MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 The Civic and Political Inclusion of Migrants and their Descendants in Europe: What we Know, What we Don’t Know and Why it Matters Laura Morales 31/01/19 1
MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 STUDYING THE CIVIC AND POLITICAL PARTICIPATION OF MIGRANTS FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF POLITICAL INCLUSION Political Inclusion • A complex and multifaceted concept. • It includes more than just voting rights and electoral participation. • It encompasses several forms of 1. Participatory engagement, and 2. Attitudes and orientations to the main political objects The Multiple indicators of Political Inclusion • Interest in politics • Electoral participation and electoral availability (inclination to vote) • Confidence in political institutions • Non-electoral political participation • Engagement in associations • Levels of representation in elected office 31/01/19 2
MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 WHAT WE KNOW: CUMULATIVE FINDINGS FROM EXISTING RESEARCH Individual characteristics of the migrants matter • Age, gender, marital/partnership situation, education and occupation tend to be relevant for all dimensions of political inclusion. • Migration trajectory factors tend to be critical: language proficiency, length of residence, citizenship acquisition, migrant generation. • The evidence is inconclusive in relation to religious background: unclear if Muslim migrants actually show any inclusion gaps. The context of settlement and the policies for integration matter • Institutions, policies and regulations are of critical importance. • Particularly, policies and legislation around citizenship acquisition are very consequential for both first and second generations. • The overall rates of participation of native populations shape strongly migrants’ political inclusion. • Both the national and the local contexts are critical. 31/01/19 3
MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 SOME ILLUSTRATIONS: ASSOCIATIONAL ENGAGEMENT Figure 1. Engagement in organizations by migrants across European cities 100 involved in organizations (%) 80 60 40 20 0 ANT BRU LIE LYO PAR BER STU BUD MIL NAP FAR LIS SET BAR MAD Source: ICS, 2011-2012 ANT=Antwerp BRU=Brussels LIE=Liège LYO= Lyon PAR=Paris BER=Berlin STU=Stuttgart BUD=Budapest MIL=Milan NAP=Naples 31/01/19 FAR=Faro LIS=Lisbon SET=Setubal BAR=Barcelona MAD=Madrid 4
MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 SOME ILLUSTRATIONS: ASSOCIATIONAL ENGAGEMENT BY CITY AND ORIGIN Figure 2. Engagement in organizations by migrants from specific ethnic groups across European cities groups involved in organizations (%) 80 60 40 20 0 Andean Latin America Moroccans Ecuadorians Ethnic Hungarians Mixed Muslims Chinese Kosovars Bangladeshi Caribbean Moroccans Algerians Tunisians Andean Latin American Moroccans Ecuadorians Egyptians Ecuadorians Turks Chilean Kosovars Turks Italian Indian Filipinos Italians BAR BUD GEN LON LYO MAD MIL STO ZUR Source: localmultidem, 2007-2010 BAR=Barcelona BUD=Budapest GEN=Geneva LON=London 31/01/19 5 LYO=Lyon MAD=Madrid MIL=Milan STO=Stockholm ZUR=Zurich
MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 SOME ILLUSTRATIONS: ASSOCIATIONAL ENGAGEMENT, LEVELS VS GAPS 31/01/19 6
MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 SOME ILLUSTRATIONS: NON-ELECTORAL POLITICAL ENGAGEMENT BY CITY AND ORIGIN 31/01/19 7
MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 SOME ILLUSTRATIONS: ELECTORAL TURNOUT Figure 4. Percentage of migrants who voted in the last national or local elections across European cities 100 voted in local or national elections (%) 80 60 40 20 0 ANT BRU LIE LYO PAR BER STU BUD MIL NAP FAR LIS SET BAR MAD Source: ICS, 2011-2012 ANT=Antwerp BRU=Brussels LIE=Liège LYO= Lyon PAR=Paris BER=Berlin STU=Stuttgart BUD=Budapest MIL=Milan NAP=Naples 31/01/19 8 FAR=Faro LIS=Lisbon SET=Setubal BAR=Barcelona MAD=Madrid
MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 SOME ILLUSTRATIONS: TURNOUT BY CITY AND ORIGIN Figure 5. Percentage of migrants from specific groups who voted in the last national or local elections (including eligible voters only) 80 voted either in last local or national elections (%) 60 40 20 0 Andean Latin America Moroccans Ecuadorians Ethnic Hungarians Mixed Muslims Chinese Italian Kosovars Bangladeshi Caribbean Indian Moroccans Algerians Tunisians Andean Latin American Moroccans Ecuadorians Egyptians Ecuadorians Filipinos Turks Chilean Italians Kosovars Turks BAR BUD GEN LON LYO MAD MIL STO ZUR Source: localmultidem, 2007-2010 BAR=Barcelona BUD=Budapest GEN=Geneva LON=London 31/01/19 9 LYO=Lyon MAD=Madrid MIL=Milan STO=Stockholm ZUR=Zurich
MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 SOME ILLUSTRATIONS: TURNOUT BY CITY, CITIZENSHIP AND GENERATION Predicted probabilities of voting in local elections, by city and group 1 .93 .9 .89 .86 .84 .78 .75 .74 .66 .64 .61 .57 .56 .56 .5 .4 .38 .34 .25 .17 .19 GEN OSL LON STO 0 Aut 1stC 2ndC 1stF 2ndF Aut 1stC 2ndC 1stF 2ndF Aut 1stC 2ndC 1stF Aut 1stC 2ndC 1stF Predicted probability with 95 % Confidence Intervals SOURCE: Localmultidem 2007-2010. st generation citizen; 2ndC= 2 nd generation citizen; 1stF= 1 st Legend: Aut = autochthonous; 1stC= 1 31/01/19 nd generation foreigner. GEN=Geneva, OSL=Oslo, LON=London, 10 generation foreigner; 2ndF= 2 STO=Stockholm.
MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 WHAT WE DON’T KNOW (just a few of the things we don’t know!) Through which mechanisms do 2 nd generations become included in the political process? • Role of political socialization in the family setting as opposed to peer groups and educational setting? • Moderating (interacting) effect of citizenship regime and context? • Very often, 2 nd generations not too different to their parents’ or even less included in the political process: why? Only age effects? How does individual engagement translate into collective level representation in elected office? • Unclear if there is a direct link or not • Representation in elected office is much less studied than individual-level behaviours and attitudes • Comparative studies are fairly limited • Are certain institutional settings (e.g. electoral systems) more conducive to inclusion? • Or are political parties the main driving factor? 31/01/19 11
MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 SOME ILLUSTRATIONS: ASSOCIATIONAL ENGAGEMENT BY CITY, ORIGIN & GENERATIONS 31/01/19 12
MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 SOME ILLUSTRATIONS: NON-ELECTORAL POLITICAL ENGAGEMENT BY CITY, ORIGIN AND GENERATION 31/01/19 13
MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 SOME ILLUSTRATIONS: TURNOUT BY CITY, ORIGIN & GENERATION 31/01/19 14
MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 SOME ILLUSTRATIONS: LEVELS OF REPRESENTATION OF CITIZENS OF IMMIGRANT ORIGIN IN NATIONAL LEGISLATURES OF 8 EUROPEAN 12 COUNTRIES UK 10 NL 8 BE 6 DE FR 4 EL 2 IT ES 0 31/01/19 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 15
MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 SOME ILLUSTRATIONS: THE SUBNATIONAL LEVEL IS NOT NECESSARILY MORE INCLUSIVE /ACCESSIBLE Regional IO MPs compared to national IO MPs BE DE EL ES FR IT NL UK Regional IO MPs 16.3 (56/344) 2.8 (56/2031) 1.7 (9/545) 0.4 (3/695) 5.3 (18/341) 0.4 (2/483) 5.1 (18/356) 5.9 (20/339) National IO MPs 8.8 (16/182) 4.0 (26/652) 3.8 (12/320) 0.7 (3/440) 4.4 (28/639) 1.5 (10/671) 11.0 (19/172) 9.7 (64/658) Note: Percentages with total numbers between parentheses. National IO MP refers to the national electoral term overlapping most with the coded regional electoral term, which is for Belgium 2010, for Germany 2009, for Greece 2009, for Spain 2011, for France 2007, for Italy 2008, for the Netherlands 2010 and the UK 2005. 31/01/19 16
MIGRATION OBSERVATORY 3RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE TORINO, 1 FEBRUARY 2019 IN SUMMARY Political inclusion does not operate equally for all of its dimensions • Migrants are generally well integrated in terms of attitudes and orientations • Migrants are less well included in terms of participatory behaviour The local and national context have substantial impacts • The same migrant groups behave very differently across contexts • Within the same setting (e.g. city/country) there is limited variation across migrant groups – when compared to across settings • The local setting defines how migrants’ associations organise and how they connect to each other and to mainstream associations 31/01/19 17
Recommend
More recommend
