Civic Participation of Migrant Women: Employing Strategies of Active Citizenship

Paradoxes of Integration: Female Migrants in Europe, Anthias, Floya, Kontos, Maria, Morokvasić, Mirjana

(eds.), Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 97-116

Civic Participation of Migrant Women:

Employing Strategies of Active Citizenship

Mojca Pajnik and Veronika Bajt

Introduction

Rethinking citizenship in the framework of migration, we tackle here the complex

interrelationship between the formal understandings of citizenship and the informal ways of

practicing civic participation as modes of ‘active citizenship’. The chapter aims to fill a gap in

research on civic participation of migrants in general and migrant women in particular.

Though cross-country comparative research has recently been employed to study migrants’

political participation in the European Union (cf. Vogel 2008, Niessen and Huddleston 2009),

there is a void in studying civic participation as a broader concept that can encompass the

multifarious forms of civic engagement of migrants. Understanding migratory practices

requires an understanding of citizenship that stretches beyond the mere legal and formally

prescribed conditions of status acquisition, particularly when faced with rigidly ethnic

conceptions of nationality. Prescribing various preconditions for gaining citizenship forces

migrants into a position where they do not have a role in the process. They cannot question,

but only fulfil the predetermined requirements related to the obtainment of residence and

work permits, passing of language tests, tests of history and constitution etc. These processes

often lead to the exclusion of migrants since they cannot be agents in the terms of playing a

role in determining the ways in which citizenship (as nationality status) is achieved.

Moreover, the migrants are not recognised as enacting citizenship by way of their various

civic participation practices.

Our analysis is based on biographical narratives of over 180 migrant women in eleven

European countries. By complementing a critical evaluation of existing migration and

integration policies, which formally enable or restrict migrant women’s civic participation

with the narratives of migrant women that reveal various practices of civic participation, a

basis is formed for developing a framework which goes beyond the dominant understanding

of citizenship as ‘passport citizenship’. We propose in this chapter that any form of activism

or involvement in political and/or community work, be it formal or informal, is considered as

relevant for analysing civic participation. This broader conceptualisation includes two layers

of analysis: on the one hand, the formal modes of participation, usually termed political

participation which relate to migrants’ political rights and political activity, but also, on the

other hand, the issue of informal networks, involving understanding the various coping

strategies that migrants employ in their everyday life. Using empirical material, we explore

this in terms of issues of identity, belongings, multiple memberships and transnational ties

(e.g. Balibar 2004, Anthias 2002, Yuval-Davis 2007, Isin 2002). Grasping citizenship in a

broader perspective than that given by the classical national, state-centred project (cf. Soysal

1994), we propose a conceptualisation of active citizenship which is based on a more

intensive connection of institutional policy with the non-institutional practices of migrants’

citizenship action. Critically engaging with conceptions of citizenship, this contribution thus

argues for a more inclusive perspective that allows for accommodation of transnational

realities of migrants.

2

We begin by analysing formal elements of civic participation, understood here as various

requirements migrants need to fulfil to be able to get access to provisions and rights. As

exhibited in migrants’ narratives, citizenship as a legal category plays an important part in

their life plans and prospects for integration. Acquiring citizenship is seen as bringing more

rights and increased social security. That this is an expectation which often fails to have actual

beneficial consequences in a migrant’s life is debated in the second part of the chapter, where

migrant women’s actual experiences of civic participation are discussed. Here, the focus is on

the informal ways of practicing civic participation as a form of active citizenship. The

analysis encompasses migrants’ self-organisation and their coping strategies that stem from

the narrative interviews complementing this with the role of the NGOs and activists’

movements in migrants’ actual experiences of civic participation in all their multifarious ways

and practices.1 The issue of concern is how migrant women in selected countries participate,

what their different participation practices are, what the different characteristics of the forms

of civic participation are and what obstacles for participation they face.

