Immigration and the challenges associated with socio-political integration in the European Union - Essay Example

?Immigration and the challenges associated with socio-political integration in the European Union Introduction Large-scale immigration post WWII has influenced modern Europe in many ways. Owing to immigration, current observations have revealed significant variations in the lives of people living in the Europe, and based on these differences there have emerged various challenges within socio-political integration in the EU (Saggar, Somerville, Ford and Sobolewska, 2012). While the government has framed policies aimed at diluting specific differences that hamper active social participation and economic inclusion, differences associated with cultural identities have been fashioned into new processes of delineating and being a ‘true’ European. The governmental policies that aim at resolving differences between the native population and immigrants face major challenges owing to the large number of immigrants entering the EU from various developing nations. There are growing concerns about the immigration policies in both receiver and sending countries, wherein there are speculations about a large-scale increase in migration flows in the near future. According to various reviews, calculations on future flow of immigration from developing nations to the EU show that there may be 13.5 million immigrants within the EU, from the year 2000 until 2050 (Mansoor and Quillin, 2007). The calculations that give an average estimate are based on various economic and demographic factors significant in determining immigration flows. Along with these numbers, one must also take into consideration political, social and cultural aspects of the immigrants, owing to the intricate nature of the issue, closely related to human trafficking, irregular migration, and shifting borders. The demographic framework of a nation is greatly affected by migratory movements, and owing to the inherent differences  in socioeconomic and  demographic  structure  of the immigrant  populations  in regard to  the  host  population,  migration  flows  significantly influence public expenditure, income distribution, demographic evolution,  social stratification along with economic development (Amin, 1995).  With rising economic challenges emerging from a steady increase in elderly the population within European societies, the European Commission regards the entry and integration of immigrants within the EU an added demographic challenge that involves providing better living and working conditions, employment, and education for the immigrants and working out a long-term, sustainable budgetary plan (Linz and Stula, 2010). Immigration may be triggered due to various reasons that may vary from political, economic, or personal reasons, while migration may also be voluntary or even forced, and the later often involves human trafficking (Kraler, Kofman, Kohli and Schmoll, 2011). From a historical perspective, Europe has always faced migration from different parts of the world. Prior to WWI, during the era of industrialisation, there were large-scale transatlantic labour migrations. Post WWII, during the period of severe economic crises and reconstruction, Europe became an important destination for many immigrants. This was mainly due to large numbers of labourers migrating to the European continent from various parts of the world due to work shortage in their own countries (Castles and Miller, 2010). At this time, there were also intra-European migrations, where labourers from south Europe moved to various west European nations.  Subsequently there were settlements established, and families brought over for reunification. Besides labour migration, there were war refugees and natural disaster refugees that came to Europe from the former USSR, Africa and the Balkans, thus further adding to the social and cultural diversities within the EU population. In this context, the essay will review various research papers and analyse the different challenges associated with socio-political integration in the European Union. Discussion The process of immigration in the EU Immigration problems pose a major socio-political challenge to the modern contemporary European Union member states that are coping with rapid diversification, uneven spread, and most importantly the increasing immigration flow. The new immigrants include refugees, asylum seekers, vacationers, and illegal immigrants from various parts of the world. Furthermore, there are an increasing number of trans-migrants, qualified professionals, students and ‘free movers,’ from various parts of the world working within the EU, and migration flow currently has spread from the more developed parts of Europe (north-western regions) to the central and southern regions also (Favell, 2003). At the same time, post-WWII immigrants living in the European Union have children that are now adults (Haug, 2002). Therefore, in view of the above, it is necessary to seek ways that help to create a balance between diverse cultures and identities, which is important for a successful socio-political integration of immigrant population within the European Union (Crul and Vermeulen, 2003). The effects of immigration are manifold and felt mostly in areas ranging from housing, education and employment, to even arts, food habits, and language. Most of the researchers have focussed on combined cultural, socio-political, and economic ramifications of immigration, while some researchers have also analysed each issue separately, in discrete parts. Large-scale immigration during the post-colonial era (middle of the twentieth century), has forced further reviews on the national character within various member states of the EU, and analyses of various provisions in the government provided opportunity frameworks, with further refinement and expansion in the current provisions, owing to increasingly new patterns in immigration, which aim at improved integration. Immigration often creates specific challenges while trying to remove or reduce specific differences between