Multiculturalism: Managing intercultural relations
This Handbook explores the multifaceted linkages between two of the most important socioeconomic phenomena of our time: globalisation and migration. Both are on the rise, increasing in size and scope worldwide, and this Handbook offers the necessary background knowledge and tools to understand how population flows shape, and are shaped by, economic and cultural globalisation. Through central themes which correspond to the four domains of human life – politics, economics (separated into trade and development, and the global division of labour), culture and family life – expert authors from five continents highlight the interdependence between migration and globalisation, and explore the mutual impact of economic, social and political globalisation on international population flows. They also investigate how migrants themselves become agents of the globalisation process. With accessible language that guides the reader easily through complex issues, this Handbook makes an ideal resource for undergraduate and graduate students, researchers and academics interested in migration, ethnicity, development, international relations and international economics.
In March 2011 scholars met in Prague at the conference Interculturalism, Meaning and Identity. This event revitalised this important theme related to Diversity and Recognition. The terms 'interculturalism' and 'integration' are experiencing a renaissance. As the extent of human movement between nations increases attempts are made to balance cultural difference and social cohesion. In some contexts immigration and settlement policies are becoming more draconian in response. Because of this, interculturalism can take on many meanings. However, pivotal to the way interculturalism is understood is identification. As the relationship between nation, ethnicity and language becomes more complex so too do the ways in which people represent them selves. The cultural resources drawn on and the processes used to form identities are examined in this truly international collection. So too are the implications of these developments for how we theorise culture, meaning and identity.
Some may claim that since multiculturalism has never been adopted as an official policy in Russia, the Russian case has no right to be presented in a cross-national book on multiculturalism. In this chapter I would like to show, however, that Russian historic experience of ethnic diversity management is unique and can be of great importance to a comparative analysis of multiculturalism. In addition, Russian society and Russian identity today are facing challenges similar to those found in other European – and Western – countries: economic and cultural globalization; massive migration; weakening of citizens’ exclusive attachment to one nation state; the danger of nationalism; and the rise of extremists. Russia may not have immigration-based multiculturalism if immigration is restricted to the movement of peoples between sovereign states. But it does have a growing multiculturalism based in internal migration across an extraordinarily diverse and expansive territory.
Background. We use Social Identity Theory as a theoretical framework, specifically focusing on strategies of identity management. The study is based on the following theoretical assumptions. First, identity management strategies might serve as mediators between different identity threats and behavioral patterns in intergroup relations. Second, identity management strategies help to make the shift from the individual to the group level of analysis, allowing us to take the consequences of intergroup behavior for a group entitativity into consideration. Third, identity management strategies strongly depend on the social context of intergroup relations. Objective. In the current study, we look into the relationships between identity management strategies of the ethnic Russian majority and their attitudes towards multiculturalism to identify whether certain strategies are helpful or harmful for the acceptance of multiculturalism in Russia. Design. We use Russia vs. the West comparison to evoke the perception of identity threat. We measure strategies of identity management based on this comparison, as well as attitudes towards multiculturalism in a survey of 307 Russian participants. Results. The findings suggest that identity management strategies are indeed related to attitudes towards cultural diversity and equality in Russia, as well as to acculturation expectations of whether minorities should adopt the mainstream Russian culture or keep their own. We find that strategies of individualization, individual mobility and assimilation have mostly negative consequences for acculturation expectations, as they all show patterns that support assimilation of minorities instead of integration. We also find support for the “scapegoat” hypothesis, showing that choosing the strategy of changing the comparison group results in more negative attitudes toward cultural diversity and equality for all in Russia. The strategies of social creativity (change of the categorization dimension, temporal comparison, comparison with a standard, etc.) seem to be irrelevant for attitudes towards multiculturalism. Conclusion. Our findings suggest that none of the strategies of identity management promote acceptance of multiculturalism. However, strategies of social creativity are the only ones that do not have negative consequences for support of multiculturalism. Theoretical and practical implications for multiculturalism policy adoption in Russia are discussed.
This article examines intercultural relations in Crimea - one of the multicultural regions of Russia. Our goal was to test three hypotheses in Crimea: the multiculturalism hypothesis, the integration hypothesis, and the contact hypothesis. The sample included members of the ethnic majority in Crimea, Russians (N = 195), and members of the ethnic minorities, Crimean Tatars (N = 197) and Ukrainians (N = 196). Data processing was carried out using path analysis. We additionally conducted 25 interviews with the members of three ethnic groups to deeper analyze the results of the quantitative study. The results showed partial support for the multiculturalism hypothesis: perceived security was linked with support for a multicultural ideology and integration among Russians and Ukrainians, and support for multicultural ideology among Crimean Tatars, however, there was no significant correlation with tolerance in the three samples. The contact hypothesis was partially confirmed: intercultural contacts predicted support for tolerance among Russians, preference for integration among Ukrainians, and both tolerance and integration among Crimean Tatars. Integration hypothesis was fully confirmed: preference for integration promotes well-being in three samples. However, the preference for separation promoted self-esteem among Crimean Tatars and life satisfaction among three ethnic groups. The results of the research are discussed from the perspective of the socio-cultural and historical context of interethnic relations in Crimea.
The initial issue that became the focus of this study is that it is impossible to directly transfer successful multicultural policy solutions found in one context, one state to another. Therefore, one of the possible answers to this problem can be investigating social psychological factors that either contribute to or interfere with the adoption of multiculturalism policy. Basing on the analysis of various works on this topic, we suggest that the key factors are the following: protection of identity; support of integration strategies and multicultural policies by the population; compliance with the rules of establishing intergroup contact, as within educational institutions, as within a wider context; development of multicultural identity. Evaluation of the impacts of these factors within the Russian context allows us to conclude that the conditions are more favourable for some of them and less favourable for others. Protection of identity, compliance with the rules of intergroup contact, and development of multicultural identity are the ones to cause the most concern, which means that two of the three key criteria of multicultural policy are not satisfied: activities aimed at accepting equal rights of various cultural groups and protection and support of their identities and cultural practices.