Formal understanding of civic participation

The acquisition of citizenship is still considered to be the most potent measure of integration

into a society; however, considerable differences exist between the states in their

naturalisation procedures (see Table 1). The carefully prescribed lists of various requirements

that the applicants need to fulfil make it difficult for migrants to acquire citizenship. More

importantly, it puts them in a receptive position of accepting the ‘rules of the game’ in the

hope of being granted citizenship. In addition, stipulations such as the one that requires

renouncing one’s primary citizenship represent an additional obstacle, exposing the double

standards that states apply when it comes to ‘their own’ citizens’ dual citizenship, to which

they concede in order not to lose their nationals to other states. Similarly, non-citizens are

automatically treated with greater suspicion and have to prove their loyalty to the state, e.g.

when it comes to establishing migrant associations, they need to prove that their activities are

not subversive or in opposition to the state’s ‘core values and norms’; several states are also

introducing citizenship tests where migrants are expected to score well and thus prove what

‘good citizens’ they would make. Emphasis on citizenship as a privilege can be observed,

putting a stress on core values regarded as the key to being ‘British’, ‘German’, ‘Slovene’ and

so on. As an example, the trajectory of proposals for requirements to be included in the

Germany’s citizenship test evolved from initial ‘moral inquisition and cultural nationalism’

(Joppke 2010: 127), even though the final decision for a federally standardised test stayed

clear of such proposals. At the same time, language and country-knowledge requirements in

the UK seek to enhance the significance of British citizenship, whereas France explicitly

defines French values (democracy, secularism etc.) through its Welcome and Reception

Contract (Goodman 2010: 766).

Limiting the attainment of citizenship

1 Interviews were also conducted with relevant stakeholders and key informants, as well as state officials and

administrative officers in order to encompass the question of migrants’ practices and experiences with civic

participation as widely as possible. The migrants’ narratives could thus be compared with explications of

practices by the state employees, activists, NGO representatives and other informants, whose work puts them in

frequent interaction with migrants.

3

Often the migrants perceive citizenship as an almost unattainable goal, the absence of which

would forever put them in second place compared to citizens, limiting their options and

hindering their self-realisation plans. Legal requirements represent a pivotal point in the life

of migrants who intend to apply for attainment of citizenship. It stems from the many

interviews that often migrants aspire to obtain citizenship (as nationality acquisition) only

because this would enable them more citizenship rights. This, however, is not to say all

migrants want to become citizens, but it points to the problematic of binding rights to

nationality. Whereas permanent residence permits often grant non-nationals many, if not all

social and political rights, citizenship remains the most important distinction between one’s

status as a ‘foreigner’ and as a ‘national’. All the eleven EU member states studied make

distinctions between their own nationals, EU citizens and ‘third-country’ migrants.

Requirements differ from state to state (see Table 1) while in the majority of cases, only

state’s ‘own’ citizens enjoy full political and civic rights. People, who are not citizens, have

little choice but to accept the restrictions placed upon their political and social rights.

Migrants thus have the option of abiding by the naturalisation processes that are usually long

and complicated in hope that this would put them on par with citizens. Migrants are required

to obtain a long list of documents, often spending significant time and money on securing

their official translations. In order to even become eligible for naturalisation, a set length of

stay is prescribed differently in each country, but mostly between 5 to 10 years. Among other

determining factors language proficiency is the most common, yet also proof of having no

criminal record. Refugees and asylum seekers with granted status are often exempt from most

stringent rules, and are subjected to specific conditions in terms of acquisition of citizenship.

Similar concessions go also to migrants who enter into marriage with a national of an EU

member state. Certain concessions, most often in the form of significant reduction in the

required length of years of legal residence, are often applied to persons who are deemed

important for national interests of the state, such as athletes, sports coaches, scientists, etc.

(i.e. extraordinary naturalisation policies). In addition, most EU states also offer preferential

access to citizenship to certain groups of people, e.g. co-ethnics.2

An important aspect of several states’ naturalisation policies is also the model of reciprocity.

For instance, in Spain nationals of Hispanic states are given a priority in terms of acquisition

of citizenship by reduced length of required residence in the country. The Portuguese

immigration policy also until recently awarded preferential treatment to the nationals of

Portuguese speaking countries; allowing for them looser conditions for entry, residence,

naturalisation, voting rights, etc. Drawing on colonial heritage and as an outcome of certain

historical relations between countries, this past history induces preferential treatment, which is

or is not then followed by current regimes of reciprocity.