the native population and the new entrants. There are also grave challenges involved in ensuring that the children of the immigrants receive the same living and employment chances. Failure to provide for the second generation, concerning employment and education, gives rise to mistrust, complaints and segregation, within the same social fabric. Immigration in the Europe Union is a heterogeneous process, where some nations have a long history of immigration, while others have started attracting immigrants in the recent years. There are also countries that have recently changed their status from emigration to immigration nations, while some States experience both widespread immigration and emigration. While some States within the EU face more labour immigrants, some countries face immigrants seeking family reunification or are refugees (OECD, 2008). In countries, such as, Cyprus, Italy, Spain and Ireland the immigration streams have had major impact on their native population, but interestingly, migrants who have settled in Cyprus or Ireland are relatively low in number. While at the same time, Italy and Spain have faced recent immigration flows that are almost 2-3 times more than what the UK, France or Germany faced during the first half of the twentieth century (OECD, 2008). The new EU Member States such as the Baltic Republics, Romania and Poland face more of emigration than immigration, while Netherlands and Finland are two states within the EU that have relatively poor records of immigration. While the UK, France and Germany are member states of the EU that have the largest immigration population, the flow of immigrants to these states have significantly decreased, when compared to Italy and Spain, in the recent years, (OECD, 2008). Observations revealed that since 2002 until 2006, entry of immigrants into the European Union increased by nearly 25%, and the nations facing maximum immigration were Ireland, Italy and Spain (Herm, 2008). Figures reveal that Netherlands showed a decline in immigration during the first decade of the twenty-first century, where immigration flows were nearly 11% less than the 2002 figures, while Finland, despite showing an increase in immigration figures, still remained low in numbers when compared to other EU states (Herm, 2008). By 2006, the European Union observed the entry and settlements of nearly 3 million newcomers, and this included immigrants moving from one EU member state to another (Herm, 2008). Given below are four main challenges that the EU member states face while dealing with socio-political integration of the immigration population. Issues related to immigration and socio-political integration with the EU Housing: In the Europe Union member states, observations revealed that immigrants tend to reside in houses that show poor living conditions and lack of maintenance, while quality of their neighbourhoods is poor, when compared to the living standards of the native population (Koopmans and Statham, 2000). Furthermore, immigrants are found concentrated in specific localities of cities and towns. The two aforementioned living habits of the immigrants have often led to theories of the formation of apparently modern ghettos, or in other words, formation of pockets of immigrant population surviving within deteriorated social and physical conditions. In Germany and the UK, such ghetto like environment is evident in downtown areas of the cities and in areas adjoining them, as for example in Birmingham, Liverpool and Frankfurt. In Sweden and France, there are ‘dormitory towns,’ which are a form of ghetto, and are seen in the suburbs around towns and cities, such as Stockholm and Paris. Therefore, the main issue in context of socio-political integration for governments of the EU member states is to fight against the inherent tendency of the immigrant population to live in ghettos with deteriorated housing conditions and poor social environment. The State policy concerning improvement of housing conditions should aim at modernising and renovating the deteriorated houses within immigrant neighbourhoods. Most often, the prevalent interventions associated with improving the living and social conditions of the immigrants are urban programmes that receive central government aid. While not all urban programmes are for the direct benefit of the immigrant populations, help reaches indirectly and comprises of various integration policies. As local authorities are not in direct control of the flow of immigrant population, urban policies and programmes framed by the central government are more beneficial for social integration, from an overall perspective (Koopmans and Statham, 2000). The issue of concentration of immigrants within specific localities in a city or town is not an easy topic to address (like the housing issue), in terms of governmental intervention and policies. While some States and cities feel that the ghetto like existence of the immigrants facilitate better socio-political integration, other cities and nations view the ghettos as major obstacles to effective socio-political integration (Phinney, Horenczyk, Liebkind, and Vedder, 2001). Sweden views ghettos as a major barrier in improving socio-political integration of immigrants, while at the same time describing them as facilitating integration, in view that concentration helps in population targeting. Here the local authorities facilitate and control immigrant populations by implementing a system of quotas and allocating public housing accommodation (Icduygu, 1996). In Germany, observations revealed that Frankfurt, Stuttgart and Berlin view ghettos as social barriers, while at the same time, Hamburg views them as facilitators in socio-political integration (Joppke, 1999). Some of the German cities have a system of quotas for allocating houses to the immigrant populations. In Sweden, the quota system is a part of socio-political integration policy, and all new immigrants receive allocated houses in various towns and cities (fixed quota is at 2.8% of the total town/city population), and is based on an ‘agreement system’ between local authorities