Diversity, Cultural Rights, and Potential Conflict
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE Multiculturalism in the Age of Immigration: Diversity, Cultural Rights, and Potential Conflict A Dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology by Ronald C. Kwon June 2018 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Matthew C. Mahutga, Chairperson Dr. Augustine J. Kposowa Dr. David Brady Dr. Sharon S. Oselin Copyright by Ronald C. Kwon 2018 The Dissertation of Ronald C. Kwon is approved: Committee Chairperson University of California, Riverside Acknowledgements I thank my chair, Matthew Mahutga. Matthew has been one of my strongest supporters during this process and challenges me to push my analyses and theoretical explanations. I would also like to thank my other committee members. David is brilliant at framing papers and I hope I have learned some of these lessons in my work. Sharon and Augustine have been encouraging through the completion of the dissertation and they are two people I look up to in the discipline. The text of this dissertation, in part or in full, is a reprint of the material as it appears the International Journal of Comparative Sociology [Ronald Kwon and Michaela Curran 2016]. The co-author (Michaela Curran) listed in that publication provided data, formatted tables, and provided a brief explanation of country-level measures. The text of this dissertation, in part or in full, is a reprint of the material as it appears the Journal of International Migration and Integration [Ronald Kwon, Brigitte Flores, and Haydee Yonamine 2018]. The co-authors (Brigitte Flores and Haydee Yonamine) listed in that publication calculated the index of dissimilarity for half the counties. iv The text of this dissertation, in part or in full, is a reprint of the material as it appears Ethnicities [Ronald Kwon and Elizabeth Hughes 2018]. The co-author (Elizabeth Hughes) listed in that publication provided a brief explanation of measures. The reprint of the material as it appears the Journal of International Migration and Integration [Ronald Kwon, Brigitte Flores, and Haydee Yonamine 2018] was funded by the Blum Initiative Grant 1-R02-D01354-031516. v ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Multiculturalism in the Age of Immigration: Diversity, Cultural Rights, and Potential Conflict by Ronald C. Kwon Doctor of Philosophy, Graduate Program in Sociology University of California, Riverside, June 2018 Dr. Matthew C. Mahutga, Chairperson In this dissertation, I examine the role of multicultural policies and how they intersect in three salient areas of support for social policy, residential segregation, and attitudes towards homosexuality. Multiculturalist policies emphasize cultural accommodation for immigrants through legal protections and can often take the form of constitutional recognition, dual citizenship, and multilingual education in schools for immigrant groups. Multiculturalism promises to facilitate integration and expand social boundaries to increasingly recognize immigrants as an important component of the national citizenry. However, the literature is far from clear about its effects. Indeed, it is incredibly contentious. Critics argue that multicultural policies encourage integration into ethnic over mainstream institutions. In turn, such policies have important effects for both natives and immigrant groups. Critics suggest that immigrants would not assimilate, live parallel vi lives, and experience sharp cultural divisions from mainstream values. For natives, critics argue multicultural policies reify ethnic boundaries, and thereby reduce support for social policies. These concerns are particularly important in age where discourses of welfare retrenchment are highly visible. Proponents strongly disagree. An opposing scholarship suggests that multiculturalist policies improve integration outcomes and promote a largely positive message of the impact of immigration for host societies. In turn, not only would multicultural policies facilitate integration, but also reduce the boundaries of “otherness” that immigrants face in host societies. There are strikingly few empirical studies that adjudicate between these two camps. This is unfortunate given the enormous space immigration occupies within modern political discourse. Overall, there remains mixed findings with multicultural policies increasing support for social policy but having little impact for residential segregation and attitudes towards homosexuality for immigrant groups. However, the findings are incongruent with narratives that suggest that multiculturalist policies facilitate negative social consequences. vii Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction …………………………………………………………... 1 References…………………………………………………………………… 6 Chapter 2 Summary…………………………………………………………………….. 