As global migration increases, governments face a tough challenge: how to help migrants fit in while preserving cultural diversity, economic stability, and social harmony. A study from the University of Auckland offers insights into how policymakers might strike the right balance.

The researchers examined nation-building efforts, past and present, and developed a framework to compare two approaches: assimilation and biculturalism.

Helping to assimilate

Assimilation policies—like promoting a single national language or standard education—have long been seen as a way to unify people. They make communication easier and reduce friction, helping society run more smoothly. But there’s a downside for minority groups, who may feel pressured to give up their cultural identity to fit in. The authors call this “lock-in” costs, where people lose valuable parts of their heritage, such as language or customs, in exchange for economic or social benefits.

On the other hand, biculturalism seeks to protect and celebrate different cultural identities. This might mean recognizing minority languages or supporting Indigenous rights. While this approach allows cultural groups to thrive, it can also make cooperation between communities harder, potentially straining social cohesion and productivity.

Which is the better approach? The answer depends on the society and how different its cultural groups are. In countries where one group is dominant, assimilation might seem the easiest way to create a unified national identity. But in more diverse societies, bicultural policies may ease tensions by giving minority groups room to preserve their traditions while still being part of the larger community.

Sensitive to context

The researchers argue for policies that are sensitive to the context, considering the welfare of minority groups and avoiding the long-term social costs of strict assimilation. They note that the size of the cultural gap between groups, and how easily they interact, should guide decisions on which approach to use.

“There’s no one-size-fits-all solution,” the authors say. Policymakers need to assess the specific cultural landscape and find the right balance between assimilation and biculturalism.

The study also points out that political pressures often favor assimilation, as politicians tend to cater to the majority. But if the goal is to boost overall societal welfare, more moderate assimilation or bicultural policies may do a better job of fostering long-term national unity.