The considerable differences in the states’ citizenship and naturalisation criteria and

procedures often reflect their distinct historical experiences and differing concepts of

nationhood and models of citizenship (cf. Fenton 1999, Smith 1998). The states’ policies also

differ in terms of how inclusive or exclusive they are towards their long-term residents. For

instance, in the 1950s France the waiting period to obtain a residence permit was the shortest

for Italians, followed by Spaniards and longest for Portuguese. In the 1970s, the European

2 The situation of Germany’s Aussiedler, i.e. co-ethnic repatriates from post-Soviet bloc countries is a case in

point, while examples of Greece and Cyprus also show that preferential treatment clauses may change with time

and depending on political climate. Like in Greece with preferential treatment of Pontic Greeks and recently also

Greek Albanians, also in Slovenia’s migration policy special provisions are taken for migrants of ‘Slovene ethnic

origin’.

4

Community residents became the most preferred, followed by the Portuguese, whereas the

Africans come at the end.3

In terms of granting citizenship, some states prioritise the so-called ius sanguinis principle of

an existing blood relationship with a citizen of the state (i.e. citizenship is based on ancestry),

whereas others stress the importance of the birthplace (the ius soli principle, i.e. the territorial

affiliation). There are also various combinations of the two principles, and the peculiarity of

the ius domicili principle, which pertains to rights based on residence (cf. Bauböck 2003,

Zlatković Winter 2001). France has traditionally exhibited the strongest elements of the ius

soli principle, whereas Germany, Greece and Italy have laws that base the acquisition of

citizenship predominantly on the ius sanguinis principle, though Germany has changed its

laws in favour of complementing the ancestral standard for awarding citizenship with the so-

called ius domicili principle.

In order to evaluate access to citizenship in different states, the ius domicili principle is a

useful addition to the two predominant legal concepts of either tying citizenship with ancestry

or with territory. Based on their social, economic and symbolic ties, the ius domicili principle

specifies the conditions that migrants have to fulfil when applying for citizenship. Most

commonly the criteria for the admission includes uninterrupted residence and some years of

work history, regular income, no criminal record, sufficient living space, and language

proficiency (Faist 2000: 273). Italy came close to introducing, together with the ius sanguinis

and the ius soli principles, the ius domicili principle in 2006. Yet with the 2008 change in

government, the future of the law proposal, which stipulated the right for those who have been

regularly residing in Italy for a consistent number of years to obtain complete civic rights,

regardless of their place of birth, remains unclear.

Table 1: Naturalization requirements by country Country Minimum residence Dual citizenship Minimum residence if

married with a citizen

Minimum

duration of

marriage

Cyprus

5 years

yes

--

3 years

France

5 years (reduced to 2

if the candidate has

French diplomas)

yes

4 years marriage

and continuous

cohabitation

if less than 3 years

residence or less than 4

years cohabitation abroad

5 years cohabitation

Germany

8 years

no, but many

exceptions

3 years

2 years

Greece

10 years

no

3 years but only if having

a child of Greek

nationality

--

Italy

10 years

no

6 months residence or 3 years of marriage

Poland

5 years

no

6 months

3 years and 6

3 Spire, Alexis (2005). Les étrangers à la carte. L’administration de l’immigration en France (1945–1975),

Paris,Grasset. Lochak, Daniéle (2006).« Le tri des étrangers: un discours récurrent, Plein Droit, n°69.

5

months

Portugal

6 years

yes

none required

3 years

Slovenia

10 years

no

1 year

3 years

Spain

10 years (2 for citizens

of Portugal and some

Hispanic states)

no (except citizens of

Portugal and some

Hispanic states)

1 year

1 year

Sweden

5 years (2 for citizens

of Nordic states)

yes

3 years permanent

residence

2 years

UK

5 years

yes

3 years

none required

Defining the ‘good citizen’