and central government (Icduygu, 1996). However, this system has one major flaw, where the immigrants are allowed to move, once all papers are in order (termed as secondary migration). This approach adopted by the central governmental policies of Sweden favours formation of small immigrant ghettos within towns and cities, often not appreciated by the local municipalities (Icduygu, 1996). In Netherlands and the UK, policies that favour concentration of the immigrant population within a locality are actively discouraged, and their policies focus more on removing any form of socio-political discrimination (Joppke, 1999). In the Netherlands, houses are given to the immigrants in proportion to their numbers, while in the UK there are various measures, which control and ensure that immigrants do not face any sort of socio-political discrimination within the housing market. The labour market scenario: there are various reports that show immigrants face strong discriminations within the EU labour market, while their children face difficulties in education. These two factors make the integration of immigrant labour market with the rest of the native population rather uncertain (OECD, 2003). The immigrant populations are generally associated with unemployment or unskilled jobs. In order to address this issue, the local authorities tend to function in two ways: by framing policies that promote socio-political integration within the labour market scenario, and by promoting occupational integration programmes (termed as ‘insertion’ policies) that are based on vocational training (OECD, 2003). A majority of the EU countries use ‘insertion’ program policies as a step towards removing labour market discrimination. Since the early 1980’s, many policies were introduced that promoted the ‘insertion’ of young immigrants, directly or indirectly, into the job market. These policies were in the form of programmes that provide specific training and help the young immigrant population to deal with employment problems and discrimination. In Netherlands and Sweden, the policies include training programmes that are both basic and advanced in form, and help the second-generation immigrants to improve their positions within the job market. In Germany, there are policies that help immigrants to receive training and later return to the labour market or while working on their first jobs. The local authorities play significant roles in this case, since they are better prepared to bridge the differences between training agencies and the economic sector. However, reports show that often such training programmes fail to reach the first generation and older immigrants in the job market (OECD, 2003). The policies that have been adopted by the EU member states to deal with labour market discrimination show varied orientations. As for example, in the Netherlands and the UK there are many such policies (aforementioned ones), which receive greater priority during implementation while in France such policies are very rare (OECD, 2003). The UK and the Netherlands have framed policies termed as ‘positive discrimination’ programs that are based on job quotas. In the UK, some of the local authorities try to maintain a stringent balance between their personnel composition and the immigrant population in that town or city (OECD, 2003). In the Netherlands, there are special councillors within subsided jobs and offices, to help fight against labour market discrimination. The chief aim is to ensure that the immigrant population is equally reflected within job distribution, especially in the public sector (OECD, 2003). However, the various anti-discrimination programs and policies adopted by the governments have shown very little effect on the private sector, in a majority of the EU member states. Issues related to schooling of migrants’ children: within the arena of education, immigrants are faced with two major challenges: the issues of the failure or success in a school, which is given less importance in the context of immigrants than for natives, and the issue of learning native language and imbibing native culture (Phalet, and Swyngedouw, 2003). The first issue, which is aggregated by the presence of immigrant pockets within cities and towns, resulting in children from immigrant families studying within the same classrooms with other native children, and it is a matter of great worry for all states within the EU. The second issue depends primarily on integration policies adopted by a country. While some states stress on tackling failure in school by implementing various educational policies, as in France and Germany, other states have chosen to adopt policies for preserving immigrants’ culture and tradition, and local authorities are directed to adopt specific measures that include hiring immigrant teachers, promoting learning of mother tongue and the essence of multiculturalism (Phalet and Swyngedouw, 2003). While France does not allow for classes in mother tongue to promote uniformity in education, in the Netherlands and Sweden there are teaching programmes that promote use of mother tongue (during the early years of education). Social prejudice: Regardless of the processes adopted by the State for the socio-political integration of the immigrants, majority of them still face social and political exclusion (Heinz, 2001). Immigrants face various disincentives and hurdles not only in schools and labour market, but also within the main legal, social and political bodies, along with discrimination from the native population (Heinz, 2001). This issue of concern is further extended by a sharp increase in votes against the immigrants and a growing ‘anti-immigrant’ feeling in many of the EU member states, where immigrants are perceived as a threat to national economy, unity and culture (Lubbers, 2001). Furthermore, the September 11 terror attacks on the US have initiated a hostile backlash against the immigrants, especially the Muslim immigrants (EUMC, 2003). The economic crisis of the 2007-2009, which have led to an insecurity and rising political tension within the socio-political