Suchergebnisse

How much variation is there in immigrant incorporation policies and practices across the Western democracies? Concluding that the effort to capture variation in typologies of incorporation schemes is likely to prove both futile and misleading, I propose a radically dis-aggregated perspective that conceives of incorporation as the product of the intersection of migrant aspirations and strategies with regulatory frameworks in four domains – state, market, welfare, and culture. Because some but not all of the regulatory institutions in these domains were created with immigrant incorporation in mind, national incorporation frameworks are not fully cohesive, are constantly changing, and at best can be described as belonging to a handful of loosely connected syndromes.

Introduction: Is there an East Asian model of immigrant incorporation? -- How civic legacies shape immigration politics -- Constructing developmental citizens in East Asia -- Civic legacies and immigrant incorporation in East Asian democracies -- "I can't be Tanaka" : understanding immigrant incorporation through migrant voices -- Marriage and migration -- Multiculturalism with adjectives.

This article analyzes sociocultural transnational linkages among Colombian, Dominican, and Salvadoran immigrants in the United States. It emphasizes the importance of comparative analysis and yields three main findings. First, participation in any particular transnational activity is low, but participation over all the different forms of transnational practices is extended. Second, the process of incorporation does not weaken transnational participation. Third, there is more than one causal path that can account for the rise of transnational sociocultural practices. The different paths can be explained by reference to the context of reception and the mode of incorporation of each group.

Sociologists, public policy-makers, and the general public usually try to anticipate how modern immigrants and their descendants will become part of American society by comparing their experiences to those of European immigrants a century or more ago.

Since the 1990s, immigrant settlement has expanded beyond gateway cities and transformed the social fabric of a growing number of American cities. In the process, it has raised new questions for urban and migration scholars. This article argues that immigration to new destinations provides an opportunity to sharpen understandings of the relationship between immigration and the urban by exploring it under new conditions. Through a discussion of immigrant settlement in Nashville, Tennessee, it identifies an overlooked precursor to immigrant incorporation—how cities see, or do not see, immigrants within the structure of local government. If immigrants are not institutionally visible to government or nongovernmental organizations, immigrant abilities to make claims to or on the city as urban residents are diminished. Through the combination of trends toward neighborhood-based urban governance and neoliberal streamlining across American cities, immigrants can become institutionally hard to find and, thus, plan for in the city.

The combination of increased migration, new technologies, and growing wealth have changed the face of Europe: today, one in ten Europeans was born outside the continent. The processes for incorporating these immigrants vary widely from city to city and nation to nation, and even from one institution within a city to another. This collection offers a comprehensive overview of the state of scholarship on all those approaches and their effectiveness, bringing current theory and practice together to analyze problems and debates in the field

AbstractAmsterdam's immigrants of Caribbean and southern Mediterranean origin have been characterized as modestly segregated from Dutch residents, and their residential assimilation has been expected to proceed rapidly. This article tests the hypothesis of spatial assimilation using both aggregate data on levels of segregation and individual‐level analyses of the people who live in ethnic minority neighborhoods. Evidence is presented of assimilation for immigrants from the former colonies of Surinam and the Antilles, but Turks and Moroccans are shown to face stronger barriers. The former groups' higher standing favors their mobility from ethnically distinct neighborhoods. There is a generational shift for Surinamese and Antilleans, while the Turks and Moroccans born in Amsterdam are as likely as the immigrant generation to settle in ethnic minority neighborhoods.