Integration or Isolation? Refugees’ Social Connections and Wellbeing
Integration or Isolation? Refugees’ Social Connections and Wellbeing
复制标题
难民的社会联系和福祉是融合还是孤立？
作者：
A. Strang;N. Quinn
融合指标框架-界定难民融合核心领域的概念框架-对围绕难民融合的讨论产生了重大影响，并在形成政策、实践和学术辩论方面发挥了重要作用。这项研究利用创新的参与性绘图方法，研究了来自伊朗和阿富汗的孤立单身难民男子（特别被边缘化）的社会联系及其对心理健康和福祉的影响。调查结果表明，与家人、当地朋友或当地服务机构的联系非常少，难以建立信任，建立互惠关系的机会很少。该条在若干方面对难民融入社会作出了重要贡献。它建议在融合指标框架内明确信任的作用，并将其列为融合的“促进者”。它挑战了普特南的简单的二元区别之间的债券和桥梁的关系，并提出了一个新的概念，债券和桥梁之间的连续体的基础上。它提供了理论创新，将互惠的概念与Hobfoll的资源保护模型结合在一起，为框架各领域的互动方式提供了新的见解。它的重要贡献是批评了普特南对社区团结理想化的依赖，并建议融合的概念化必须考虑到交叉但有区别的社区的影响。在政策和实践方面出现了两个关键的优先事项：使寻求庇护者和难民能够发展足够密切的联系关系，并找到更有效的方法，建立对相关资源和服务的了解和信任。
The Indicators of Integration framework—a conceptual framework defining core domains of refugee integration—has had a significant impact on the discourse surrounding refugee integration and a major role in shaping policy, practice and academic debate. Drawing on an innovative participatory mapping approach, this study examined the social connections of isolated single refugee men from Iran and Afghanistan (highlighted as particularly marginalized) and the implications for their mental health and wellbeing. Findings indicated very low levels of contact with family, local friends or local services, difficulties establishing trust and few opportunities for reciprocal relationships. The article makes an important contribution to the field of refugee integration in a number of ways. It suggests that the role of trust should be made explicit within the Indicators of Integration framework and be included as a ‘Facilitator’ of integration. It challenges Putnam’s simple binary distinction between bonding and bridging relationships and suggests a new conceptualization based on a continuum between bonds and bridges. It offers theoretical innovation by bringing together the concept of reciprocity with Hobfoll’s resource-conservation model to offer new insights into the way domains of the Framework interact. Its important contribution is in critiquing Putnam’s reliance on the idealization of community solidarity and suggesting conceptualizations of integration must be informed by the impact of intersecting but differentiated communities. Two key priorities emerge for policy and practice: enabling asylum seekers and refugees to develop sufficient close bonding relationships and finding more effective ways of building knowledge and trust of relevant resources and services.