1
Tracking the integration process of the Syrian immigrants, who have fled the
Syrian Civil War and settled in Södertälje city, Sweden
(2011-2017)
Sisil Benjaro
Communication for Development One-year master
15 Credits January 2018
2
Abstract
This research is a case-study about the integration of Syrian immigrants in Södertälje, Sweden. The unit of analysis is the Syrian immigrants who fled the ongoing armed conflict, arrived to Sweden between 2011 and 2014 and settled in Södertälje after being granted the residence permit. The objective of this research is examining what factors limit/support the integration of these immigrants; and how existing policies and institutional programs contribute towards that end, with an intention to formulate recommendations to improve their impact and effectiveness. This qualitative case-study is built upon existing theories that help assessing integration in a multidimensional way. However, since integration into a new context is a complex phenomenon that can take a lifetime, my study is limited to investigate limiting and supporting factors that affect the integration of the Syrian immigrants until they become self-sufficient. To serve this scope, the concepts of ‘systemic integration’ and ‘self-resilience’ are integrated in the theoretical perspective. This enables the visualization of the outcome of the dynamic interaction between the identified limiting and supporting factors affecting the immigrant during her/his integration. Data is collected through semi-structured interviews conducted with purposely selected migrants and key informants, as well as policy documents review.
Among the identified limiting factors hampering integration, the focus is put on the ones related to communication; the communication between the immigrants and governmental services. In spite of the crucial role the protective mechanisms established by the Swedish government play to cover immigrants’ basic needs and support their integration, the interviewees’ experiences have revealed communicational problems that erode/reduce the full potential of the ongoing support; problems that need to be addressed.
3 Table of Contents
1. Introduction ... 4
1.1. Aim, objectives and research questions ... 4
1.2. Introduction to the core theory ... 5
1.3. Outlining the finding ... 7
1.4. Scope and limitation ... 7
2. Background Information ... 9
2.1. Background information about migration to Sweden ... 9
2.2. Asylum and forms of protection granted in Sweden ... 9
2.3. Background information about Södertälje city and migration ... 11
3. Theoretical perspective ... 13
3.1. Defining ‘migrant’ and ‘integration’ ... 13
3.2. Ager and Strang’s conceptual framework of integration ... 13
3.3. Systemic integration ... 15
3.4. The concept of resilience ... 16
3.5. Visualizing systemic integration and resilience ... 17
4. Research methodology ... 20
5. Findings ... 26
5.1. Factors affecting integration ... 26
5.1.1. The limiting factors ... 26
5.1.2. The supporting factors ... 33
5.2. Tracking integration ... 37
5.2.1. The trajectories of those who have succeeded to be integrated/self-sufficient ... 37
5.2.2. The trajectories of those who are on their way to be integrated/self-sufficient ... 39
5.2.3. The trajectories of those who still face difficulties to be integrated/self-sufficient ... 40
5.3. Policies, programs, institutions & processes supporting immigrants & their integration ... 43
5.3.1. Governmental support ... 44
5.3.1.1. Rights for refugees/humanitarian immigrants and their families ... 44
5.3.1.2. The introduction/establishment program... 44
5.3.2. Non-governmental support ... 47
6. Conclusion and recommendations ... 51
7. References ... 54
4
1. Introduction:
This research examines the integration of the Syrian-immigrants who fled the on-going armed conflict, arrived to Sweden between (2011-2014), and settled down in Södertälje city after being granted the residence permit. The interest to research the integration of this group of immigrants in particular is evoked by the massive number (127.061)1 reaching Sweden since 2011 (SCB, 2017b). The majority of those were granted the residence permit for refugees/protection reasons, or family reunification with refugees/protection status-granted migrants. The focus is put on ‘Södertälje’ because many of those immigrants chose this city to settle in, mainly for its strategic location near Stockholm, the huge Assyrian/Syriac community already-established there, and lately for being an industrial city with many job opportunities that might be opened for them.
1.1. Aim, objectives and research questions
The general objective of this research is investigating what factors limit/support these migrants’ integration until becoming self-sufficient; and how existing policies and institutional programs contribute towards that end with an intention to formulate recommendations to improve their impact and effectiveness. For the latter, a special focus is put on the field of ‘Communication for Development’ (ComDev).
Research Questions:
How is ‘self-sufficiency’ attained among the legal Syrian-immigrants living in Södertälje, with respect to the process of utilizing opportunities to overcome challenges, and integrate into the Swedish society?
In-order-to answer this question, a descriptive-longitudinal single case-study which relies on multiple sources of evidences based on a pre-defined theoretical perspective is conducted. Personal experiences of Syrian-immigrants interviewed for the sake of this research are explored in-order-to identify what challenging and supporting factors affect their integration, and examine how they have coped with the challenges and used the supporting factors to overcome them. The analyzed data will be presented using the life trajectory approach. Self-sufficiency is the
1
5 ‘positive’ outcome of the interaction of these factors. The following sub-questions will help me answer the key research question:
- What challenges hamper immigrants’ integration, their causes and effects, and how are they confronted? What factors support their integration?
- Which policies, programs, institutions and processes support immigrants and their integration? Are there any suggestions for improvements?
Communication is a tool to magnify developmental efforts. In that context, the formulation of recommendations, based on ideas, problems, and situations related to developmental activities aiming immigrants’ integration and shared by actors in a development situation, to inform policy-makers and practitioners reflects the relation that this research has to development support communication linked to the field of ComDev. In other words, the reveal of the behavioral factors related to the individual experiences of the interviewed immigrants and the key informants in this study has the potential to lead to concrete actions. This, according to Erskine Childers, is development support communication. The integration of such strategic communication in development projects magnifies ‘development’ (Shahzad & Bokhari, 2014). This research attempts to spot problems related to the ComDev field for deeper analysis and propose solutions using ‘social marketing’, a tool belonging to Development Communication.
1.2. Introduction to the core theory
Integration is ‘’individualized, contested and contextual’’ (Robinson, 1998, cited by Ager & Strang, 2008, p.16). Diverse concepts of integration are adopted by policy- and decision-makers in different countries and contexts. However, in this study, my focus is not placed on discussing the different adopted approaches to integration but on how to assess it, and therefore I choose Ager and Strang’s conceptual framework of integration. This framework is chosen not only for its ability to reflect, to some extent, the communalities in the different insights of what ‘successful’ integration is but also for being recognized by the European-Union-(EU) member-states (MPC, n.d.). This framework comprises four main interconnected ‘headings’, with ten dimensions that enable assessing integration: A) employment, housing, education and health; B) social bridges, bonds and links; C) language and cultural knowledge, and safety and stability; and D) rights and citizenship. These domains
6 embrace the eight policy-areas included in MIPEX, Migrant-Integration-Policy-Index, used by the EU states to measure integration. These policy-areas are: labor-market mobility, education, health, family-reunion, anti-discrimination, political participation, permanent-residence, and access to nationality.
