Instead of ‘writing against’ and discarding ‘immigrants’ integration, why not reconceptualize integration as a wicked concept?
Abstract Over the years, some scholars have not only written against the concept of immigrant integration but have called for its rejection and abandonment. Critics argue that the concept is normative, objectifies others, mirrors outmoded imaginary of society, orients towards methodological national...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SpringerOpen
2023-04-01
|
| Series: | Comparative Migration Studies |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-023-00334-3 |
| _version_ | 1797841146083278848 |
|---|---|
| author | Senanu Kwasi Kutor Godwin Arku Elmond Bandauko |
| author_facet | Senanu Kwasi Kutor Godwin Arku Elmond Bandauko |
| author_sort | Senanu Kwasi Kutor |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Over the years, some scholars have not only written against the concept of immigrant integration but have called for its rejection and abandonment. Critics argue that the concept is normative, objectifies others, mirrors outmoded imaginary of society, orients towards methodological nationalism, and a narrow emphasis on immigrants in the forces defining integration progression. Nonetheless, the concept continues to receive academic and policy attention. Against the backdrop of this polarized view, this paper raises an important question relating to the benefit or otherwise of writing against the concept of integration in the field of integration studies. Specifically, the paper asks: Is it appropriate to write against and reject the concept of integration? The paper responds to this question from a provocative conceptual perspective. Here, the paper argues that when the concept is purged of its inherent criticisms and rather reconceptualize as a wicked concept, it still offers a unique analytical spectrum with which scholars can approach several substantive critical questions regarding immigrants’ integration. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-09T16:26:20Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-65e2fda711634bef9edf9511eaeb17fc |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2214-594X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-09T16:26:20Z |
| publishDate | 2023-04-01 |
| publisher | SpringerOpen |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Comparative Migration Studies |
| spelling | doaj.art-65e2fda711634bef9edf9511eaeb17fc2023-04-23T11:11:57ZengSpringerOpenComparative Migration Studies2214-594X2023-04-0111111610.1186/s40878-023-00334-3Instead of ‘writing against’ and discarding ‘immigrants’ integration, why not reconceptualize integration as a wicked concept?Senanu Kwasi Kutor0Godwin Arku1Elmond Bandauko2Department of Geography and Environment, University of Western OntarioDepartment of Geography and Environment, University of Western OntarioDepartment of Geography and Environment, University of Western OntarioAbstract Over the years, some scholars have not only written against the concept of immigrant integration but have called for its rejection and abandonment. Critics argue that the concept is normative, objectifies others, mirrors outmoded imaginary of society, orients towards methodological nationalism, and a narrow emphasis on immigrants in the forces defining integration progression. Nonetheless, the concept continues to receive academic and policy attention. Against the backdrop of this polarized view, this paper raises an important question relating to the benefit or otherwise of writing against the concept of integration in the field of integration studies. Specifically, the paper asks: Is it appropriate to write against and reject the concept of integration? The paper responds to this question from a provocative conceptual perspective. Here, the paper argues that when the concept is purged of its inherent criticisms and rather reconceptualize as a wicked concept, it still offers a unique analytical spectrum with which scholars can approach several substantive critical questions regarding immigrants’ integration.https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-023-00334-3ImmigrantIntegrationMethodological nationalismTransnationalismWicked concept |
| spellingShingle | Senanu Kwasi Kutor Godwin Arku Elmond Bandauko Instead of ‘writing against’ and discarding ‘immigrants’ integration, why not reconceptualize integration as a wicked concept? Comparative Migration Studies Immigrant Integration Methodological nationalism Transnationalism Wicked concept |
| title | Instead of ‘writing against’ and discarding ‘immigrants’ integration, why not reconceptualize integration as a wicked concept? |
| title_full | Instead of ‘writing against’ and discarding ‘immigrants’ integration, why not reconceptualize integration as a wicked concept? |
| title_fullStr | Instead of ‘writing against’ and discarding ‘immigrants’ integration, why not reconceptualize integration as a wicked concept? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Instead of ‘writing against’ and discarding ‘immigrants’ integration, why not reconceptualize integration as a wicked concept? |
| title_short | Instead of ‘writing against’ and discarding ‘immigrants’ integration, why not reconceptualize integration as a wicked concept? |
| title_sort | instead of writing against and discarding immigrants integration why not reconceptualize integration as a wicked concept |
| topic | Immigrant Integration Methodological nationalism Transnationalism Wicked concept |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-023-00334-3 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT senanukwasikutor insteadofwritingagainstanddiscardingimmigrantsintegrationwhynotreconceptualizeintegrationasawickedconcept AT godwinarku insteadofwritingagainstanddiscardingimmigrantsintegrationwhynotreconceptualizeintegrationasawickedconcept AT elmondbandauko insteadofwritingagainstanddiscardingimmigrantsintegrationwhynotreconceptualizeintegrationasawickedconcept |