Intercultural Relations and Acculturation in the Pacific Region
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Intercultural Relations and Acculturation in the Pacific Region John W. Berry Queen’s University, Canada he Pacific region is one of the most culturally diverse areas of the world; societies within this region Tare also culturally diverse. For both these reasons, intercultural relations and acculturation phe- nomena are at the forefront of psychological interests there. This paper first situates these phenomena in their ecological and cultural contexts, in which human diversity and individual behaviour can be examined and understood as adaptations to these contexts. Then the notion of differentiation in psy- chological and sociocultural phenomena is discussed, linking them to the concept of social capital. The processes involved in acculturation and intercultural relations are then described, and linked to the concept of differentiation. The argument is presented (with an empirical example from research with immigrant youth) that the more differentiated are a person’s psychological life, as well as their social and cultural engagements, then the better adapted they are to living interculturally. Suggestions for policy and programme development and implementation are made: these include advancing the multicultural way of living together, and of accepting the need for mutual accommodation. Keywords: acculturation, assimilation, differentiation, integration, intercultural relations, marginalisation, multiculturalism, security, separation, social capital The Pacific region encompasses perhaps the most to culture (e.g., cross-cultural psychology; Berry, diverse set of cultures in the world. From indigenous Poortinga, Breugelmans, Chasiotis, & Sam, 2010; and peoples in East Asia and the Pacific islands, through to indigenous psychology; Allwood & Berry, 2006; Kim & those in the Western hemisphere, and from largely Berry, 1993), and to applications of psychology to European-derived settler societies in Australia and societal development and wellbeing (e.g., Berry, New Zealand to those in North and South America, Mishra, & Tripathi, 2002) and acculturation (e.g., Sam cultural variation represents virtually all forms of cul- & Berry, 2006). tural adaptations and achievements. Hunting, While working with indigenous peoples, I became gathering fishing, agricultural, industrial and post- concerned with the largely negative impact on them of industrial societies live and thrive in juxtaposition. intercultural contact and the resultant acculturation. This variation lays the foundation for historical and The themes of psychological differentiation, intercul- contemporary human development, intercultural tural relations and acculturation have since become contact, intercultural relations and mutual accultura- entwined in my research work and in applications to tion in complex ways. policy and program development in many kinds of cul- Although I am writing from a Canadian perspec- tural communities. tive, my own involvement with this vast region has In this article, the following core ideas are reviewed: extended from the mid-1960s, while working on many features of culture are considered to be adaptive to the diverse issues in Australia and New Guinea (on issues ecosystem in which they evolve; individuals develop of cognitive differentiation and acculturation; Berry, and display behaviours that are adaptive to these eco- 1976), to projects in Indonesia (on community-based cultural contexts; and contact between groups and rehabilitation; Dalal, Pande & Berry, 2000) and to individuals that carry these cultures and behaviours South East Asia and China (on mutual intercultural into the intercultural settings result in the processes of relations; Leong & Berry, 2010). Much of this work has change that can be understood in terms of intercultural been concerned with basic psychological issues related and acculturation strategies and outcomes. Address for correspondence: John W. Berry, Queen’s University, 154 Albert St, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6. E-mail: [email protected] JOURNAL OF PACIFIC RIM PSYCHOLOGY Volume 4, Issue 2 pp. 95–102 95 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.40.40, on 02 Oct 2021 at 06:54:45, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1375/prp.4.2.95 John W. Berry Ecocultural Approach extent and style of expression of these shared underlying processes. As we have noted, this combination of under- The ecocultural approach (Berry, 2003) seems to be lying similarity with surface expressive variation has ready made for understanding the cultural and behav- been given the name ‘universal’ by Berry et al. (2010) to ioural phenomena to be found in this region. Over the distinguish it both from ‘absolutism’, which tends to years, an attempt has been made to incorporate many ignore cultural influence on behavioural development ideas and issues into a working framework for cross-cul- and expression, and from ‘relativism’, which tends to tural psychological research (Berry, 1966, 1976; Berry et ignore the existence of common underlying psychologi- al., 1986; Mishra, Sinha & Berry, 1996). The ecocultural cal processes. Of course, while variations in behavioural framework is a kind of map that lays out the categories of expression can be directly observed, underlying com- variables that need to be examined in studies seeking to monalities are a theoretical construction and cannot be understand human behavioural diversity, both in their observed directly. Paradoxically, this search for our local contexts and comparatively. This ecocultural per- spective has evolved through a series of research studies common humanity can only be pursued by observing devoted to understanding similarities and differences in our diversity. And this dual task is the essence of cross- perception, cognition and social behaviour (Berry, 1976; cultural psychology (Berry, 1969, 2000). Berry et al., 1986; Mishra, Sinha, & Berry, 1996) to a The current version of the ecocultural framework broad approach to understanding human diversity. The (Berry, 2011; Berry et al., 2010) proposes to account for core ideas have a long history (Jahoda, 1995), and have human psychological diversity (both individual and become assembled into conceptual frameworks (Berry, group similarities and differences) by taking into 1975, 1995) used in empirical research, and in coordi- account two fundamental sources of influence (ecologi- nating textbooks in cross-cultural psychology (Berry et cal and sociopolitical), and two features of human al., 2010). Similar ideas and frameworks have been populations that are adapted to them: cultural and bio- advanced both by anthropologists (e.g., Feldman, 1975; logical characteristics. These population variables are Whiting, 1974) and psychologists (e.g., Bronfenbrenner, transmitted to individuals by various ‘transmission vari- 1979), who share the view that human activity can only be ables’, such as cultural transmission (enculturation, understood within the context in which it develops and socialisation), genetics, and acculturation. Our under- takes place. standing of both cultural and genetic transmission have The ecocultural perspective is rooted in two basic been greatly advanced by recent work on culture learn- assumptions. The first (the ‘universalist’ assumption) is ing and on the human genome project. The essence of that all human societies exhibit commonalities, both both these domains is the fundamental similarity of all cultural (‘cultural universals’) and psychological. This human beings (at a deep level), combined with variation perspective holds that basic psychological processes are in the expression of these shared attributes (at the shared, species-common characteristics of all human surface level). beings on which culture plays variations during the Finally, the sociopolitical context brings about course of development and daily activity. The second is contact among cultures, so that individuals have to the ‘adaptation’ assumption: behaviour is considered to adapt to more than one context. When many cultural be differentially developed and expressed in response to contexts are involved (as in situations of culture contact ecological, sociopolitical and cultural contexts. This view and acculturation), psychological phenomena can be allows for comparisons across cultures (on the basis of the viewed as attempts to deal simultaneously with two common underlying process), and makes comparison (sometimes inconsistent, sometimes conflicting) cultural worthwhile (using the surface variation as basic evidence). contexts (Berry, 2005). These attempts at understanding In the social sciences, such as cultural anthropology people in their multiple contexts is an important alter- (e.g., Murdock, 1975) or sociology (e.g., Aberle, Cohen, native to the more usual pathologising of colonised or Davis, & Sutton, 1950), there is substantial evidence that immigrant cultures and peoples. Of course, these inter- groups everywhere possess shared cultural and social cultural settings need to be approached with the same attributes. For example, all peoples have language, tools, non-ethnocentric perspective as cross-cultural ones social structures (e.g., norms, roles) and social institu- (Berry, 1985). Work on the process and outcomes of tions (e.g., marriage, justice). It is also evident that such acculturation has also been advancing (e.g., Sam & commonalities are expressed by groups in different ways Berry, 2006), necessitated by the dramatic increase in