To facilitate the understanding of the origin of Ager and Strang’s framework, I will briefly describe two of the most influential theoretical models related to immigrants’ integration:
1) Race Relation Cycles model, proposed by Park and Bogardus, understands integration as a
linear sequence of stages that ends with the total absorption of the immigrant group. It starts with migrants trying to orient themselves and look for satisfactory ways to conduct their lives in the new context, leading to a conflictive ‘’competition between immigrants and the autochthonous population in the labour- and housing-market’’ (Park, 1950, cited by Schunck, 2014, p.13) which brings the second-stage. In the second-stage the autochthonous population is willing to let migrants take positions that they consider undesirable; leading to conflicts over valued positions that come with racial conflict. This stage is characterised as a long process of adaptation (Schunck, 2014, p.13). In the third-stage, ‘’the autochthonous population and the immigrants come to accept the ethnic differentiation and stratification as legitimate (ibid.). Yet, with time there will be an inevitable diffusion of the autochthonous population and the migrant group leading to the demise of the ethnic system of stratification, and finally to assimilation, the fourth-stage. Assimilation is, a ‘’process of [….] fusion by which persons and groups acquire the memories, sentiments, and attitudes of other persons or groups, and [….] are incorporated with them in a common cultural life’’ (Park & Burgess, 1970 [1921], cited by Schunck, 2014, pp.13-14). This model assumes the dissolution of ethnic institutions and is criticized for pursuing the ultimate goal of complete assimilation of the immigrant group.
2) Absorption and Dispersion of Immigrants: this model identifies three main indices: acculturation referring to the acquisition of new skills e.g. language, knowledge about local
culture and norms. Personal adjustment referring to migrants’ ability to plan, and handle frustration and insecurity in the host country. Dispersion, also called institutional integration, refers to migrants’ participation in familial, economic, political, and religious domains of the receiving society (Schunck, 2014, pp.18-19). According to this model, ‘’[c]oncentration of
7 immigrants in certain segments of the labour-market, [and] the existence of geographically segregated ethnic enclaves [….] indicate a low degree of dispersion’’ (Schunck, 2014, p.19). Migrants’ presence with their culture and behaviours affect the host society and make it more pluralistic.
From these two theoretical models, it can be argued that there is a very strong link between the key aspects indicated within the integration stages, and MIPEX eight policy-areas and Ager and Strang’s ten domains.
In addition, with the purpose of defining the scope of this study, the adopted framework of Ager and Strang is linked to the concepts of systemic integration, resilience in the context of displacement, and self-sufficiency.
And finally, social marketing as a tool related to the ‘ComDev’ field is used for analysis and recommendations formulation.
1.3. Outlining the finding
The finding is subdivided into two parts: in the first part, I mainly attempt to answer the first research sub-question by identifying what limiting and supporting factors affect immigrants’ integration, and then analyzing them in-relation-to the theoretical perspective. In addition, a detailed account of the dynamic interaction between the identified limiting and supporting factors is provided to finally understand the outcome of such an interaction.
In the second part, I attempt to answer the second research sub-question by describing policies, programs and processes coordinated/implemented by governmental and non-governmental actors to support immigrants’ integration; followed by highlighting one of the main findings that I choose to deeply analyze using the lens of ComDev. This helps me formulate recommendations to improve practices related to integration.
1.4. Scope and limitation
As it is unrealistic to assess a fully-accomplished process of integration, especially for immigrants whose maximum stay in Sweden has not exceeded (6.5) years, my study will be limited to investigate factors (limiting and supporting) that affect their integration until they become self-sufficient.
8 Moreover, in-relation-to the integration approach adopted by Sweden, I do not aim, in my study, to analyze whether multiculturalism is de facto or officially recognized/supported by policy. I neither look into how multiculturalism is implemented nor how it has been evolving in Sweden. Instead, I reflect it as a position that corresponds to the logic of liberal democracy, in which pluralism is respected, and may support integration, as delimited in this study, positively.
9
2.
Background information2.1. Background information about migration to Sweden
Sweden was mostly an emigrating country until refugees fleeing World War II started changing it into an immigrating country; these refugees were basically coming from Germany and the Baltic countries (Sweden, 2016). Between 1950s-70s, Sweden became a destination to many laborers coming from Finland, Greece, Italy and Turkey looking for job opportunities. While in 1980s, the immigration nature changed to become dominated by asylum seekers immigration and their families. By that time a new system and new legislations for receiving this type of immigrants were adopted. In 1990s Sweden welcomed more than 100.000 people from former Yugoslavia, and 3.600 Albanians displaced from Macedonia. This was followed by receiving 30.000 Iraqi refugees escaping the Iraq War after 2003. And once the Syrian War broke out in 2011 until now, Sweden welcomed 100.000 Syrian-migrants out of one million seeking asylum in Europe, to be the second EU‘s top receiving country after Germany (Syrian Refugees, 2017).
2.2. Asylum and forms of protection granted in Sweden
According to the 2015 Aliens Act, Sweden can grant residence permit on several protection grounds—‘refugee’ and ‘subsidiary protection’, both equivalent to the provisions of the 2011 European Union Qualification Directive and the United Nation (UN) Refugee Convention of 1951. In addition, the Aliens Act of Sweden can grant a residence permit, on a third ground, to applicants who are not qualified for the two mentioned protection forms, as proposed in the chapter 4, section 2, yet
1- feel a well-founded fear of suffering the death penalty or being subjected to corporal punishment, torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment,
2- need protection because of external or internal armed conflict or, because of other severe conflicts in the country of origin, feel a well-founded fear of being subjected to serious abuses or,
3- [are] unable to return to the country of origin because of an environmental disaster (Aliens Act, 2005).
It is worth mentioning that the increased number of the arrivals seeking asylum in Sweden during the second half of 2015 stretched the internal capacity to provide a roof and protection to the applicants. In that context, the government of Sweden put in practice a range of measures to
10 reduce the number of asylum seekers arriving to the country. A new temporary law related to asylum and protection entered into force July 2016; where the permanent residence permit was changed into a temporary one. However, these changes did not influence the targeted group in this research as all arrived before 2015 and accordingly granted the permanent residence.
