Nstitutional and discursive opportunity structures

1
The role of social capital in migrants
engagement in local politics in European cities
Laura Morales (University of Manchester) Katia
Pilati (University of Trento)
A project funded by
2

• Research objectiveTo examine how bridging and
  bonding social capital differently shape
  political attitudes and behaviors of migrants
  across cities in Europe.

• Theoretical approaches
• Literature on political participation by
  migrants
• - Political Opportunity Structure (POS) approach
  focusing on the institutional structure (Koopmans
  et al. 2005, Bloemraad 2006).
• - Organizational approach focusing on
  intermediate meso-structures (Fennema and Tillie
  1999, 2001 Togeby 1999).
• LINK with theories distinguishing different
  types of structures/links
• - Overlapping and intersecting structures
  (Simmel).
• - Bonding and bridging social capital (Putnam).

3

• Definition of bonding vs bridging social capital
• Bridging social capital, defined as social
  networks and links among socially heterogeneous
  groups (Putnam, 2000) bonding is other side of
  the coin, linkage within homogenous groups.
• We restrict our analysis to bridging/bonding
  along one of many possible social categories
  ethnicity.
• POS conceptualisation ways in which
  institutional policy approaches to migration
  provide opportunities for the political
  participation of migrants.
• Measurement a comparative set of indicators,
  ranging from the legal-institutional framework
  for obtaining citizenship rights to national
  immigration and integration policies.
• Individual rights dimension available
  opportunities that migrants have for accessing
  equal citizenship and individual rights (from
  permits, to citizenship, to labour market and
  political rights).
• Group rights dimension extent to which group
  specificities are accommodated (cultural,
  linguistic, religious, schooling, rights).

4

• Expectations different structures/links
  different types of engagement/participation.
• If migrants interact with their co-ethnics they
  will be more likely to be exposed to
  participation that relate to issues and concerns
  framed around their own ethnic group.
  Consequently, bonding - rather than bridging
  social capital will provide fertile ground for
  political engagement with an ethnic focus.
• Instead, ethnically diverse social interactions
  will promote political engagement related to
  issues and concerns that affect the larger
  society.
• More open regimes in terms of individual rights
  will facilitate incorporation into
  residence-country politics.
• More open regimes in terms of ethnic group rights
  will foster continued engagement in
  origin-country politics but not necessarily
  detrimental to residence-country political
  inclusion.

5

• Description of the study methodology

• Data sources
• Micro data collected through a survey carried
  out between 2007 and 2008 in 8 European cities
  (Barcelona, Budapest, Geneva, London, Lyon,
  Madrid, Milan, and Zurich) to measure
  individual-level participation and social
  capital.
• Data from organisational survey, to measure
  organisational-level social capital (index on
  bonding links within migrants organizational
  networks).
• Contextual macro-level indicators on
  policy/legal framework.
• Main IVs 4 indicators of bonding social capital
• Respondent involved in any ethnic advocacy
  organisation?
• Respondent involved in any organisation with
  50 members of Rs co-ethnics? ( over total
  organisational memberships)
• Ethnic homogeneity of informal relationships (
  co-ethnic over all relations partner, household,
  more important acquaintances)
• Degree of bonding (ties with other co-ethnic
  organisations) within migrants organisational
  networks
• DVs 4 types of political engagement (ethnic and
  non ethnic)
• Political interest residence country politics,
  origin country politics, one vs other.
• Contacts mainstream issues vs ethnic-group or
  origin country related issues.
• Protests mainstream issues vs ethnic-group or
  origin country related issues.
• (Political consumerism) too few cases of action
  by migrants.

6
DV Interest in politics
7
DV Protesting
8
DV Contacting politicians officials
9
Individual-level explanatory variable Involved
in ethnic advocacy organizations
10
Individual level explanatory variable Involved
in organizations with 50 members of Rs ethnic
group
11
Individual level explanatory variable Ethnic
homogeneity of informal relationships
12
Organisational-level explanatory variable Ethnic
ties with network of organisations of each ethnic
group
13
Multivariate Analyses

• Model specifications for each dimension of
  political inclusion (interest, contacting
  protesting),
• We employ 3 different DVs per dimension
  non-exclusive residence-country related
  interest/participation, non-exclusive ethnic
  related interest/participation, exclusive ethnic
  related interest/participation vs exclusive
  residence-country related interest participation.
• All modelled as dichothomous contrasts with
  logistic or multinomial multivariate regressions.
• Single-level equations, though multilevel
  structure.
• Core interest is in bridging/bonding social
  capital indicators impact of Political
  Opportunity Structures.
• BUT various controls included
• General social capital generalised trust,
  overall associational involvement.
• Socio-economic gender, age, education,
  employment situation, marital status.
• Immigration process 2nd generation, Muslim
  background, years since arrival,
  residence-country nationality, legal situation.

14
Detailed findings by type of political engagement
15

• Bonding social capital has a negative impact on
  interest in residence-country politics, but a
  positive impact on home-country interest.
• Greater openness in individual rights for
  immigrants diminishes their interest in
  home-country politics.
• Greater opennes in group rights for immigrants
  diminishes their interest in residence-country
  politics and increases exclusive interest in
  home-country politics.

16

• Bonding social capital has a negative impact on
  mainstream political contacting, but no
  consistent impact on ethnic contacting.
• Greater openness in individual rights for
  immigrants fosters mainstream contacting and
  diminishes their exclusive ethnic political
  contacting.
• Greater openness in group rights for immigrants
  diminishes their mainstream contacting and
  increases exclusive ethnic contacting.

17

• Individual-level bonding social capital has a
  negative impact on mainstream protest, and no
  consistent impact on ethnic protesting. BUT
  organisational-level bonding social capital
  fosters mainstream protesting and diminishes
  ethnic protest action.
• Greater openness in individual rights for
  immigrants fosters mainstream protesting and
  diminishes their exclusive ethnic protest action.
  
• Greater openness in group rights for immigrants
  diminishes their mainstream protesting, as well
  as ethnic-focused protest.

18
Overall summary of findings
19

• THANKS!
• MORE INFORMATION ON http//www.um.es/localmultidem