a week you could come they could help with the language, it was amazing. And one person who we used to live with in an apartment building, her name is Miss C, at the time when we met she was an international counselor at the Seattle Pacific University. She offered us help, right away when we came after a week, she helped us with language, and she helped Michael, my husband, and he started a couple of courses at the Seattle Pacific University. This lady was amazing to us. ” (Lena, November 2009)

Summary – Two stories of the immigration Washingto n State Scotland -Receiving society is more open: „We are also immigrants” -Multiculturism is rather a good thing, but local citizens are concerned about its disadvantages -Only 11, 8% of them had no international friends -For a Scottish person an English man or woman can be perceived as a foreigner -Immigrants from the countries of the former SU were more desperate to leave their home country, -They were the most unhappy at their home countries and now they are the happiest -More immigrants are thinking about moving back to their home countries, -Mainly economic immigrants -They are more proud to their nationalities