These protection policies are accompanied with integration policies formulated to support migrants integrate into the new context. Integration, as mentioned before, is a contested concept, perceived differently in different contexts. And these different perceptions cover a spectrum ranging from ideas related to assimilation from one side to multiculturalism from the other side. With assimilation it is meant that the immigrant is required to abandon her/his cultural identity and replace it with that of the host society. While with multiculturalism, it is meant that both the immigrant and the host society preserve their own identities and only limited adaptation is required (Council of Europe, 1995; Bijl & Verweij, 2012); an adaptation that helps the immigrant to participate/be an active member in the new society. In Sweden, it is noteworthy that multiculturalism is supported (Borevi, 2014).
Integration is a multidimensional concern. And when it comes to integration in the labor-market, the Swedish authorities identify seven themes seen as critical issues facing immigrants: 1) basic skills and Swedish language for adults; 2) validation and recognition of competences acquired in formal and informal setting; 3) employers’ demand of immigrant labor force (this point is addressed by the government through the formulation of policies and programs/initiatives that encourage employers to hire immigrants); 4) discrimination; 5) network and job search (this point is addressed by the provision of personalized guidance during the first years in Sweden); 6) school-to-work transitions; and 7) coordination among actors (OECD, 2014, p.4). It is well known that immigrants’ integration in a new society depends on many factors and that the similarity between immigrants and the host community in-relation-to language, labor-market and educational system, principles etc. plays its role in mitigating and speeding up the process. As for the case of the Syrian-immigrants in Sweden, the non-similarity with the host population, intensifies the difficulty of the integration process and extends it, at least for the first generation of adults. Thus, investigating these factors is important.
11 Now and before elaborating on the theoretical perspective and the methodology adopted in this study, I will provide background information about the context of Södertälje.
2.3. Background information about Södertälje city and migration
Södertälje is a Swedish city, located 30 kilometers southwest Stockholm with nearly (84.000) residents. (40%) of these residents have foreign background—the Assyrians/Syrians from the Middles East as the biggest group (22.000) followed by the Finnish (11.000) and immigrants from former Yugoslavia. (‘’Södertälje,’’ n.d.).
The migration of the Middle Eastern families to Sweden and mainly to Södertälje started in the 1960s. Since then they have proven their presence in the Swedish society by actively engaging in the labor-market, running business (restaurants and shops); establishing associations and two international TV channels2 broadcasting in Syriac and Arabic; building up five churches and organizing two professional soccer teams.
The already-settled Assyrian/Syriac community in this city has been an attraction to the immigrants fleeing the ongoing Syrian War, as it provides a suitable environment for them to preserve their traditions and practice their cultural customs, and consequently feel ‘’home’’. However, from the other side, this community influences these immigrants negatively as it interrupts their progress in learning the Swedish language which is considered a main pillar for ‘successful’ integration in the Swedish society. The newly arrived immigrants tend more probably to embed themselves with the language and the culture that they know than to bother learning a new language and adapting themselves to a new culture, and accordingly delay their integration in the Swedish society and labor-market.
It is noteworthy that the reason behind the Syrian-immigrants’ choice to settle in Södertälje is not only that it reminds them of everything from home, but also the job opportunities that it offers, represented in factory work with Scania AB3. In addition, Södertälje’s proximity to Stockholm city, 40 minutes trip by commuter train, creates good opportunities for work.
Nevertheless, unemployment and high dependency on the welfare system are still among Södertälje’s main challenges; ‘’30.4% of the population age group 20-64 do neither work nor
2
Suroyo TV & Suryoyo sat.
3
12 study’’ (Fornhöjden Fast Forward, 2015, p.50). The city has the highest rate of social benefit costs in comparison to other municipalities.
Another challenge to be highlighted is the housing shortage, a longstanding structural problem not only affecting Södertälje but Sweden in general. The high flow of migrants to this city, as reflected in the increases number of the participants in the establishment program jumping
approximately from 500 in 2012 to 1500 in
2015 (Key informant B, personal communication, December 6, 2017), has made the situation even worse. In Södertälje, it is not uncommon to find 10-15 persons living in a two or three-room apartment. Beyond that, this flow has even altered the housing market (increasing the demand, triggering illegal sublease with high rental prices etc.).
13
3. Theoretical perspective
Now I will introduce the theoretical perspective of this study starting by defining the conceptual framework of integration followed by describing my approach to measure it.
3.1. Defining ‘migrant’ and ‘integration’
A migrant is a person who moves to another country with an intention to stay for a particular time-period. S/he can be a permanent or temporary migrant with a formal residency permit. A migrant can be a labor/family migrant, an asylum seeker or a refugee: a labor migrant is a person who moves to another country for the sake of work; a family migrant is a person who moves from one place to another to be united with his family and an asylum seeker is a person who has applied for asylum but whose claim or demand is pending. The asylum seeker goes through a channel where her/his case is studied before taking the decision on the sort and duration of the residency permit granted to her/him. The asylum seeker who is granted a sort of protection is called ‘a refugee’ or ‘a subsidiary protection status-granted migrant’ (OECD, 2017, p.20) whom my research is primarily focusing on. The latter will be used interchangeably with the concept of ‘a humanitarian migrant’ in this paper.
Within the context of this research, a working definition of ‘integration’ (implicitly derived from Ager and Strang‘s framework described later) can be:
An individual or group is integrated within a society when they:
achieve public outcomes within employment, housing, education, health etc. which are
equivalent to those achieved within the wider host communities;
are socially connected with members of a (national, ethnic, cultural, religious or other)
community with which they identify, with members of other communities and with relevant services and functions of the state; and
have sufficient linguistic competence and cultural knowledge, and a sufficient sense of
security and stability, to confidently engage in that society in a manner consistent with shared notions of nationhood and citizenship (Home Office, 2002, p.5).
3.2. Ager and Strang’s conceptual framework of integration
The definition of ‘integration’ proposed above is derived from a framework drawn by Ager and Strang. This framework comprises four main interconnected ‘headings’, with ten
14 multidimensional domains (as shown in figure N.1) that allow migrants’ integration to be measured and analyzed.
The four headings include:
A) Markers and Means, this part of the framework explores migrants’ achievements in comparison with the wide population regarding four dimensions: 1- employment, 2- housing; 3-education and 4- health. These dimensions are perceived as markers and means: ‘’‘markers’; because success in these domains is an indication of positive integration outcomes, and ‘means’ because success in these domains is likely to assist the wider integration process’’ (Home Office, 2002, p.3).
