Neighborhood Integration: Cross-National Comparisons of Refugee Segregation

• In Event: The Refugee Crisis from Both Sides: Attitudes towards and of Syrian Refugees

Abstract

Cities in the global south have experienced influxes of refugees in recent decades, contributing to a rise in residential segregation by ethnic identity. The aim of this study is to answer: what factors drive the formation of “ethnic enclaves”? Housing is often an arena in which host/migrant interactions play out. Host populations might be generally accepting of migrants or refugees in the abstract, but not accepting of them into their neighborhoods. These reactions can have large consequences for the welfare of migrants, as where one lives often shapes so many other aspects of life. Where migrants are locked into enclaves by negative reactions of hosts, quality of life is affected.

While much of the empirical work on migrant integration is singularly focused on reactions of host population members, integration is about more than just the reaction of the host. It also pertains to the perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors of refugees themselves. Migrants make numerous decisions about how and when to integrate into host communities or to remain segregated within ethnic enclaves. In this project, we interrogate attitudes towards and perceptions of local level integration among both hosts and migrants through the lens of the housing market.

Studying preferences over where to live offers a chance to study simultaneous host and migrant perspectives. Which migrants/host-community citizens prefer to live in migrant/host-community enclaves? Do variations in socio-economic characteristics of a neighborhood counterbalance these prejudices? And finally, what factors affect whether host population members or migrants accept or reject interactions with one other?

To investigate these questions, we embed conjoint experiments within a larger survey mapping socio-economic differentiations of ± 5000 Syrians paired with ± 5000 host-population members spread in the secondary cities of Irbid, Jordan and Adana, Turkey. We expect to find that respondents will most prefer areas dominated by their own group and ethnically diverse areas over those dominated by an outgroup. They will also tolerate gaps in service provision and increased insecurity dominated by their identity ingroup because it is perceived as less threatening and less indiscriminate. Furthermore, the positive effects of social capital will be higher in areas dominated by the respondent’s identity ingroup. Finally, we expect that shared national identity will matter more than shared religious background.

Authors

• Karen E. Ferree, University of California, San Diego

• Kristen Kao, University of Gothenburg