Published January 28, 2021 | Version v1

Qualitative Field Study

  • 1. Charité Berlin/BIM
  • 2. Charité Berlin
  • 3. University of Zagreb
  • 4. Center for Strategic Studies (CSS), University of Jordan
  • 5. Malmö University
  • 6. Humboldt University Berlin/Charité Berlin/BIM

Contributors

  • 1. Malmö University, Department of Global Political Studies, Malmö Institute for Studies of Migration, Diversity and Welfare

Description

The FOCUS project is undertaking a range of research and piloting tasks which aim to improve understanding of dynamic integration and to assist the implementation of effective practices. As part of this work a detailed programme of qualitative research has been undertaken in four countries. This report presents the country-specific findings of this research, which will be further consolidated in a cross-site analysis to be completed in the coming months.

The purpose of the qualitative research within FOCUS is:

“to provide a deeper understanding of the current sentiments and relations among and between members of the arriving and receiving communities; explore both opportunities for and barriers to integration from both perspectives as well as to generate hypotheses that guide future interventions for dynamic integration.”

The work was based on guidelines developed following an extensive review of the current state of research in this area and key knowledge gaps which require further exploration (consolidated in D3.1 Research design and methodology).

  • Focus group discussions (FGDs) were held with members of the receiving communities and with members of the arriving communities in a total of 10 site in four countries which have different experiences of migration from Syria in recent years (Sweden, Germany, Jordan, Croatia).
  • The FGDs were recorded and their transcripts were translated and analysed using Thematic Analysis. Several virtual coding workshops among the research partners ensured the development of a coding frame that captured and structured significant information at all sites.
  • The core of this report involves the presentation of the findings for each of the four countries (Sections 4-7). Each of these sections is presented with a similar format while the analyses reflect the findings in those sites alone.
  • As a background to these findings, Section 2 presents a brief introduction of the research questions and the sensitizing concepts, while Section 3 recaps of the methods of data collection and analysis.
  • A final résumé presents an initial brief review of emerging patterns across sites in advance of the fuller cross-site analysis to be contained in the upcoming deliverable D4.3 Cross-site analysis (section 8).

The use of a common methodology, focus group guide and structure for coding/analysing across the countries was successfully undertaken. It has provided country reports which can now form the basis of the next stage of evaluation.

Over the course of the thematic analysis, four themes including several categories and codes emerged:

  1. The theme “Perspectives on integration” contains participants’ reflections on “How integration has evolved so far”, its representation in “Feeling integrated” but also more abstract ideas that point to “Understandings of ideal integration”, associated “Responsible actors” as well as an outlook into the “Future effects”.
  2. The theme “On intergroup relations” represents “Attitudes and perceptions towards the outgroup”, “Intergroup contact” as well as “Perception of threat”, other “Intergroup feelings”
  3. The theme “Avenues for negotiating integration” contains perceived “Barriers to integration” and “Facilitators of integration”, which are then explored on a deeper level as “Legal and institutional barriers” and “Individual, social and economic resources”.
  4. The theme “Power, cultural, social and geographical struggles and rapprochements” represents different societal and institutionalized organizing principles that operate on different levels in the integration process in a defined locality and includes codes on “Racism and discrimination”, “Culture”, “Religion”, Locality” and “Language”.

Files

FOCUS_D4.2_Qualitative-Field-Study.pdf

Files (1.3 MB)

Name Size Download all
md5:626155f1747ed9d9b875c35e090e6b86
1.3 MB Preview Download

Additional details

Related works

Is continued by
Project deliverable: 10.5281/zenodo.4697415 (DOI)
Is described by
Project deliverable: 10.5281/zenodo.4697389 (DOI)
Is source of
Project deliverable: 10.5281/zenodo.5948721 (DOI)
Requires
Project deliverable: 10.5281/zenodo.4697409 (DOI)

Funding

European Commission
FOCUS - Forced displacement and refugee-host community solidarity 822401