B) Social connections including dimensions 5, 6 and 7, represented in social bridges, bonds and links; the use of these terms is related to social capital. These forms of connections are distinguished: ‘’1. Social bonds (connections within a community defined by, for example, ethnic, national or religious identity); 2. Social bridges (with members of other communities); and 3. Social links (with institutions, including [….] government services)’’ (Home Office, 2002, p.4).
C) Facilitators, a heading that includes the key integration facilitating factors. Dimension 8-language and cultural knowledge: includes 8-language and ‘’knowledge of [the] national and local
15 procedures, customs and facilities, [….] culture [….]’’ (Home Office, 2002, p.4), and circumstances, that are related to dimension 9- safety and stability.
D) Foundation, reflected in dimension 10- rights and citizenship. ‘’This represents the basis upon which [the] expectations and obligations [of the state] for the process of integration are established’’ (Home Office, 2002, p.4), and those of the migrants as-well.
This framework is flexible and applicable to different contexts, as it reflects, to some extent, a common understanding of what ‘successful’ integration is, and how to measure it.
The relationship among the domains
There is not a linear or causal model of integration. The pathways linking the domains can be read from the bottom to the top or from the right to the left side or vice versa, because the positive outcome in each domain can cause benefit in multidimensional ways. It also depends on the person, context and circumstances, so the domains are linked to each other in many different ways.
The working definition of integration proposed above considers the full achievement of all the elements defined in the framework, which may take the migrant years or even decades to accomplish. The scope of this study is to assess the integration of the Syrian-migrants, with legal status in Sweden, until attaining ‘self-sufficiency’ state (or in other words, labor-market integration); bearing in mind that the maximum period of their stay in Sweden has not exceeded 6.5 years. Thus, this definition can be applied with some limitations in some domains.
In my attempt to put a boundary to Ager and Strang‘s framework in a way that serves the scope of my study, I propose two concepts—systemic integration and resilience, which underpin the analysis of immigrant´s integration until reaching ‘self-sufficiency’ status. Measuring immigrants’ self-sufficiency will enable me examine in practice their integration after a fairly short period of time in Sweden.
3.3. Systemic integration as defined by Esser is integration ‘’into the structures of society in
the sense that society offers equality of education, income, professional prestige and political participation for all regardless of ethnicity’’ (Esser, 2001, cited by Wohlfart, 2014, p.31). This resonates with the key goal of the Swedish integration policies represented in ‘’equal rights,
16 obligations and opportunities for all, regardless of ethnic or cultural background’’ (Government Offices of Sweden, 2009, para.1). In such a context, once the migrant is granted the Swedish residence permit, s/he is provided with the basis for full and equal engagement within the host society, and is, accordingly, able-to participate in the processes run within the governmental and non-governmental structures, enabling her/him to fulfill her/his needs (whether by her/himself or with external support provided by the system). Living in a society that is well-integrated at a systemic level is of a great importance; however this needs to be combined with the person’s self-resilience in-order-to be-able-to express ‘self-sufficiency’. This link to the concept of resilience is included in-order-to visualize the level of the migrants’ dependency on external support and/or their own.
3.4. The concept of resilience is used in many disciplines and its application is contested.
‘’The study of resilience evolved from the disciplines of psychology and psychiatry in the 1940s’’ (Manyena, 2006, p.433). Yet, after taking in consideration the commonalities identified in existing definitions, McAslan defines resilience as:
[T]he ability of something or someone to cope in the face of adversity—to recover and return to normality after confronting an abnormal, alarming and often unexpected threat. [….]. Resilience also suggests an ability and willingness to adapt over time to a changing and potentially threatening environment (McAslan, 2010, p.1).
The aspect of adaptation is particularly relevant when it comes to people because individuals are able-to engage in adaptive behavior (Manyena, 2006, p.444).
Resilience in the context of displacement: ‘’Resilience is a dynamic process wherein
individuals display positive adaptation despite experiences of significant adversity or trauma’’ (Luthar et al., 2000; Masten, 1999; & Rutter, 1999, 2000 cited by Luthar & Cicchetti, 2000, p.858). ‘’[I]t is a two dimensional construct that implies exposure to adversity and the manifestation of positive adjustment outcomes’’ (Luthar & Cicchetti, 2000, p.858). The dimension of the manifestation of positive adjustment can be linked to positive coping strategies. The application of this bidimensional framework serves to direct interventionists to organize empirical knowledge regarding the salience of particular vulnerability, firstly; and on the other hand, protective processes, within the context of specific adversities (ibid.). In that framework it
17 is worth to clarify ‘’vulnerability [….] [as] a multilayered and multidimensional social space defined by the determinate, political, economic and institutional capabilities of people in specific places at specific times’’ (Bohle, Downing & Watts, 1994 cited by Manyena, 2006, p.441). In the context of displacement ‘’vulnerability are those circumstances that place people at risk while reducing their means of response or denying them available protection’’ (Comfort et al., 1999 cited by Manyena, 2006, p.442). Within the context of displacement, ‘’the relational aspect of resilience’’ is another element that needs to be highlighted.
[I]t is embedded in the network of relationships within social settings. A person‘s identity and well-being is better understood in observing their capacity to manage their responses to adverse circumstances in an interpersonal community through the networks of relationships. Brison, highlights the collective strength of individuals in social networks and the importance of social support in the process of recovery from trauma (Eades, 2013, para.12).
3.5. Visualizing systemic integration and resilience
As indicated above, self-sufficiency in this study is equated to a combination of systemic integration and resilience; so the analysis of the life trajectories of the cases under-study will reveal the external and internal factors, and the process of change, leading the immigrant to her/his self-sufficiency.
Self-sufficiency can be measured through ‘income‘, (the income the individual needs to cover her/his monthly basic needs). The figure N.2a displays the possible mobility pathways towards/from the ‘self-sufficiency’ income line. The mobility can be changing over time, upward, downward or fluctuating up and down the self-sufficiency income line (Shepherd, 2007), depending on the outcome of the interaction between the limiting and the supporting factors affecting the individual.
