Interculturalism as a New Framework to reduce Prejudice in Times of Crisis in European Countries
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/imig.12262 |
| Published date | 01 April 2017 |
| Date | 01 April 2017 |
| Author | Valeria Bello |
Interculturalism as a New Framework to
reduce Prejudice in Times of Crisis in
European Countries
Valeria Bello*
ABSTRACT
With the socio-economic crisis that is affecting Europe particularly negatively, immigrants
have been often reported as additional threats in the job market for established residents. Theo-
ries of prejudice, such as the Theory of Self-interest or that of the Perceived Group Threats,
have suggested economic factors to explain these kinds of attitudes towards immigrants. More
recently, some scholars have advanced theories of intercultural values to account for individu-
als’dispositions towards those perceived as newcomers. The aim of this work is to understand
whether or not intercultural values are able to modify the effects that economic factors exert
on prejudice in times of crisis. The main objective is to identify whether the kinds of values
instilled within societies play a stronger role than other variables, particularly economic fac-
tors. The findings show that Interculturalism plays a much greater role than economic factors
in influencing attitudes towards outsiders.
INTRODUCTION
In the last decade, the world has witnessed two different but parallel phenomena. On the one hand,
the start of a socio-economic crisis has affected different sectors of countries and seems in particu-
lar to have entailed further tensions between members of the host societies and immigrants.
1
Alleg-
edly, established residents consider newcomers as sources of additional threats in the job market,
because they seem to create more competition for an already scarce labour demand. For some
authors (Fetzer, 2000; O’Rourke and Sinnott, 2006; Raijaman et al., 2003), this situation is the
result of actual threats that newcomers pose to “insiders”
2
and for others (Quillian, 1995; Sheepers
et al., 2002), the threats are only perceived. Despite the different interpretations of threats, both
approaches focus on economic factors as main sources of negative attitudes towards immigrants.
On the other hand, a new concept, Interculturalism, is replacing the multicultural framework of
policies concerning the integration of immigrants. According to some literature (Kymlicka, 2012),
Interculturalism is instrumentally used by key International Organizations, including a variety of
UN agencies and the EU, because Multiculturalism, considered as a framework of integration poli-
cies, has been recently blamed by both practitioners and scholars for the lack of immigrants’inte-
gration (Lentin and Titley, 2011; Silj 2010). In addition, Multiculturalism has also been accused of
being responsible for the escalation of terrorism (Phillips, 2006). Europe has been one of the most
affected regions for both phenomena (Silj, 2010; Vertovec and Wessendorf, 2010). This article
analyses the situation in European countries to challenge current interpretations of both phenomena,
* United Nations University, Barcelona
doi: 10.1111/imig.12262
©2017 The Author
International Migration ©2017 IOM
International Migration Vol. 55 (2) 2017
ISSN 0020-7985Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
mainly by investigating whether or not Interculturalism can positively affect the formation of atti-
tudes towards immigrants and thus reduce prejudice. Even in times of economic crisis, according
to the approach illustrated in this work, holding intercultural values would make individuals less
prejudiced towards immigrants, despite current hardship and the role that economic vulnerabilities
could play. This article also aims to show that the presence of immigrants, particularly if they
reside in the country long enough to integrate successfully, can be beneficial for the formation of
positive attitudes towards those perceived as outsiders. This would dispute current frameworks aim-
ing to encourage return migration, proposed as the best way of managing migration during the eco-
nomic crisis (Beets and Willekens, 2009), by suggesting that they do not improve the relations
between members of host societies and communities of newcomers.
The paradigm of Interculturalism is currently presented as a new tool to both better integrate
immigrants in host societies and to frame relationships between communities and groups of differ-
ent cultural backgrounds in more positive ways (Meer and Modood, 2012). For the way it is con-
ceived, Interculturalism not only promises migrants they can live comfortably side by side with
established residents, but also includes a vision of improved dialogue and relationships between dif-
ferent cultural groups (Meer and Modood, 2012). Prejudice, however, can compromise both dia-
logue and peaceful relationships between groups. For this reason, prejudice and attitudes towards
immigrants in general, and in Europe in particular, are key issues in this concern.
Interculturalism and the related concept of “Intercultural Dialogue”have developed only in
recent years. Perhaps for this reason, at least until now, these notions have been explored far less
than other similar terms, such as the one of Multiculturalism (Meer and Modood, 2012; Sze and
Powell, 2004; Wood et al., 2006). Meer and Modood (2012) claim that there are four domains in
which Interculturalism has been distinguished from other similar notions, and particularly from
Multiculturalism, as: 1) it concerns something greater than coexistence, such as dialogue and
interactions; 2) “Interculturalism is conceived as something less ‘groupist’or more yielding of
synthesis than Multiculturalism”(Meer and Modood, 2012: 177); 3) it is bound to a more robust
sense of collective interests, such as societal cohesion and national citizenship; 4) “where Multi-
culturalism may be illiberal and relativistic, Interculturalism is more likely to lead to criticism of
illiberal cultural practices (as part of the process of intercultural dialogue)”(Meer and Modood,
2012: 177). According to the two authors, even if it is possible to understand Interculturalism as
a distinct concept, it remains complementary to Multiculturalism whereas Wood et al., (2006)
consider that Interculturalism can be differentiated from Multiculturalism by the key role that
communication plays.
This article adopts the approach of Sze and Powell (2004), who claim: “Multiculturalism tends to
preserve a cultural heritage, while Interculturalism acknowledges and enables cultures to have cur-
rency, to be exchanged, to circulate, to be modified and evolve”(Sze and Powell, 2004: 8).
According to them, Interculturalism can, indeed, be differentiated from Multiculturalism because
the latter is a framework in which immigrants are considered to be “digestible”by the host society
through aseptic operations, which aim at the cohabitation of groups without establishing particular
contacts and cultural exchange amongst them (Sze and Powell, 2004; Wilson-Forsberg, 2013).
Although it has been acknowledged that Multiculturalism has never existed as a single normative
model nor been applied in coherent forms on the ground (Silj, 2010), it has still been reproached
for lack of immigrants’integration. It is considered to produce a type of co-living that does not
involve exchange, beyond the sporadic case of trade transactions, for example when an established
resident goes to an “ethnic”restaurant or buys something in a shop whose owner is someone per-
ceived as a “foreigner”(Lentin and Titley, 2011; Wilson-Forsberg, 2013). However, Kesler and
Bloemraad (2010), in an article addressing the effects of immigration on social capital and trust,
show that in those countries which are more multicultural, immigration does not entail negative
outcomes on trust and engagement but even can positively affects them.
24 Bello
©2017 The Author. International Migration ©2017 IOM
To continue reading
Request your trial