It is a common requirement that those applying for citizenship have to fulfil a number of

additional requirements, not merely the prescribed duration of residence. Among the most

frequent additional conditions are obtaining a police clearance certificate, proof of suitable

housing, financial resources, and health insurance. It is also customary that a renunciation of

former citizenship is required. Even though recent literature notes a worldwide trend in dual

citizenship (Faist et al. 2004), certain states still do not allow dual citizenship, which means

that migrants are required to denounce their other citizenship. Moreover, dual citizenship

continues to spur nationalist questions of loyalty and belonging. In factual terms, the denial of

dual citizenship represents a complex decision for many migrants, whose ties to family

members and property in other countries make the denunciation of their citizenship a difficult

choice. Policies of reciprocity frequently allow citizens of EU countries to retain their

citizenship if a corresponding treatment of the host state’s citizens applying for naturalisation

exists in their countries. However, ‘third country’ migrants are usually exempt from such

concessions.

It is quite widespread that naturalisation policies require proof of language proficiency and a

trend can be observed in states asking their future citizens to pass various citizenship tests

(e.g. courses on country’s history and constitution, ‘way of life’, etc.). Citizenship thus

becomes related to the notion of migrants’ sense of belonging to the new society. Migrants are

required to share a ‘sense of belonging and identity,’ learn the language and respect and

embrace the ‘values of the host country’. As an example, in the UK all applicants have to pass

the ‘Life in the UK’ test before submitting their application, which requires English

proficiency and knowledge of life in Britain. Fluent knowledge of the dominant state

language is an important condition for obtaining citizenship through naturalisation also in

other countries. In Slovenia, Italy and Germany, for example, knowledge of language is

considered an indicator of the foreigners’ will to integrate. Moreover, reflecting the well-

established presence of public rituals and ceremonies in construction of nationhood (e.g.

Moore and Myerhoff 1977, Kertzer 1988, Bajt 2000), citizenship ceremonies have been

established in several states that celebrate the acquisition of citizenship (as nationality),

supposedly instilling in new citizens the sense of belonging and civic values.

Moreover, an important political shift has taken place in the last few years with policies

related to the so-called war on terror. Transforming the policy landscape, the preoccupation

6

with counter-terrorism measures have on the one hand turned migration into a security issue,

and on the other hand begun to significantly compromise human rights conventions and

standards. There is an emerging trend in certain countries to link naturalisation to proving a

capacity for ‘good citizenship’. This may require the successful completion of citizenship

programmes, such as the already mentioned passing a ‘citizenship test’. Since the London

suicide bombings of July 2005, the UK has seen an acceleration of this trend. This applies to

non citizens but residents or residents to be as well (those who are not British nationals).

Migrant organisations and political participation

Despite several EU resolutions and declarations, both EU and ‘third country’ migrants are

exempt from participating at parliamentary and presidential national elections, unless they are

awarded citizenship, which grants them full political and civic rights.4 The first country to

introduce local voting rights to migrants was Sweden, already in 1976. Several states deny

migrants local voting rights altogether, whereas, on the other hand, there are states that award

migrants full voting rights in local elections – provided they fulfil certain requirements (e.g.

legal residence, registration to vote, etc.) (see Table 2). On the one hand, we have Cyprus,

France, Germany, Italy and Poland, which deny migrant local voting rights. It should be noted

that, for instance, in Italy the extension of the right to vote to foreign citizens is not

theoretically unconstitutional, provided that it is limited to local referendums and local

administrative elections. Yet the issue of extension of the right to vote to non-citizens has

been transformed into a political issue and manipulated according to the political aims of

political parties.

On the other hand, Sweden, Slovenia, the United Kingdom, Portugal and Spain can be

grouped together as countries recognising voting rights to migrants on the local level. Usually

requiring a minimum duration of 5 years of legal residence, these states enfranchise not only

EU nationals but also ‘third country’ migrants who fulfil the set conditions. The conditions for

non-EU citizens to be able to participate at local elections most commonly include legal status

of a minimum duration, the requirement to register in order to vote, whereas some states

restrict enfranchisement to migrants with citizenship of particular states. The UK, Portugal

and Spain only enfranchise citizens of specifically defined countries, which are considered as

sharing a particular historical and geopolitical bond (e.g. former colonies). This also reflects

these countries’ naturalisation policies and speaks of specifically constructed historic ties with

defined countries.