18 The value of the self-sufficiency income line (shown in figure N.2a) is 15620 SEK; this is an average value calculated based on figures provided by ‘Statistics Sweden’ for the household‘s basic expenditures in 2012 and 2017 (SCB, 2017a).4
As proposed in the figure N.2b, integration is reflected in three different categories related to systemic integration, resilience and self-sufficiency. The three categories are represented by people who are: a) integrated; b) in-progress; and c) not integrated. These categories are purposely created to make a comparative analysis of the limiting and supporting factors affecting the process of integration of the cases under-study (over time).
4
19 As pointed before, living in a society as the Swedish which is integrated at the systemic level means that all legal immigrants are granted the rights and entitlements needed to facilitate their integration; yet what differentiates each individual from the other is her/his own ability to cope and adapt, and be consequently self-sufficient (generating her/his own income from her/his own activity). It is noteworthy that the categories represent a continuum that describes transitions. Thus, for example, a person can move from ‘systemically integrated’5 and not self-resilient to, ‘in-progress’, and then to ‘systemically integrated’ and self-resilient. Conversely, mobility can be also observed in the opposite direction since a person who lives in a society that is integrated at a systemic level can lose her/his resilience capacity and become dependent on the financial support of the system. Here, it is important to indicate that in a context as the Swedish, a person’s trajectory can be above the drawn income line due to the financial support granted her/him by the system, yet not considered ‘integrated’ in my study as s/he is not self-resilient and accordingly not self-sufficient. Income from one’s own activity and income from an external support will be differentiated in-order-to unveil the ability of the individual to rely on her/himself.
5
20
4. Research methodology
For my project, I choose a qualitative single case-study research approach, as I intend to study the integration process of a particular group, the ‘Syrian-migrants‘, who have fled the ongoing war and settled down in ‘Södertälje’. This group of ‘migrants’ in-particular is selected to be the unit of analysis and their integration is to be studied within their context ‘Södertälje’. This resonates with Yin’s definition of the case-study research method being ‘’an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context’’ (Yin, 1984, cited by Zainal, 2007, p.2).
For this study, as elaborated above, I formulated a theoretical perspective, combining the definitions of ‘migrant’ and ‘integration’, and the integration domains with the concepts of ‘systemic integration’, ‘resilience’ and ‘self-sufficiency’. The theoretical perspective guided me during data-collection and supported my data-analysis.
Data-collection
In this study, empirical field-work using semi-structured interviews with purposely selected immigrants was held. (17) Syrian-immigrants6 were individually interviewed. An interview is a conversational practice carried out to serve the researchers’ ends (e.g. obtaining knowledge about a defined topic) (Brinkmann, 2008). In my study, it involved most often a one-way dialogue, where I asked the questions and the interviewees responded. Also, (11) Syrian-immigrants7 were interviewed in groups. A group interview is a form of group-based data collection (Morgan, 2008a), where the researcher leads a group discussion to generate data that serves her/his interests. In my research, the main reason behind conducting group interviews was cross-checking the data reached from the individual interviews in-relation-to the topic that prompted recommendations at the end of the study.
Additionally, a total of (6) key informants participated in the study, and individual semi-structured interviews were held with them as well; (2) representatives from the (SPES), (1) from
6
For detailed information, see appendix N.3.
7
21 Södertälje Municipality, (1) from Suroyo TV, (1) SFI8teacher, and one consultation via e-mail with ‘Statistics Sweden’. 9
In semi-structured interviews, the researcher asks interviewees predetermined but open-ended questions (Ayres, 2008). So the questions10 in this study were formulated in a way that served my goals as a researcher while at the same time gave room for the respondents’ spontaneous accounts (Brinkmann, 2008) and encouraged them to engage in active discussions. Here, it is noteworthy that I played a relatively directive role by assuring that the discussion stayed focused on the research topic (Morgan, 2008a). The detailed qualitative accounts produced helped me explore/describe the data in real-life environment, as well as explain the complexities of real-life situations (Zainal, 2007).
The individual interviews with the immigrants were conducted either face-to-face in Södertälje public library or via Skype/WhatsApp, based on the interviewees’ availability; while the (3) group interviews were held face-to-face in Södertälje public library. For the case of the key informants, the interviews were held face-to-face in their offices, via email or phone. The languages used were Syriac and Arabic with the immigrants, and English and some Swedish with the key informants. The interviews started by introducing myself and giving a brief explanation about the purpose of the research followed by a permission request to record the conversation(s). Interviewees were additionally informed that their real names would not be revealed in the report. At the end of each interview with migrants, I used the timeline technique to draw their life trajectories and locate the key events and processes that led them to change their situation. It is noteworthy that after selecting the key finding that prompted recommendations, I went back to the respondents for further details and to validate the proposed arguments. Additionally, it should be highlighted that having the conversations recorded allowed me to listen to the interviewees’ talks every time I needed while processing and analyzing the data.
In-addition-to the interviews, I relied on documents purposefully-selected as a source of data. Cross-cutting data from different sources supported ‘internal validation’.
8 Swedish For Immigrants 9
For detailed information, see Appendix N.5.
10
22 Sampling
The participants were purposively selected based on specific criteria (described below). I mainly depended on my social network on Facebook (being myself Syrian) in-order-to reach/identify an initial set of participants, and then I applied the snowball sampling method where those participants served as informants about other potential participants to be included in the study (Morgan, 2008b).
The selection criteria: the target was any Syrian immigrant aged between 20-64 (excluding those
with special needs), and arriving to Sweden between (2011-2014) and settling in Södertälje city. Age was basically considered in-order-to have a broad view of the integration process assuming that migrants belonging to different age groups faced different experiences (with different opportunities and challenges) related to integration. Gender was also taken into account as a significant variable; basically to give equal opportunity/value for the viewpoints/experiences of both men and women. Overlooking the involvement of any gender category could have led to an incomplete picture of the problem, while integrating them both enhanced its quality and relevance. In addition, considering gender generally contributes to empowering people (particularly women), and helps them both reflect about the topic under-study, understand its causes, and find solutions (Leduc, 2009). Regarding the (17) migrants interviewed individually, (11) belonged to the age group (20-44 years), (6) females and (5) males; while the other (6) respondents belonged to the age group (45-64), (4) females and (2) males. While in-relation-to the group interviews, the composition was made in a way that the first group included migrants in their 20s, the second in their 30s and the third in their 50s, with (3) females and (1) male in the first; (2) females and (2) males in the second; and (1) female and (2) males in the third. I aimed at meeting people who had some sort of relation (friends, colleagues etc.) in each group in-order-to assure that they felt comfortable talking in-order-to each other about the in-order-topic under-study (Morgan, 2008a) and actively engaged in the conversation. I also tried to assemble people who shared similar perspectives toward the topic of integration (through snowballing), or in-other-words, I tried to compose homogeneous groups, to encourage the participants to relate to the topic in-relation-to both their similarities and differences (ibid.) Another variable was the time of arrival, assuming that the cases under-study, arriving almost at the same time, faced similar external advantages and disadvantages; and already accomplished a minimum of 3 years in Sweden, the time that integration programs take to prepare an migrant to integrate in the
labor-23 market. There is one exceptional case among the respondents; a person who arrived in 2015 but was considered in the study for the uniqueness of her experience. Moreover, in-order-to enrich the analysis of the integration limiting and supporting factors and the dynamic interaction between them, the selection criteria considered selecting people located in the three pre-defined integration categories.
