International migration implies the coexistence of different ethnic and cultural groups in the receiving country. The refugee crisis of 2015 has resulted in critical levels of opinion polarization on the question of whether to welcome migrants, causing clashes in receiving countries. This scenario emphasizes the need to better understand the dynamics of mutual adaptation between locals and migrants, and the conditions that favor successful integration. Agent-based simulations can help achieve this goal. In this work, we introduce our model MigrAgent and our preliminary results. The model synthesizes the dynamics of migration intake and post-migration adaptation. It explores the different acculturation outcomes that can emerge from the mutual adaptation of a migrant population and a local population depending on their degree of tolerance. With parameter sweeping, we detect how different acculturation strategies can coexist in a society and in different degrees among various subgroups. The results show higher polarization effects between a local population and a migrant population for fast intake conditions. When migrant intake is slow, transitory conditions between acculturation outcomes emerge for subgroups, e.g., from assimilation to integration for liberal migrants and from marginalization to separation for conservative migrants. Relative group sizes due to speed of intake cause counterintuitive scenarios, such as the separation of liberal locals. We qualitatively compare the processes of our model with the German portion sample of the survey Causes and Consequences of Socio-Cultural Integration Processes among New Immigrants in Europe (SCIP), finding preliminary confirmation of our assumptions and results.
International migration implies individuals or entire populations crossing international boundaries (International Organization for Migration [IOM], 2017). It is a complex phenomenon common in human history that connects people from different cultures and historical backgrounds. Understanding the consequences of international migration for receiving societies has become more important considering the increase in migration flows to Europe and other global destinations since 2015, namely due to the refugee crisis (European Commission [EC], 2015; Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2015). At the peak of the crisis, as reported by the European Commission (2015), the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees [UNHCR] confirmed that 1,015,078 migrants had reached Europe via the Mediterranean Sea in 2015. As Eurostat (2017) has reported, EU countries approved 307,650 asylum requests during 2015, and the number increased in 2016 to 672,890 requests accepted. In 2016, Germany approved 433,905 requests, while Sweden approved 66,585 and Italy 35,405. Although the peak of the refugee crisis is likely in the past (UNHCR, 2017), factors such as climate change might increase migration pressure in the future due to floods, droughts and associated conflicts. For example, Kelley, Mohtadi, Cane, Saeger and Kushnir (2015) have linked the conflict in Syria and the associated refugee crisis to unprecedented droughts in the region.
The consequences of such migration for receiving countries are evident. A survey by the Pew Research Center (Wike, Stokes & Simmons, 2016) has demonstrated opinion polarization in European countries due to the refugee crisis. For example, the discussions on Brexit focused on, among other topics, the sovereignty of the UK in the context of refugee acceptance. On the one hand, many Europeans consider refugees as unwilling to integrate and as representing a threat to the stability and economy of their nations (Wike et al., 2016). On the other hand, many support the urgent calls to open borders and accept refugees as a form of humanitarian aid (Wike et al., 2016). This internal chasm regarding the acceptance of migrants is more evident than at earlier stages of European history (OECD, 2015). Additionally, many asylum seekers who have been granted the status of humanitarian migrants are likely to settle in Europe in the long term. As social scientists, we are interested in the consequences of this scenario as regards the cohesion of the receiving societies and the integration of migrants.
Facing these issues requires one to consider the dynamics of acculturation in the context of continuous first-hand contact between members of different cultures (Redfield, Linton, & Herskovits, 1936). A prominent model in the field of acculturation studies is the fourfold model proposed by Berry (1984Berry ( , 2005)), which identifies acculturation as a mutually adaptive process between a local community and migrant minorities. It assumes that acculturation occurs at two levels: (1) a cultural-group level made up of norms and (2) a psychological-individual level concerning the individual experience of adaptation (Berry, 1984(Berry, , 2005)). The model is based on the orientations people adopt to face issues related to maintaining their own cultural identities and participating in the larger society. Four orientations emerge from the intersection of the two distinct dimensions:
• Integration: high maintenance of one’s own culture, frequent interactions with the other group
• Assimilation: low maintenance of one’s own culture, frequent interactions with the other group • Separation: high maintenance of one’s own culture, infrequent interactions with the other group • Marginalization: low maintenance of one’s own culture, infrequent interactions with the other group
The most recent elaborations of the model have associated societal ideologies with the different orientations (Berry, 2005(Berry, , 2017)). Integration is associated with multicultural societies and people able to navigate the features of different cultures. Assimilation entails melting pot policies and incorporation within the receiving society. Separation means segregation between ethnic groups, while marginalization is associated with exclusion. Regardless of the original focus on the orientations, Berry’s categories are universally recognized as a typological model describing the range of possibilities regarding how people situate themselves and participate in different cultural groups (Nguyen & Benet-Martinez, 2013).
Figure 1. Acculturation orientations and societal profiles. Adapted from Berry (2005) Many social science studies have explored what processes favor one strategy over another and how desired integration outcomes can be reached (Ward & Kus, 2012). The dynamics of acculturation are influenced by many factors. In this paper, we focus on the role of tolerance for both the receiving community and migrants. Apparentl
This content is AI-processed based on open access ArXiv data.