9 Introduction………………………………………………………………….. 10 Welfare chauvinism, immigration, and native support for social policy……. 13 Multiculturalism and the immigration-redistribution link………..…………. 16 Data and methods …………………………………………………………… 22 Analytic strategy…………………………………………………………….. 27 Results………………………………………………………………………...31 Discussion and conclusion……………………………………………………43 References…………………………………………………………………….46 Chapter 3 Summary…………………………………………………………………….. 53 Introduction………………………………………………………………….. 54 What explains the spatial mobility of immigrants?……..……………..……. 57 Theories of residential segregation and multiculturalist policies…………… 61 Data and methods …………………………………………………………... 64 Results………………………………………………………………………..70 Discussion and conclusion………………………………………………….. 77 References……………………………………………………………………82 viii Chapter 4 Summary……………………………………………………………………. 89 Introduction…………………………………………………………………..90 The civic-multiculturalist trade-off…………………………………….…….93 Multicultural policies and their implications for immigrant attitudes toward homosexuality………..……………………………………………... 96 Data and methods …………………………………………………………..105 Analytic strategy……………………………………………………………113 Results………………………………………………………………………115 Discussion and conclusion………………………………………………….132 References…………………………………………………………………. 136 Chapter 5: Conclusion....………………………………………………………….145 References…………………………………………………………………. 150 ix List of Figures Figure 2.1.…………………………………………………………………….. 32 Figure 2.2.…………………………………………………………………….. 40 Figure 2.3.…………………………………………………………………….. 42 Figure 3.1.…………………………………………………………………….. 77 Figure 4.1.…………………………………………………………………….100 Figure 4.2.…………………………………………………………………….103 Figure 4.3.…………………………………………………………………….108 Figure 4.4.…………………………………………………………………….116 Figure 4.5.…………………………………………………………………….120 Figure 4.6.…………………………………………………………………….124 x List of Tables Table 2.1..…………………………………………………………………….. 28 Table 2.2..…………………………………………………………………….. 35 Table 2.3..…………………………………………………………………….. 37 Table 3.1..…………………………………………………………………….. 69 Table 3.2..…………………………………………………………………….. 71 Table 3.3..…………………………………………………………………….. 71 Table 3.4..…………………………………………………………………….. 73 Table 3.5..…………………………………………………………………….. 75 Table 4.1..…………………………………………………………………….114 Table 4.2..…………………………………………………………………….118 Table 4.3..…………………………………………………………………….122 Table 4.4..…………………………………………………………………….126 Table 4.5..…………………………………………………………………….129 Table 4.6..…………………………………………………………………….131 Table 4.7..…………………………………………………………………….135 xi Chapter 1: Introduction The turn of the twenty-first century may be one increasingly shaped by the divisions over immigration. Nativity gaps in employment, educational attainment, and instances of social unrest involving large numbers of first and second-generation immigrants in the United Kingdom and France have rekindled debates over immigrant integration. The controversy surrounding immigration continues to generate lingering questions over access, inclusion, and the in/ability of the state to foster a strong sense of national identity in the face of rising immigration, shifts in migration patterns away from European countries, and relative declines in the skills of incoming immigrants in comparison to past periods of mass migration (Borjas 1995; Waldinger and Lichter 2003; Vertovec 2007). Profound changes in immigration dynamics to rich democracies (Vertovec 2007), coincided with new policy scripts aimed to facilitate immigrant integration were in their early stages of development and implementation (Banting and Kymlicka 2006; Koopmans 2013). Rich democracies have historically devoted little time, energy, and policy directives to facilitate immigrant incorporation. Rather, host societies largely assumed integration would to a certain degree, inevitably unfold over time (Alba and Nee 2009; Banting and Kymlicka 2006; Gordon 1964). Today, nearly all affluent democracies institute some form of integration or civic policy with the explicit goal of expediting positive integration outcomes (Banting and Kymlicka 2006; Goodman 2015; Goodman and Wright 2015; Koopmans 2013; Mouritsen 2013). 1 Across rich democracies, immigrant integration has become a hot button issue within affluent democracies. Wide variation in immigrant outcomes stimulated two broad perspectives centered on the human and social capital immigrants bring to bear on the labor market (Borjas 1995; Chiswick and Miller 2002; Nee and Sanders 2001), as well as the context of reception to explain integration gaps (Portes and Rumbaut 2001; Portes and Zhou 1993; Zhou 1997). First, human capital and classical assimilation theories implicate educational attainment and acculturation as important predictors of successful economic integration. Over time, immigrants are better able to parlay or acquire human capital within