Data analysis
The data from the respondents’ life trajectories related to their integration experiences and life events allowed me to track their integration paths in-relation-to the limiting and supporting factors and the dynamic interaction between them. The life trajectory patterns (smooth or single/multiple steps (Shepherd, 2007) (as described in figure N.2a)) were used to show the three possible directions of the respondents’ integration paths (ascending, stable, or descending). In that context, retrospective statistic quantitative data enabled me to first estimate the value of a ‘self-sufficiency’ income line (based on the individual’s monthly living costs), and then, to reflect it against the outcome of the dynamic interaction between the limiting and the supporting factors that affected the immigrants’ integration (related to self-sufficiency). In that way, I was able-to categorize the respondents according to their ‘integration’ situations, as predefined in the theoretical perspective.
The analysis of the empirical data collected and the explanation building relied on the chronologic analysis of the life events. ‘Critical analysis’ aiming to show the problems with a posture was adopted. I identified events and situations from the data collected during the interviews and made causal links between them to build-up explanations. This was combined with ‘constructive analysis’ aiming to show the benefit of a stance and to respond to counter-arguments supported by the theoretical perspective; and ‘comparative analysis’ to compare cases, or show how cases were related to the adopted theories. ‘Pattern matching’ was also used where the empirically based patterns were compared with the predefined theoretical ones. This analytic tactic enhanced the internal validity of the study (Yin, 2009).
In this research, I also quantified the data, because reality can be seen better when things are looked at through both lenses—qualitative and quantitative (Peter, 1993). Quantitative analysis of qualitative data means involving numbers and percentages. Two tables of the integration
24 limiting and supporting factors identified during the interviews were organized; including the number of times each factor was mentioned and by whom. The quantitative data derived from these two tables were engaged along the ‘findings’ chapter together with the interpretative accounts.
Finally, ‘content analysis’ was also applied mainly to analyze the secondary data collected from purposely-selected documents discussing the Swedish integration policies and programs. This analytic method helped me make sense of the texts. I gave a close reading to the documents and derived meaningful information from them. Although content analysis is an intellectual process, its outcome is possible to be noted (Julien, 2008). In my case, I used my notebook to draw a map with the 10 integration-domains included in the adopted conceptual framework of integration, and then, while reading, I classified the ideas within these domains and sometimes drew causal lines.
Writing strategies
In my research, I adopted several writing strategies typically used within qualitative studies. I provided narratives/descriptions of the interviewed-migrants’ experiences using an interpretative approach; presented information in tabular forms; and simplified data by using figures that portrayed the relationship between the variables (Creswell, 2009). In addition, I quantified the data, as described-above, and engaged it with a rich depiction (thick description) of the case which helped proving that the conclusion ‘made sense’ and increased thereby the credibility of the interpretation. Finally, I need to add that the interpretation might have been influenced by my background, being myself a Syrian migrant living in Sweden and going through the integration process.
Generalization
In this study, ‘’generalization of results [….] stems on theory rather than on populations’’ (Yin, 1994, cited by Zainal, 2007, p.2). This is named analytic generalization which is distinct from statistical generalization as it does not draw inferences from data to a population, but compares the findings of a case-study to a previously developed theory (Macfarlan, 2015). The analytic generalization process, as described by Yin, is a two-step process where first the researcher makes a conceptual claim that shows how the findings bear
25 upon a particular theoretical perspective, and second how the latter is applied to implicate situations where similar events might occur (Yin, 2010, cited by Macfarlan, 2015, para.4). The inferences, in this case-study, are not to be transported to a large population but to those living in similar contexts and experiencing similar situations.
Constraints
Time constraint prevented me from conducting more interviews; however, it is noteworthy that this did not affect the reliability of the topic addressed in the conclusion and recommendations due to the fact that saturation of information in-relation-to that topic was reached.
Additionally, I did not include any ‘quotes’ literally said by the migrants in my paper, mainly because the language I used with the majority of the migrants during the interviews was Syriac— a language that I speak very well but do not read or write. And including quotes ideally requires writing them in the original language and then translating them into English11, to show cultural sensitivity.
Now that I have introduced the research objective, the theoretical perspective and the methodology, I will proceed with the findings.
11
26
5. Findings
In this part, I will present my research findings by first listing the limiting and supporting factors that affect the integration process of the interviewed-migrants, and analyzing them using the theoretical perspective. Second, portraying the integration trajectories of the migrants belonging to the three pre-defined categories (integrated; in-progress; not integrated). I will elaborate on how they have been utilizing the opportunities to overcome the challenges, and become self-sufficient. Third, describing and analyzing existing policies, programs and processes supporting integration.
5.1. Factors affecting integration 5.1.1. The limiting factors
The figure N.3 represents the ranking of the limiting factors as proposed by the interviewees. The ranking is sorted from the most frequently commented factor to the least. The 17 interviewed-migrants are represented by 17 different letters. Additionally, the figure portrays Ager and Strang‘s domains to which each limiting factor belongs. It should be remarked that some of the identified limiting factors are related to more than one domain.
