Integration is often seen as the holy grail for immigrants and as a sign that their move to a new country has been a success. One might easily assume that once integration has been “achieved”, that any discrimination previously aimed towards you will evaporate.
Research from the WZB Berlin Social Science Center suggests that not only is this not really the case, but the opposite may actually occur.
“Better integration seems to go hand in hand with more reports of discrimination and exclusion. We see that people who actually have good access to middle-class society report more experiences of exclusion. It is counterintuitive and somehow paradoxical,” the researchers explain.
Opening eyes
The findings emphasize a notable correlation between higher levels of education among immigrants and their descendants and an increased reporting of discrimination. Surprisingly, labor market attainment appears to bear little to no influence on this outcome.
The study further highlights the significance of immigrants’ engagement in public life. Those with proficient language skills and a high degree of local media consumption tend to encounter higher levels of discrimination. Similarly, exposure to the majority population through participation in civic associations or residence in neighborhoods with a substantial majority presence also contributes to a greater likelihood of experiencing discrimination.
Ultimately, the ability of individual immigrants or descendants to perceive and address discrimination in their daily lives plays a pivotal role. This ability tends to strengthen with improved education, language proficiency, and increased social interactions with the surrounding society. Simultaneously, immigrants who conspicuously differ from the majority population, such as through their distinctive attire, often find themselves facing heightened levels of discrimination.
Complex interplay
In essence, this meta-analysis reveals the complex interplay of factors influencing the integration paradox. It underscores the intricate relationship between education, language skills, social contacts, and the recognition and articulation of discrimination experienced by immigrants and their descendants. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for developing effective strategies to promote inclusive and harmonious societies.
All of this raises the question of just how politicians should respond to complaints about discrimination if those complaints increase after interventions designed to increase integration. And how should they interpret complaints, which can both stem from real progress in the field and cover ongoing discrimination?
“Politicians may rightly ask why people complain when things have actually improved. Here, the results suggest that it is important to understand the reasons for dissatisfaction before concluding whether complaints are unjustified or not. Conversely, the absence of reports of discrimination does not necessarily mean that everything is fine. Both point to the importance of seeking dialogue with the people in question before reacting politically,” the authors conclude.