Table 2: Migrant’s local voting rights and participation in advisory boards

Country Local voting rights Migrants’ advisory boards

Cyprus No No

France No Yes

Germany No Yes

Greece Yes No

Italy No, but notable exceptions in some

municipalities and regions.

Yes

Poland No No

Portugal Yes Yes

Slovenia Yes No

4 See, in particular, the European Commission’s Common Agenda for Integration (2005) and the Convention for

the Participation of Foreigners in Public Life at Local Level (1992).

7

Spain Yes Yes

Sweden Yes Yes

UK Yes No, but local authorities develop direct

channels for migrant participation.

EU conventions further stipulate that foreign residents should be granted equal rights as

citizens in terms of the right to freedom of expression. The right to free assembly is on the

overall not problematic and migrants are granted this either by states’ constitutional

proclamations of respect for human rights or by more specific legal provisions that define the

right to associate freely. Usually this is based on conditions of migrants’ legal residence,

which becomes more relevant in cases of formal establishment of associations (in several of

the states their existence is a recent development) or when joining trade unions. However,

there are restrictions. For example, associations of non-citizens may be subject to specific

restrictions. Among the obstacles in establishing migrants’ organisations the lack of state

financial support plays a crucial part, since in some countries migrant organisations are

legally denied the eligibility for public funding. There are also some good practices, such as in

Italy, where the right to political participation and association means not only that migrants

are allowed to create their own organisations, which are publicly recognised and active, but

migrants-only or mixed associations can also apply for financial support, provided that they

meet certain criteria (the association must be apolitical, non-Italian members must be legal

residents in Italy). All the states reserve the power to forbid both nationals and foreign

citizens from associating with a ‘subversive aim,’ a stipulation that is becoming increasingly

relevant with the ubiquitous fear of ‘subversive radical movements’ in the ‘war on terror’

dictum.

Migrants in many countries also participate in political parties and trade unions. Political

parties, however, still resist their inclusion in positions of high responsibility, perceiving

migrants as only representatives of migrant communities, not representatives of the interests

of the whole society. Trade unions may have more open approach to migrant membership and

exhibit little corporate closure for the defence of national workers. In practice, however, there

are violations of the rights of migrant workers, particularly in sectors that are not unionised.

The fact that migrants are mostly temporarily employed is further prohibiting their

participation at leadership levels, while there are also significant gendered effects that result

in female migrants facing even more seclusion.

Several states provide for various additional levels of civic inclusion in terms of opening up

channels for migrants’ participation through consultative bodies or awarding them voting

rights to communal councils (see Table 2). Beginning in the early 1970s, in Germany local

urban communities that had higher share of foreign citizens created the means for their

political representation in the form of ‘foreigners’ advisory councils’. Some of the federal

states anchored these councils in their municipal laws; the political influence of the

foreigners’ advisory councils, however, is narrow. Portugal has also created a number of

institutions to increase the migrants’ civic participation. At the local level, there are advisory

councils and municipal departments specialised in migration issues. Sweden and France also

have some institutional representation at the local level, while Italy, Spain and Sweden

include foreigners’ advisory boards at the federal level. In the case of the UK, the local

authorities are obliged by law to develop channels of direct communication with

representatives of ethnic communities. Italy also has representative bodies of migrants, which

have allowed for a certain degree of inclusion of non-citizens into local administrations,

though it is only a few local administrations that have in fact developed such a model. The

8

‘Territorial Council for Immigration’ analyses local migration-related issues and promotes

initiatives aimed at the social insertion of migrants in local context, yet it is merely a

consultative body. The existence of these bodies depends heavily on the degree of local

coordination and activism, resulting from bottom-up activism with and within local

governments, dependent on the conscious acknowledgement by local governments of the

problems affecting migrant populations residing on their territory, and the shared activism of

NGOs and local governments to solve such problems.

These positive political experiences in migrant civic participation are far from enough and as

a rule they fail to even recognise, let alone address the gender dimension. Even where

migrants’ advisory boards and other consultative bodies exist, be it on local, regional or

federal level, they remain unstable, and frequently they are not representative. Moreover, they

have very limited power, usually with no decision-making authority. They thus do not

succeed in guaranteeing a wider political representation to the migrants – let alone migrant

women in particular, nor do they manage to accomplish much in terms of political rights. As

political figures, migrants are still predominantly powerless and the migrants’ advisory boards

do not manage to produce any significant change, especially in states where the migrant

associations are generally weak, fragmented, or hardly existent (e.g. Poland, Slovenia,

Cyprus).

