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.
Multiculturalism is an increasingly common characteristic of contemporary societies. In culturally diverse social contexts, virtually every person experiences intercultural contact on a daily basis. It is essential to understand that there must be both cultural diversity and equity in social participation for true multiculturalism to exist in these settings. Beyond its core definition, it is clear that multiculturalism is a complex concept encompassing many dimensions and meanings. First, the term is understood to describe a demographic fact, indicating the existence of cultural diversity in a society. Second, multiculturalism refers to the policies and programs that are in place to manage intercultural relations and acculturation. Third, multiculturalism refers to psychological phenomena, including individual attitudes and ideologies that accept or reject the demographic, civic and policy features of multiculturalism. This chapter considers Canadian multiculturalism policy, examining how the multiple meanings of multiculturalism vary around the world. Within this framework, I highlight the psychological processes and outcomes of multiculturalism, particularly in connection with acculturation, adaptation and intercultural relations and consider whether these processes and outcomes differ for dominant and non-dominant groups. I suggest some ways in which to enhance the positive outcomes of intercultural contact and the resultant acculturation outcomes. Finally, this chapter sets the stage for the presentation of the other chapters in this volume. It elaborates three hypotheses derived from Canadian multiculturalism policy: the multiculturalism, integration and contact hypotheses.
Orientation: This article addresses the role of multiculturalism in employee attitudes.
Research purpose: It proposes a model of positive features of multiculturalism in organisations and tests it in South Africa. The model postulates three levels in multiculturalism: antecedent conditions, such as multiculturalism practices and norms that define the diversity climate; mediators, such as diversity-enhancing employee attitudes; and positive work outcomes.
Motivation for the study: South Africans from diverse backgrounds hardly meet in their private spaces. Given this forced contact in the workplace and the calls for national unity and social cohesion, we propose that a workplace that is characterised by mutual respect, accommodation and tolerance for difference could have a positive impact on employee work attitudes.
Research approach/design and method: A quantitative approach was adopted using survey questionnaires that were distributed to employees selected on the basis of convenience sampling (N= 299) in various workplaces.
Main findings: A multi-group path analysis confirmed the validity of the model for the white, black and mixed race ethnic groups. Although the differences were negligible to medium, white groups seemed to experience a slightly more favourable multicultural environment compared to black and mixed race groups.
Practical/managerial implications: All dimension scores were well above the mid-point of the scale, which suggests that psychometrically speaking, the multicultural climate, ethnic integration orientations and employee attitudes are experienced by these employees as favourable.
Contribution/value-add: From a conceptual perspective, the model implies that the more distal variable of a multicultural climate influences employee attitudes through a set of more proximal integration attitudes and practices. From a practical perspective, an inclusive climate has more distal characteristics such as the general multiculturalism climate and more proximal characteristics such as ethnic vitality.
Employing a person-oriented approach to acculturation expectations held by Russian majority group members, we investigated the presence of groups of profiles and relationships between acculturation expectation profiles and intergroup attitudes. Applying latent profile analysis, we found three easy-to-interpret acculturation expectation profiles: biculturalism expectations, alternate-biculturalism expectations (with public—private domain differences in preference), and assimilation expectations. The subsequent comparative analysis showed that these profiles mainly differed in the extent of the desirability of maintenance of heritage culture, and adoption of the mainstream culture by immigrants only in private domains of life. The biculturalism expectation profile contained individuals who support the idea of a multicultural society. The alternate-biculturalism expectation profile contained individuals with slightly less emphasis on adoption of mainstream acculturation for immigrants, a distinction between preferences in the public and private domains of life, more focus on public domains, and less right-wing authoritarianism. The assimilation expectation profile contained individuals with a higher dangerous worldview and endorsement of discrimination, and lower support of a multicultural ideology, willingness to engage in intergroup contact, and desire of maintenance of heritage acculturation for immigrants. Our study demonstrated the value of a person-oriented approach in a population where subgroups differ in the domain dependence of their acculturation expectations.