27 Figure N.3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
R A S Z M B I Q G J L P T X N W H
1 No fluent/limited Swedish language 17 R A S Z M B I Q G J L P T X N W H Language and Culture
2
Limited social relations with the Swedes
(e.g. friendship, fellowship etc.) 15 R A S Z M B I Q G P T X N W H
Social Bridges, Language and Culture
3 Housing shortage and instability 13 S Z M B I Q J P T X N W H Housing
4 Migrants' self-isolation within their ethnic cohort in Södertälje 12 R A S Z M B Q G X N W H
Social Bridges, Language and Culture
5
Lack of awarness about the policies, programs and institutions working to support integration due to problems related to
information dissemination/miscommunication 11 Z M B Q G P T X N W H Social Links
6 The quality of the Swedish language courses 11 A S M B I Q G J L P T Language and Culture
7 Limited English language 9 M I Q G P T X N W Language and Culture
8
Not resorting to a psychological counsellor when felt
demotivated/depressed/frustrated 9 S Z B Q G J P X W Health
9
Obstacles to equate the migrants' skills/education to the
Swedish standards 8 A S M B I L P T
Employment, Education
10
Time-wasting in ineffective courses aiming to enforce the migrants'
employability capacities 7 M L T X N W H Social Links
11 Weak civic knowledge 7 Z M B X N W H Rights
12
The differences between the Swedish educational system
the Syrian one 7 A S B Q G J L Education
13 Overcrowding due to the housing shortage 6 S Z M B I H Health, Housing
14 Lack of some social workers' experience 6 B Q G P T N Social Links
15 Weak employability capacity due to age, health 5 T X N W H Employment, Health
16 Hidden descrimination 4 B I P T Employment
17 Demotivation 4 T X W H Health
18
Migrants' perception that the Swedes are unwilling to build up
relations with them 4 R I T H
Social Bridges, Language and Culture
19
Emotional exhaustion due to worries about the family left back
in Syria 3 Z I P Health
20
Exploitation in the labor market
(e.g. illegal job, low payment, instability) 3 M Q P Employment
21 Lack of coordination among the municipalities 2 Q G Social Links
22 loneliness (being far from her/his close family members) 1 P Health
Interviewed migrants Domains Limiting Factors N . R e sp o n d e n ts
28 To facilitate the analysis of the limiting factors, how they hamper integration and how they interact, I have grouped them following Ager and Strang‘s framework and ranked them as shown in the figure N.4.
Language and culture: the limited command of the Swedish language has an influence on:
a) The engagement in the labor-market. In this regard, (5) out of (17) respondents (29.4%) are completely marginalized from the labor-market ((4) of them have not finished the SFI language course). And (9) out of (17) respondents (52.9%) who are/were engaged in the labor-market face/d problems for not speaking the language fluently. For the latter, all, except for one interviewee, accomplished the SFI course.
b) The performance at the university, (2) out of (3) respondents who are university students with SVA312 courseaccomplished receive complaints from their teachers because of their non-academic language. The third person usually submits his assignment in English, and that’s way he does not receive such complaints. Additionally, (1) out of (2) respondents, who were engaged in the labor-market and are planning to join the university, feels linguistically unprepared (although he has SVA3 accomplished).
Although (10) out of (17) respondents (58.8%) have accomplished the required learning level whether to work or study, they still have problems speaking the language fluently. This limiting factor can be directly attributed to another limiting factor highlighted by the interviewees: the quality of the Swedish language courses. According to the respondents, the language being taught is a) too literary not serving immigrants to easily interact on a daily basis or in the labor-market as suggested by (11) out of (17) respondents (64.7%); and b) not academic, influencing the performance of those who have studied/are studying at the university as suggested by (5) out
12
SVA3 is the highest level of Swedish required when applying to study university-programs instructed in Swedish; it is equivalent to the high school Swedish language course.
29 of (17) respondents (29.4%). In-addition-to the quality of the language itself, (4) out of (17) respondents (23.5%) highlighted the lack of teachers’ experience, and (5) out of (17) respondents (29.4%) the poor classification of migrants in the classrooms where no attention is given to their different ages or backgrounds.
In-relation-to the linguistic skills the respondents possess, their limited English language is highlighted as a limiting factor that prevents them from exploring available job opportunities as confirmed by (2) out of (17) respondents (11.7%), or making better progress in their studies as confirmed by (3) out of (17) respondents (17.6%), or interacting easily on a daily basis as confirmed by (4) out of (17) respondents (23.5%).
Social Bridges: According to (15) out of (17) respondents (88,2%), the second main integration
limiting factor is the limited social relations they have so far with the Swedes (e.g. friendship, fellowship etc.). This fact is plausible if considering the short time of the respondents living in this new context. In fact, the respondents have the average of (4.5) years of stay in Sweden (minimum 2.9 years and maximum 5.9 years). Besides attributing this limiting factor to the fairly short stay in Sweden and the linguistic problems highlighted above, other reasons were suggested by the respondents:
a) Syrian-immigrants’ self-isolation/intention to keep their ties with their ethnic cohort in Södertälje, (12) out of (17) respondents (70.5%).
b) The respondents’ perception that the Swedes are unwilling to build-up relations with immigrants, (4) out of (17) respondents (23.5%).
Here, it is noteworthy that the connection between the social relations with the Swedes and the Swedish language is bidirectional, that’s to say having connections with the Swedes helps immigrants improve their language, and having a good Swedish language increases the possibilities of building-up relations with the Swedes. These two interconnected factors can even support migrants understand the Swedish culture better, and at a second level improve their employability.
Social Links: (11) out of (17) respondents (64.7%) commented that they are not well-informed
30 that the government’s approach to disseminate information, as confirmed by the key informants, is a self-service approach, mainly using websites followed by personal consultation. The undesired outcomes of these personal consultations are also a relevant limiting factor hampering migrants’ integration in the labor-market/education as highlighted by (6) out of (17) respondents (35.2%). These unwished-for outcomes result from the unsuccessful ‘exchange’ between the public services/structures and migrants, each to fulfill their own interests. The unsuccessful ‘exchange’ is represented in miscommunication, problems in information provision/dissemination, poor coordination, inflexibility of the system/applicants and/or lack of caseworkers’ experience. For example, one highly-educated immigrant was not informed at the right moment by her caseworker about the possibility of joining the Short Route program designed especially for graduated migrants to accelerate their integration. She got to know about the program from a friend when it was too late, and therefore missed ‘a golden opportunity’ to be integrated as she described it. An example related to inflexibility and lack of some social workers’ experience, (2) respondents, who wanted to join the dentistry/pharmaceutics programs at the university as-soon-as possible, requested their caseworker not to fill their schedules with internships/courses that did not directly serve their study plan only to prove that they had 8 hours of activities daily. The caseworker did not consider their request and sent them to an available IT course just to justify the financial benefit they received. The (2) immigrants, following the reiterated refusal of their request from their caseworker, asked changing to another caseworker and moved ahead with their study plan. The inflexibility of this caseworker could have caused a delay in the admission of these two immigrants at the university. Other examples that are more related to the labor-market are of: (P), a 32 years-old economist, who lost the chance to join the Short Route program twice because his case worker(s) missed submitting his application on time; and the case of (T), a 56 years-old civil engineer who was recommended by his caseworker/mentor to attend a cleaning course, while he was interested in an engineering course that could have linked him to the labor-market and helped him utilize his engineering skills. It can be argued that the factors pointed above can be attributed to the fact that the system was/is overwhelmed with the high influx of immigrants influencing its efficiency and effectiveness; nevertheless, according to the key informants, it is not the case for Södertälje (Key informant A, personal communication, December 4, 2017). One key informant explained that they are usually informed one year in advance about the numbers of newcomers;
31
this time helps accommodating the
system (Key informant B, personal communication, December 6 & 7, 2017). ‘Poor matching’, as explained by the key informants, is sometimes consented between the caseworkers and the applicants due to the lack of possibilities/options to place the applicants according to their preferences. In such a context, new skills that are needed in the labor-market and people could have are explored by the caseworkers.
