Successful collaboration begins with a shared language, hence the need for a glossary. This joint effort of contributors from several teams ensures, on the one hand, terminological and conceptual coherence across not only our theoretical approaches, but also the qualitative case studies and quantitative research conducted in OPPORTUNITIES. On the other hand, our glossary facilitates communication between the academic side of the project and the fieldwork conducted by NGOs, uniting our teams working from Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Ghana, Italy, Mauritania, the Netherlands, Portugal, Romania and Senegal.

For more information about the Structure and Objectives of the Glossary, click here...)

Without the use of any modifier, integration is a mode of migrant incorporation which requires migrants’ adherence to the legal and political framework of the host community and their identification with the common culture of citizenship. Ethnic and/or cultural differences are relegated to the private realm. It differs from assimilation in that migrants are not required to renounce their particular national, ethnic, religious or cultural identities and to conform to the culture of the majority community in order to belong. Given that both assimilation and integration focus on the individual, they do not facilitate the recognition of groups and the importance of diversity and cultural pluralism in society. Accordingly, integration policies, and the demands made by states for (better) integration of migrants, often fall short of treating migrants as full members of, and equal participants, in the community.

⇢ see also inclusion

References and further reading:

  • Castles, Stephen and Alastair Davidson. 2000. Citizenship and Migration: Globalisation and the Politics of Belonging. Basingstoke: Macmillan Press.
  • Kostakopoulou, Dora. 2010. “The Anatomy of Civic Integration.” Modern Law Review 7.36: 933–958
  • Kostakopoulou, Dora. 2002. “Integrating’ Non-EU Migrants in the European Union: Ambivalent Legacies and Mutating Paradigms.” Columbia Journal of European Law 8.2: 1–21.

Category: A

Work Package: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8