References

  • Ager, A. & Strang, A. (2004). Indicators of Integration: final report. London: Home Office
  • Ager, A., & Strang, A. (2008). Understanding Integration: A Conceptual Framework. Journal of Refugee Studies, 21(2), 166-191.
  • Asper, P. & Corte, U. (2019). What is Qualitative Research. Qualitative Sociology, 42, 139–160
  • Bakker, L., Dagevos, J., & Engbersen, G. (2014). The Importance of Resources and Security in the Socio-Economic Integration of Refugees. A Study on the Impact of Length of Stay in Asylum Accommodation and Residence Status on Socio-Economic Integration for the Four Largest Refugee Groups in the Netherlands. Int. Migration & Integration, 15, 431–448.
  • Balibar, É. (1991). Is there a 'neo-racism'? In: Balibar, É., Wallerstein, I.: Race, Nation, Class. Ambigious Identities. London: Verso, 17-28.
  • Beek, M., Fleischmann F. (2020) Religion and integration: does immigrant generation matter? The case of Moroccan and Turkish immigrants in the Netherlands. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 46(17), 3655-3676.
  • Ben-Nun Bloom, P., Arikan, G., & Courtemanche, M. (2015). Religious Social Identity, Religious Belief, and Anti-Immigration Sentiment. American Political Science Review, 109(2), 203–221.
  • Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, Acculturation and Adaptation'. International Association of Applied Psychology, 46(1): 5–68
  • Blumer, H. (1954). What is wrong with social theory? American Sociological Review, 18, 3–10.
  • Bonilla-Silva, E. (1997). Rethinking Racism: Toward a Structural Interpretation. American Sociological Review, 62(3), 465-480.
  • Bonilla-Silva, E. (2015). More than Prejudice: Restatement, Reflections, and New Directions in Critical Race Theory. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 1(1), 73-87.
  • Bourdieu, P. (1999). Sozialer Sinn. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
  • Bowskill, M., Lyons, E., & Coyle, A. (2007). The rhetoric of acculturation: When integration means assimilation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 46, 793–813.
  • Braithwaite, A., Chu, T. S., Curtis, J., & Ghosn, F. (2019). Violence and the perception of risk associated with hosting refugees. Public Choice, 178(3-4), pp. 473-492.
  • Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2),77-101.
  • Buijs, F. J., & Rath, J. C. (2006). Muslims in Europe. The state of research. IMISCOE Working paper. Universiteit van Amsterdam. Retrieved from: http://www.imiscoe.org/publications/workingpapers/documents/MuslimsinEurope-Thestateofresearch.pdf [Accessed 21/1/2021]
  • Castles, S., Korac, M., Vasta, E., & Vertovec, S. (2002). Integration: Mapping the field. Home Office online report, 29(3), 115-118.
  • Charmaz, K. (2003). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In Denzin, N. K., Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.), Strategies for qualitative inquiry (2nd ed., pp. 249–291). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Connor, P., & Koenig, M. (2013). Bridges and Barriers: Religion and Immigrant Occupational Attainment across Integration Contexts. International Migration Review, 47(1), 3–38.
  • Connor, P., & Koenig, M. (2015). Explaining the Muslim employment gap in Western Europe: Individual-level effects and ethno-religious penalties. Social Science Research, 49, 191–201.
  • Council of the European Union (20.5.2012). Conclusions on multilingualism and the development of language competences. Retrieved from: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/ cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/educ/142692.pdf [Accessed 23/12/2020]
  • Cowling, M. M., Anderson, J. R., & Ferguson, R. (2019). Prejudice-relevant Correlates of Attitudes towards Refugees: A Meta-analysis. Journal of Refugee Studies, 32(3), pp. 502–524.
  • Dandy, J., & Pe-Rua, R. (2015). The Refugee Experience of Social Cohesion in Australia: Exploring the Roles of Racism, Intercultural Contact, and the Media. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 13, 339-357.
  • Esser, H. (2006). Migration, Sprache und Integration. (AKI-Forschungsbilanz, 4). Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung, Arbeitsstelle Interkulturelle Konflikte und gesellschaftliche Integration.
  • European Commission (24.11.2020). Action plan on Integration and Inclusion 2021-2027. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/pdf/action_plan_on_integration_ and_inclusion_2021-2027.pdf [Accessed 23/12/2020]
  • Fassin, D., & Rechtman, R. (2009). The empire of trauma: An inquiry into the condition of victimhood. (R. Gomme, Trans.). Princeton University Press.
  • Fekete, Liz (2009). A suitable enemy. Racism, Migration and Islamophobia in Europe. London: Pluto.
  • Fleischmann, F. & Phalet, K. (2012). Integration and Religiosity among the Turkish second generation in Europe: A comparative analysis across four capital cities. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 35(2), 320-341.
  • Foner, N. (2015). Is Islam in Western Europe like Race in the United States? Sociological Forum, 30(4), 885-899.
  • Foner, N., & Alba, R. (2008). Immigrant Religion in the U.S. and Western Europe: Bridge or Barrier to Inclusion? International Migration Review, 42(2), 360–392.
  • Galchenko, I., & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2007). The role of perceived cultural distance in the acculturation of exchange students in Russia. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31(2), 181–197.