Migrant women’s experiences in civic participation

Drawing on the actual participations that stem from the narrative interviews with migrant

women, we here explore what are the different participation practices and what are the

obstacles that hinder migrants’ participation. Excluding ‘third-country’ migrants from the

right to vote is contrary to their genuine participation in the society and particularly in their

local communities, where some are very active participants. Stringent citizenship

requirements are increasingly at odds with the contemporary phenomena of spatial mobility

and emergent forms of local and transnational identities. The exclusion of migrants from

some formal participation options (e.g. voting, naturalisation) does not mean that their civic

participation is absent. To the contrary, the narratives of migrant women show the variety of

experiences with being politically active, regardless of the actual formal status that does or

does not grant migrants equal rights as these are recognised for citizens (as nationals).

While gaining citizenship is a strategy often expected to significantly improve a migrant’s

life, several women speak of how their predicament remained the same after citizenship

obtainment, and how they were still unable to find a job and participate politically. The

potential tension between migrant women’s life plans, strategies, and the actual outcomes is

often related to the fact that the society continues to view and treat them as ‘foreigners’. This,

in turn, is closely connected to general stereotypes and prejudice:

Although I’m citizen, I’m always stranger! I’m still stranger, because people watch me on the street and

sure, that woman is stranger, they never will think I’m Slovene. (Katarina, Latin America, Slovenia)5

But even if I have passport…We are forever foreigners here…forever. Even if you have passport and it

reads you are a Cypriot, but you are Olga, Natasha and I don’t know what else, you are a foreigner, a

foreigner. And this is what you will be forever, you cannot change it… (Natasha, Ukraine, Cyprus)

5 The interviewees are identified by a pseudonym, their country of birth, and the country of their residence at the

time of the interview.

9

The comparative evaluation of narrative interviews with migrant women, key informants and

state officials points to the conclusion that the degree of civic involvement seems to strongly

depend on the migratory pattern and specific status of migrants. Circulatory, short-term

migrants and ‘undocumented’ workers engaged in the informal sectors of the labour market

are much less likely to engage in civic, social and cultural initiatives. The level of civic

involvement may reflect migrants’ strategies and life plans, since migrants who are not

attempting to settle but only come as short-term labour migrants are often more interested in

saving their energy to accumulate more savings, rather than getting involved in what they

perceive to be time-consuming civic activities. Many migrants in our sample thus expressed

the opinion that being in a country only temporarily contributes to the assumption that there is

‘no use’ for them to become members of any organisation or institution because they are too

busy working. This comment has been made in several interviews across the eleven country

cases, particularly by women who work long hours, are engaged in domestic work and are

taking care of their families, and thus have very little, if any free time to spare.

Moreover, migrants face different conditions that depend not only on particular legislation in

a given country, but also on local implementation of political rights of migrants in their

countries of residence, on their citizenship, and their status. One should also take into account

the overall level of civic participation in each country, especially where civic involvement is

low, community engagement non-existent and people generally not prone to much political

activity. Poland and Slovenia provide notable examples. In Poland, only members of two

migrant groups, the Vietnamese and the Armenians, have established functioning

associations, whereas other migrant groups do not have any sort of representational

organisation. In Slovenia, the gap is particularly visible between the ethnic communities of

migrants from Yugoslavia’s successor states, who are more organised and active in various

predominantly cultural associations, and the migrants from other countries of the world, who

have migrated to Slovenia in the last decade, and remain particularly secluded from public

engagement. Exploring the European Social Survey in order to quantify migrants’ civic

activities in the EU, studies have shown that high correlation exists between participating

rates of the ‘local’ population and the migrants in a given country (Aleksynska 2008). As

exhibited in our comparative analysis and confirmed by other research (e.g. Vogel 2008), the

lowest levels of migrant political participation are to be found in Poland and Slovenia, and

also Greece – although here, recently, the economic turmoil has increased also migrants’

activity.