Employment: (15) out of (17) respondents (88.2%) are able-to work. Among them, (7) are working: (3) with permanent employment contracts; (3) with short-termed/temporary contracts; (1) is self-employed. (3) work occasionally since they are studying. The unemployed are (5) out of (15) respondents able-to work (33.3%), (3) of them have never worked since their arrival to Sweden. Among the (5) unemployed respondents, (2) are young and (3) are old; and (2) are low-skilled while (3) are professionals (1 pharmacist, 1 civil engineer and 1 economist). In this domain, (5) out of (17) respondents (29.4%), over 50, perceive that they have low possibilities to join the labor-market due to their advanced age. As a limiting factor, it is noteworthy that (4) out of (17) respondents (23.5%) have experienced hidden discrimination in their attempts to join the labor-market represented in the employers’ requirement of excellent Swedish language or Swedish language as a mother tongue. Another limiting factor, as pointed by (3) out of (17) respondents (17.6%), is the exploitation in the labor-market represented in: long working hours and low payment, or working in the ‘black’ market with no contract or social protection. The immigrants are aware of this exploitation but most often cannot avoid it for having no other choices. (8) out of (17) respondents (47%) have faced obstacles equating their education/skills to the Swedish standards; (3) of them have overcome it by complementing their studies with bridging courses/programs at the university, (1) has changed to another studying field to join the labor-market faster, (1) unemployed is still waiting for the admission. Additionally, It should be highlighted that (2) out of (17) respondents (11.7%) are not qualified to engage in the labor-market due to health problems.
Health: it is noteworthy that (10) out of (17) respondents (58.8%) suffer frustration caused by
the hardness of the integration process; the overcrowding; the feeling of loneliness or the concerns about their families left back in Syria. Demotivation to study/seek a job was also highlighted by the respondents, particularly the old ones who mainly attributed this feeling to
32 their belief that no employer would be interested in hiring them. Such events trigger anxiety, loss of self-confidence or depression as highlighted by (6) out of (17) respondents (35.2%), which in turn erode their resilience and adaptation capabilities.
The interviews revealed that the immigrants’ utilization of psychological and consultation services is so limited or almost non-existent, making it more difficult for them to confront the challenges of engaging in a new life and society. These services can assist them overcome these stressors, which seem to be overlooked as limiting factors of integration, at least from the immigrants‘ side.
Housing: (13) out of (17) respondents (76.4%) have been affected by the housing shortage in
different ways. This shortage together with the increasing demand associated with the increased number of migrants coming to Södertälje has influenced the housing market, triggering illegal sublease with high rental prices and creating an environment for corruption within this sector. In-reference-to the illegal sublease, the respondents expressed that some Middle Eastern families (from the old generation of immigrants) perceive the newly arrivals’ desperate need for accommodation a golden chance to make money. A family of 4-5 adults (who are in the queue of housing applicants for a decade or more) rents four apartments legally, lives in one and subleases the others for high prices to newcomers. Also some employees in the housing agencies, as the interviews revealed, receive bribes from immigrants to put their names on the top of the queue of housing applicants and sign them official rental contracts/agreements. The bribes have ranged between 25.000 SEK at the beginning of the housing crisis (2012-2013) and 150.000 SEK nowadays.
At the present time, (9) out of (17) respondents (52.9%) pay (57%) higher rental price (if considering, as suggested by the respondents, 7000 SEK an average reference of a monthly rental cost to a three-room apartment). High rental prices increase the living costs (raising the self-sufficiency income line). In-relation-to the housing security, (5) out of (17) respondents (29.4%) suffer housing insecurity for having no official rental contracts so, besides the high price they pay, they can be evicted at-any-moment, as already experienced by (2) out of (17) respondents (11.7%) who have changed their residence six times since their arrival to Sweden. (3) out of (17) respondents (17.6%), who want to live alone, have to share houses/apartments with others due to
33 the housing shortage or the high rental prices. So, in-addition-to the financial exhaustion, the housing shortage creates stress and instability.
Rights: limited civic knowledge is a limiting factor highlighted by (7) out of (17) respondents
(41.1%). The interviews unveiled that the immigrants’ awareness of their labor rights and welfare system entitlements is limited and needs to be strengthened. They believe that they have to be informed about their rights to be-able-to strive for them.
Education: the difference between the educational systems at the Swedish universities and the
Syrian ones was highlighted by the respondents. For the educated immigrants who have had the chance to study/complement their studies at the university, it is difficult to achieve the desired progress due to the lack of capacities to adapt to the Swedish educational system and techniques. This can impact their chance of becoming self-resilient in the future. For example, (1) respondent needs double the time that a native-born Swede needs to accomplish her assignments. Another example is of an immigrant who has failed the validation exam to get the admission to study a bridging program for the public health staff. These limitations will, accordingly, delay these migrants’ engagement in the labor-market.
Now after examining the limiting factors and their causes, and understanding how they affect the immigrants’ integration process, I will explore in-details the supporting factors that are most commonly used by the immigrants during their integration process. Afterward, I will attempt to visualize the integration process through the outcomes of the interaction of the supporting and limiting factors.
5.1.2. The supporting factors:
The figure N.5 represents the ranking of the supporting factors as proposed by the interviewees. The ranking is sorted from the most frequently commented factors to the least. The 17 interviewed-migrants are represented by 17 different letters.
These supporting factors are grouped round four main pillars: 1) rights and citizenship; 2) institutional, economic and political support; 3) social connections; and 4) resilience and adaptation ability, as the figure shows. These pillars, which I elaborate on below, reflect the resilience framework as well as Ager and Strang‘s.
