Given the impact of several factors such as economic instability and geopolitical movements, migration has emerged as an indisputable aspect of modern society. Complex tensions reflecting the diverse perspectives within these communities have been formed through interactions between migrants and locals in Western countries. Numerous factors, from past immigration patterns to the creation of policies and public opinion, affect this challenging interaction. It is important to explore the root causes of these conflicts by examining the environmental, migrant, and personal elements that contribute to the specific dynamics of immigration and look at the various elements that could affect public opinion, policy choices, and social cohesiveness.
The occurrence of migrations is driven by various factors such as violent conflict, political instability, national power dynamics, imperial expansion, ethnic tensions, radicalism, terrorism, environmental degradation, and fluctuations in economic growth. In nations experiencing significant immigration, like the United States, the influx of migrants adds complexity to foreign policy decisions and can pose challenges to the internal cohesion of host countries. Matters like dual nationality, social exclusion, multiculturalism, and concerns about international terrorism fuel intense political discussions and public debates.
Tension between migrants and locals in Western countries is influenced by a complex interplay of factors, reflecting the diverse attitudes within societies. Public perceptions of immigration encompass a broad spectrum, influenced by contextual, migrant, and personal characteristics.
Country Differences: Public support for immigration varies widely among countries. North America tends to hold more positive views than Europe, and attitudes differ even within regions (e.g., consensual support in Canada versus division in the Netherlands). Historical immigration patterns, political context, policies, immigrant population size, and composition contribute to these differences.
Immigration Policies and Public Perception: Distinctions in immigration policies, such as categorizing migrants as Western or non-Western, EU or non-EU, shape public attitudes. Negative sentiments often emerge toward culturally dissimilar immigrants, such as Muslims in Europe. Voluntary migrants, like labor migrants, may face more negativity than involuntary migrants like refugees.
Societal Divisions: Within populations, attitudes toward immigrants vary. Higher-educated individuals and political liberals often hold more positive views, valuing cosmopolitanism and cultural diversity. Conversely, those strongly attached to national identity, perceiving economic and cultural threats, and having authoritarian predispositions may harbor anti-immigrant sentiments.
Personal and Contextual Interactions: Psychological characteristics play a role in shaping attitudes, with factors like authoritarian predisposition influencing reactions to culturally dissimilar immigrants. Individual differences become more pronounced in contexts with higher immigrant proportions, economic decline, and conservative ideological climates.
Media and Political Framing: Public perception is heavily influenced by how immigration is portrayed in the media and framed by politicians. Exaggerated perceptions of immigrant numbers, often fueled by political narratives, can contribute to negative attitudes. Framing that emphasizes immigrants as either threats or contributors impacts public opinion.
System Justification Motivations: Politicians may use system justification motivations to garner support for refugees by framing policies as aligning with societal norms and values. Positive or negative framing of immigrants in political discourse can sway public opinion.
Challenges and Uncertainties: Beyond extreme views, many individuals grapple with the challenges and uncertainties posed by large-scale immigration. Addressing these concerns is crucial for fostering broad public support for immigration and refugee settlement.
Understanding the multifaceted drivers of attitudes toward immigration is essential for mitigating social and political disruptions. Acknowledging and addressing the concerns of the general public is crucial for successful immigrant integration and the overall well-being of both newcomers and host communities in the face of the global phenomenon of mass immigration.
Policy debate over immigration has intensified amidst growing global refugee crises and a wave of nationalist electoral victories. Often that debate focuses on a narrow question. Policymakers and voters reasonably want to know what the effects of immigration are, to help them decide how much immigration there should be.
We must ask a more fruitful question: how can different policy choices generate positive economic effects from immigration and avoid negative ones? Immigration is not inherently “good” or “bad.” Its effects depend on the context and the policy choices that shape it.
While recognizing that there is no universal approach to inclusion due to its highly personalized and contextual nature, this chapter highlights three key policy implications aimed at enhancing migrants’ inclusion and fostering social cohesion:
Holistic Inclusion Policies: The adoption of comprehensive inclusion policies holds the potential to enhance the effectiveness of policy responses. Despite the prevalent focus on labor market inclusion, this chapter emphasizes the interconnectedness of various policy areas. Inclusion outcomes in one specific policy domain can significantly impact others. The absence of holistic inclusion policies may prove costly for both migrants and receiving societies. Single-policy responses in isolation are likely insufficient; a coherent strategy across multiple areas is essential. Failure to implement a comprehensive approach not only risks the exclusion and marginalization of migrants but also poses a threat to social cohesion in the receiving society.
Inclusive Policies Across Multiple Areas: Achieving deeper and more sustainable inclusion outcomes necessitates more inclusive policy responses across a wide range of related areas. This is particularly evident in language requirements, political participation, and naturalization. Conversely, restrictive policies, especially when used for migration management, carry the risk of being counterproductive. Conditions like pre-entry language tests for family reunification, while intended to facilitate integration, can inadvertently limit the number of migrants benefiting from family reunification, potentially hindering the overall inclusion of migrant sponsors and their relatives.
Enhanced Involvement of Local Actors and Migrants: Recognizing the pivotal role played by local actors and migrants, there is a need to strengthen their involvement in the development and reassessment of national inclusion policies. Empowering cities and local authorities can help mitigate tensions between local and national levels, where discrepancies in inclusion approaches may arise. As the primary spaces for inclusion, cities are well-positioned to share insights into inclusion challenges and best practices. Despite migrants’ active engagement in practical efforts for their own inclusion and that of their peers, their voices have not been adequately reflected in policymaking. Increasingly incorporating their perspectives can lead to a more thorough understanding of their inclusion needs and aspirations, ultimately enhancing the effectiveness of inclusion policies.
Conclusion:
In navigating the complexities of tensions between migrants and locals in Western countries, one overarching truth emerges: there is no one-size-fits-all solution. The diversity of attitudes within societies, shaped by historical, contextual, and personal factors, underscores the need for nuanced and comprehensive approaches. Holistic inclusion policies, inclusive measures across multiple domains, and enhanced involvement of local actors and migrants themselves are crucial components of a strategy aimed at fostering social cohesion. As we grapple with the challenges and uncertainties posed by large-scale immigration, acknowledging the concerns of the general public becomes paramount. Only through a thoughtful and inclusive approach can societies successfully navigate the intricate dynamics of migration, ensuring the well-being of both newcomers and host communities in the face of this global phenomenon.
Resources:
https://www.oecd.org/dev/pgd/46923664.pdf
https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/subprojects/immigration-and-conflict