  • Geschke D., Mummendey A., Kessler T., Funke F. (2010). Majority members' acculturation goals as predictors and effects of attitudes and behaviours towards migrants. British Journal of Social Psychology, 49(3), 489-506.
  • Goodman, S., & Kirkwood, S. (2019). Political and Media Discourses about Integrating Refugees in the UK. European Journal of Social Psychology, 49, 1456-1470.
  • Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82. doi:10.1177/1525822X05279903
  • Hogan-Brun, G., Mar-Molinero, C., & Stevenson, P. (2009). Discourses on language and integration: Critical perspectives on language testing regimes in Europe. Amsterdam [u.a.]: Benjamins.
  • Keller, H. (2007). Cultures of infancy. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Khattab, N., Johnston, R., Modood, T., & Sirkeci, I. (2011). Economic activity in the South-Asian population in Britain: the impact of ethnicity, religion, and class. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 34(9), 1466-1481.
  • Kogan I., Fong,E., Reitz, J.(2020) Religion and integration among immigrant and minority youth, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 46(17):3543-3558.
  • Kretschmer, D. (2018). Explaining differences in gender role attitudes among migrant and native adolescents in Germany: intergenerational transmission, religiosity, and integration. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 44(13), 2197–2218. Leudar, I., Hayes, J., Nekvapil, J., & Turner Baker, J. (2008). Hostility Themes in Media, Community and Refugee Narratives. Discourse & Society, 19(2), 187-221.
  • Lindley, J. (2002). Race or Religion? The impact of religion on the employment and earnings of Britian's ethnic communities. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 28(3):427-442.
  • Nemec, J. (2020). Toward a Volitional Definition of Religion. Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 88(3), 664-692.
  • Oers, R v., Ersbøll, E., & Kostakopoulou, T. (2010). A re-definition of belonging?: Language and integration tests in Europe. Leiden [u.a.]: Nijhoff.
  • Pivovarov, D. V. (2015). On Universal Definition of Religion. Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences, 1, 52-63.
  • QSR International (2019). NVivo 12 [computer software]. London, United Kingdom: QSR International (UK) Limited. Available from qsrinternational.com/nvivo-qualitative-data-analysis-software/home
  • Redfield R., Linton R., & Herskovtis M. (1936). Memorandum on the study of acculturation. American Anthropologist, 38, 149-152.
  • Samovar, L. A. & Porter, R. E. (2004). Communication between Cultures. 5th Edition. Belmont: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
  • Safak, A., Kunuroglu, F. K., van de Vijver, F., & Yagmur, K. (2020). Acculturation of Syrian refugees in the Netherlands: Religion as social identity and boundary marker. Journal of Refugee Studies, 1. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/feaa020
  • Schweitzer, R., Perkoulidis, S., Krome, S., Ludlow, C., & Ryan, M. (2005). Attitudes towards refugees: The dark side of prejudice in Australia. Australian Journal of Psychology, 57(3), pp. 170–179.
  • Seale, C. F. (1999). The quality in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 5(4), 465-478.
  • Sebastiani, L. & Martín-Godoy, P. (2020). Elective affinities between racism and immigrant integration policies: a dialogue between two studies carried out across the European Union and Spain, Identities.
  • Shooman, Y. (2011). Keine Frage des Glaubens: Zur Rassifizierung von "Kultur" und "Religion" im Antimuslimischen Rassismus. In: Friedrich. S. (ED.): Rassismus in der Leistungsgesellschaft. Anaylsen und kritische Perspektiven zu den rassistischen Normalisierungsprozessen der "Sarrazindebatte". Münster: Edition Assemblage, 59-76.
  • Statistisches Bundesamt (2020). Migrationshintergrund. Retrieved from: https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bevoelkerung/Migration-Integration/Glossar/migrationshintergrund.html [Accessed 26/10/20]
  • Steinke, I. (1999). Kriterien qualitativer Sozialforschung. Ansätze zur Bewertung qualitative-empirischer Sozialforschung. München: Juventa.
  • Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (2000). An integrated threat theory of prejudice. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), The Claremont Symposium on Applied Social Psychology Reducing prejudice and discrimination, pp. 23-45.
  • Suanet, I., & Van De Vijver, F. J. R. (2009). Perceived cultural distance and acculturation among exchange students in Russia. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 19(3), 182–197.
  • Terry, G., Hayfield, N., Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2017). Thematic analysis. In W. Stainton Rogers, & C. Willig (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research in Psychology, (17-37). London: SAGE Publications DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781526405555.n2
  • Triandis, H.C. & Brislin, R. W. (1984). Cross-Cultural Psychology. American Psychologist, 39(9), 1006-1016.
  • UNHCR (2018). Figures at a Glance, Retrieved from https://www.unhcr.org/figures-at-a-glance.html [Accessed 20/01/2021]
  • VERBI Software. (2019). MAXQDA 2020 [computer software]. Berlin, Germany: VERBI Software. Available from maxqda.com.
  • Weber, M (2016 [1904-1920]) Die protestantische Ethik und der Geist des Kapitalismus. Die protestantischen Sekten und der Geist des Kapitalismus. Schriften 1904-1920. Mohrsiebeck: Tübingen.