framework of many EU countries, there are growing instances where media and public opinion have blamed the immigrants for being an economic burden, a threat to national security and cultural outsiders, leading to further socio-political exclusion. In a European Social Survey that covered the Netherlands, the UK, Belgium and Germany, various interesting cross-national patterns in socio-political integration were observed (Sniderman, Hagendoorn, and Prior, 2003). On listing the most essential criteria in allowing the entry of new immigrants, the native population voted for a strong willingness on part of the immigrants to adopt the host culture, followed by their skill in the national language and thirdly, educational qualifications. A majority of the native population from the four EU member states rejected the concept of cultural and linguistic diversity. While, a majority favoured equal rights and legal protection from any kind of discrimination as a means to achieve socio-political integration; there was very little support for special policies that favour accommodation or acknowledgment of immigrants’ cultures through special schools for religion and language, and awarding full political rights (right to vote) for the immigrants (Sniderman, Hagendoorn, and Prior, 2003). Conclusion Immigration issues still pose a major challenge in socio-political integration of the EU, and will continue to do so in the near future as the above review suggests. While there are various governmental policies and programmes in place that aim at decreasing discrimination at all levels and bringing about social and political integration, the general mind-set of the native population continue to view the immigrants as outsiders, both within the social and political realms. The anti-immigrant feelings that were already present in the early twenty-first century have been further aggravated by the worldwide terror attacks perpetuated by Islamic fundamentalists, and the 2007-2009 economic crisis that left many from the native population without a job. Thus, an unstable economic situation and a rising intolerance for Islamic terrorism have led to further socio-political exclusion of the immigrant populations within the EU. References Amin, S., 1995. “Migrations in Contemporary Africa: A Retrospective View.” In, Jonathan Baker, and Tade A. Aina, (eds.) The Migration Experience in Africa. Uppsala: Nordiska. Castles, S., and Miller, M., 2010.  The Age of Migration – International Population  Movements in the Modern World. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Crul, M. and Vermeulen, H., 2003. (eds.). The future of the second generation: The integration of migrant youth in six European countries. International Migration Review, 37(4). EUMC, 2003. Situation of Islamic communities in five European cities. Vienna: European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia. Favell, A., 2003. Games without frontiers: Questioning transnational social power of migrants in Europe. Archives Europeennes de Sociologie, XLIV(3), 397-427. Haug, W., 2002. The demography of immigrant populations in Europe. European Population Papers Series n 8. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, DG III, Social Cohesion F-67075. Heinz, S., (ed.), 2001. Social Exclusion as a Multidimensional Process: Subcultural and Formally Assisted Strategies of Coping With and Avoiding Social Exclusion. Brussels: European Commission. Herm, A., 2008. Recent migration trends: citizens of EU-27 Member States become ever more mobile while EU remains attractive to non-EU citizens. Eurostat, Population and social conditions, 98/2008. Icduygu, A., 1996. Becoming a new citizen in an immigration country: Turks in Australia and Sweden. International Migration, 34(2), 257-272. Joppke, C., 1999. Immigration and the nation state: The US, Germany and Great Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Koopmans, R., and Statham, P., 2000. Challenging immigration and ethnic relations politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kraler, A., Kofman, E., Kohli, M., and Schmoll, C., (eds.), 2011. Gender, Generations and the Family in International Migration. IMISCOE-AUP Reports Series. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. Linz, K., and Stula, S., 2010. Demographic Change in Europe – An Overview. Working  paper no. 4 of the Oberservatory for Sociopolitical Developments in Europe. Accessed 22nd November 2013, http://www.sociopolitical-observatory.eu/uploads/tx_aebgppublications/Working_Paper_no_4_Observatory_Demographic_change_in_Europe_Overview.pdf Lubbers, M., 2001. Exclusionistic electorates: Extreme right-wing voting in Western Europe. Nijmegen: Radboud University Mansoor, A., and Quillin, B., (eds.), 2007. Migration and Remittances: Eastern Europe and Former Soviet Union. Washington DC: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank. OECD, 2008. International Migration Outlook. Annual Report 2008 Edition. Paris: SOPEMI. OECD, 2003. Employment outlook: Toward more and better jobs. Paris: OECD. Phalet, K. and Swyngedouw, M., 2003. “A cross-cultural analysis of immigrant and host values and acculturation orientations.” In, H. Vinken, & P. Ester (eds), Comparing cultures. Leiden: Brill. Phinney, J, Horenczyk, G., Liebkind, K., and Vedder, P., 2001. Ethnic identity, immigration and well-being: An international perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 57(3), 493-510. Saggar, S., Somerville, W., Ford, R., and Sobolewska, M., 2012. The Impacts of Migration on Social Cohesion and Integration. Final report to the Migration Advisory Committee, January 2012 . accessed 20th November 2013, http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/aboutus/workingwithus/mac/27-analysis-migration/02-research-projects/social-cohesion-integration?view=Binary Sniderman, P., Hagendoorn, L. and Prior, M., 2003. Predisposing factors and situational triggers: Exclusionary reactions towards immigrant minorities. American Political Science Review 98, 35-49. Accessed 23rd November 2013, http://www.princeton.edu/~mprior/Sniderman%20et%20al%202004.APSR.pdf Read More