权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Everyday integration: The Local Contexts, Practices, and Mobilities of Integration

日常整合：整合的当地背景、实践和流动性

基本信息

批准号：
ES/S009582/1
负责人：
Jon Fox
金额：
$ 97.92万
依托单位：
University of Bristol
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Research Grant
财政年份：
2019
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2019 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES%2FS009582%2F1
关键词：
Everyday integration Local Contexts Practices

项目摘要

The recent Casey Review (2016) and Integrated Communities Strategy Green Paper (2018) have revived integration as a national policy priority. The problem these strategies address is the perceived lack of integration of immigrants and ethnic minorities. The fix they propose combines English Language provision and the promotion of 'fundamental British values' with curbs on immigration and interventions to address what are viewed as harmful cultural practices. Whilst most will agree that integration is desirable, there are different views on what integration is and how best to achieve it. Our approach is distinctive in at least three ways.First, we view integration as a process involving everyone, not just immigrants and ethnic minorities. The drawback of approaches that single out certain populations as 'unintegrated' is that they relieve other, 'integrated' populations of responsibility for integration. Integration, we argue, can only work if it involves everyone, where everyone shares its responsibilities and benefits.Second, we view integration as beginning in the situated practices and local contexts of everyday life. The drawback of approaches that stress fundamental national values is they trade in abstractions that may have little bearing on people's day-to-day concerns. Integration, we argue, should be pursued and achieved through social intercourse grounded in everyday life, not (only) through the promotion of abstract national values.Third, we view integration as a bottom-up phenomenon, where the aim of policy should be to capture and encourage existing best practices whilst simultaneously attenuating local barriers to integration. The drawback of approaches pitched at the national level is they are less sensitive to variation in local context. Integration, we argue, must begin with and attend to the specificities of local context.Our Everyday Integration approach reclaims and retools integration for academic and policy purposes.Our approach represents a step change in the scholarship on integration. Integration has been criticised for its assimilationist undertones and lack of conceptual clarity, leading some to abandon it in favour of cognate concepts such as incorporation or inclusion. Given integration's continued policy relevance, however, our aim instead is to redefine and reclaim it in ways that identify and then remedy its earlier shortcomings. We begin with integration as an assortment of locally grounded everyday practices and mobilities that facilitate meaningful and constructive social exchange. We will develop this approach as our main scholarly intervention to integration.Our approach is designed to achieve maximum impact for the everyday users and agents of integration. Integration is not just a matter of fostering good relations between citizens and migrants in national contexts. Rather, integration occurs through the grounded practices, exchanges, and mobilities of everyday life in local contexts. Our policy interventions are designed to capture and facilitate existing good practices whilst simultaneously addressing remaining barriers to integration. Working with the Mayor of Bristol, the Bristol City Council, and a wide range of City and Community Partners, we will use our research findings to co-produce and implement an Integration Strategy for Bristol. We will then distil the insights from our research and Strategy to formulate an Integration Toolkit that can be flexibly adapted for other urban contexts across Britain.Rather than simply seeing the lack of integration as a problem, we contend that a focus on the ways in which different groups of mobile and settled residents of the city already experience and practice integration - that is, the people who are its everyday architects and agents - can provide insights and creative approaches for scholars and policymakers seeking to understand and foster integration.

最近的《凯西评论》（2016年）和《综合社区战略绿色文件》（2018年）将融合重新列为国家政策优先事项。这些战略所针对的问题是移民和少数民族被认为缺乏融合。他们提出的解决方案将英语语言规定和促进“英国基本价值观”与限制移民和干预措施相结合，以解决被视为有害的文化习俗。虽然大多数人都同意融合是可取的，但对于什么是融合，以及如何最有效地实现融合，却有不同的看法。我们的做法至少在三个方面与众不同：第一，我们认为融合是一个人人参与的过程，而不仅仅是移民和少数族裔人士。将某些群体单独列为“未融合”群体的做法的缺点是，它们解除了其他“融合”群体的融合责任。我们认为，只有让每个人都参与进来，每个人都分担责任，分享利益，一体化才能奏效。第二，我们认为一体化始于日常生活的情境实践和当地环境。强调基本国家价值的方法的缺点是，它们在抽象中交易，可能对人们的日常关注没有什么影响。整合，我们认为，应该追求和实现通过社会交往扎根于日常生活中，而不是（仅）通过促进抽象的国家value.Third，我们认为一体化作为一个自下而上的现象，政策的目的应该是捕捉和鼓励现有的最佳做法，同时削弱当地的障碍融合。在国家一级采取的办法的缺点是，它们对当地情况的变化不太敏感。我们认为，整合必须开始并关注当地环境的特殊性。我们的日常整合方法回收并重新整合学术和政策目的。我们的方法代表了整合奖学金的一步变化。一体化因其同化主义色彩和缺乏概念清晰度而受到批评，导致一些人放弃它，转而支持合并或包容等同源概念。然而，考虑到一体化的持续政策相关性，我们的目标是重新定义并重新利用它，以确定并纠正其早期的缺点。我们开始与融合作为一个品种的本地接地的日常做法和流动性，促进有意义的和建设性的社会交流。我们将把这种方法作为我们对集成的主要学术干预。我们的方法旨在为集成的日常用户和代理人实现最大的影响。融合不仅仅是在国家范围内促进公民和移徙者之间的良好关系。相反，融合是通过在当地环境中扎根的实践、交流和日常生活的流动来实现的。我们的政策干预旨在捕捉和促进现有的良好做法，同时解决剩余的一体化障碍。与布里斯托市长，布里斯托市理事会，以及广泛的城市和社区合作伙伴，我们将利用我们的研究成果，共同制作和实施布里斯托一体化战略。然后，我们将从我们的研究和战略的见解，制定一个整合工具包，可以灵活地适应其他城市的情况下，在英国。而不是简单地看到缺乏整合作为一个问题，我们认为，重点是如何不同群体的移动的和定居居民的城市已经经历和实践融合-也就是说，作为其日常建筑师和代理人的人们，可以为寻求理解和促进融合的学者和决策者提供见解和创造性方法。