Reframing ‘integration’: Acknowledging and addressing five core critiques

Empirical and theoretical insights from the rich body of research on ‘integration’ in migration studies have led to increasing recognition of its complexity. Among European scholars, however, there remains no consensus on how integration should be defined nor what the processes entail. Integration h...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Spencer, S, Charsley, K
Format: Journal article
Language:English
Published: Springer 2021
_version_ 1797104662991601664
author Spencer, S
Charsley, K
author_facet Spencer, S
Charsley, K
author_sort Spencer, S
collection OXFORD
description Empirical and theoretical insights from the rich body of research on ‘integration’ in migration studies have led to increasing recognition of its complexity. Among European scholars, however, there remains no consensus on how integration should be defined nor what the processes entail. Integration has, moreover, been the subject of powerful academic critiques, some decrying any further use of the concept. In this paper we argue that it is both necessary and possible to address each of the five core critiques on which recent criticism has focused: normativity; negative objectification of migrants as ‘other’; outdated imaginary of society; methodological nationalism; and a narrow focus on migrants in the factors shaping integration processes. We provide a definition of integration, and a revised heuristic model of integration processes and the ‘effectors’ that have been shown to shape them, as a contribution to a constructive debate on the ways in which these challenges for empirical research can be overcome.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T06:36:46Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:f7ec615b-4fb3-4413-93ef-5ad573090c3c
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-07T06:36:46Z
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:f7ec615b-4fb3-4413-93ef-5ad573090c3c2022-03-27T12:46:21ZReframing ‘integration’: Acknowledging and addressing five core critiquesJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:f7ec615b-4fb3-4413-93ef-5ad573090c3cEnglishSymplectic ElementsSpringer2021Spencer, SCharsley, KEmpirical and theoretical insights from the rich body of research on ‘integration’ in migration studies have led to increasing recognition of its complexity. Among European scholars, however, there remains no consensus on how integration should be defined nor what the processes entail. Integration has, moreover, been the subject of powerful academic critiques, some decrying any further use of the concept. In this paper we argue that it is both necessary and possible to address each of the five core critiques on which recent criticism has focused: normativity; negative objectification of migrants as ‘other’; outdated imaginary of society; methodological nationalism; and a narrow focus on migrants in the factors shaping integration processes. We provide a definition of integration, and a revised heuristic model of integration processes and the ‘effectors’ that have been shown to shape them, as a contribution to a constructive debate on the ways in which these challenges for empirical research can be overcome.
spellingShingle Spencer, S
Charsley, K
Reframing ‘integration’: Acknowledging and addressing five core critiques
title Reframing ‘integration’: Acknowledging and addressing five core critiques
title_full Reframing ‘integration’: Acknowledging and addressing five core critiques
title_fullStr Reframing ‘integration’: Acknowledging and addressing five core critiques
title_full_unstemmed Reframing ‘integration’: Acknowledging and addressing five core critiques
title_short Reframing ‘integration’: Acknowledging and addressing five core critiques
title_sort reframing integration acknowledging and addressing five core critiques
work_keys_str_mv AT spencers reframingintegrationacknowledgingandaddressingfivecorecritiques
AT charsleyk reframingintegrationacknowledgingandaddressingfivecorecritiques