Civic participation as a form of active citizenship

The issue of civic participation is here encompassing informal networks beyond state borders,

self-organisation of migrant women, and their particular coping strategies employed. Civic

participation is understood as much more than the mere formal political engagement. It

involves adopting a political discourse, claiming rights, and actively seeking support either

among co-ethnics, other migrants, the media, NGOs. We consider all forms of activism or

involvement in political or community work, be it formal or informal, as relevant for

analysing civic participation. Different modes of mobilisation of migrants, self-organisation,

new social movements of migrants, political, and religious networks are here examined

through migrant women’s narratives. The notion of civic participation is thus discussed

broadly as a part of the integration process that is taking place, and in terms of what it means

to the migrant women. .

10

Female migrants as active citizens

Migrants repeatedly experience de-skilling and downward social mobility (cf. Pajnik and

Campani 2011). Their precarious situation may drive them to more active civic engagement in

order to bring attention to their problems. At the same time, migrants’ preoccupation with

earning enough to make ends meet often prevents them from participating more fully.

Monika, a domestic worker from Poland living in Germany, develops an ethnically focused

political discourse on the rights of Polish migrant women in care work. She presents herself as

a speaker and advocate of the Polish women and men. Monika does not develop her activities

in the framework of organisations in the society of her migration, but uses her ethnic

affiliation as a mobilising factor. Similarly, Down, a Thai masseuse in Slovenia, adopts a

political discourse about the rights of migrant women and in particular the need to dismantle

the sexual stereotypes of Thai women. As another example, Nafila, who found refuge in

Germany after fleeing war-torn Bosnia, managed to mobilise support from people involved

with protection of human rights of asylum seekers. With their assistance she was also able to

mobilise support from some of the mass media, thus providing an example of an active

migrant’s civic engagement. Moreover, Rosy, a domestic worker who migrated to Italy from

Peru, is engaged in voluntary sector, as well as in centri d’ascolto.6 This activity helps her to

find fulfilment in helping people by listening to them, organising cultural evenings and

language courses. Rosy is coordinating her activity with other centri d’ascolto in order to

create a network. Aside from her work as a domestic worker, Rosy says that this activity has

allowed her to learn from other people’s experiences. Apart from her involvement in the

Council of Foreigners, Rosy also volunteers to help people with the Alzheimer’s disease, and

is in contact with the consulate of her country of birth. One of her aims is providing advice

and information to people who are looking for work; she notes that regulating the status of

people who already have a job represents a good motive for her engagement:

I work as badante

7 in the morning, so, in the afternoon, I’m with this Council of Foreigners of the

Province, we get together, doing projects, so this occupies me mentally, no? It’s a thing I like. (Rosy,

Peru, Italy)

As exemplified in the above cases, civic participation can become a coping strategy for

migrants. Altruism and solidarity seem to be the driving values for Marina, who migrated

from Bulgaria to Greece, where she works as a hotel chambermaid. She committed herself to

promoting migrant politics. This becomes a biographical process through which she regains

her agency lost due to migration. Moreover, in this type of active participation she finds a way

to regain and enjoy one of her talents and desires – writing – which has helped her to feel

creative, and has given a new meaning to her migration plan.

The discourse of human rights and political activism is also visibly present in female

migrants’ narratives. Sara, a live-out domestic worker from the Philippines, speaks in the

name of all Asian domestic workers in Cyprus. She wants their rights as domestic workers to

be respected by the employers. Both Sara and her husband are social activists involved in

volunteer work, whereas Sara is also a coordinator of a self-help domestic workers church

association. Moreover, she is one of the founding members of a transnational migrant

association. She is hence active in community work and activities with social character. The

motives of human rights and political activism are strong also in Lory’s narrative. A domestic

6 Listening centres, i.e. guidance, assistance, or counselling centres in Italy.

7 Personal or home caregiver.

11

worker in Greece, who came from Africa, she emphasises how her life has been enriched by

her strong feminist commitment. She maintains her activism gave her a chance to improve her

life and claim a dynamic identity in feminist migrant activism. Lory has devoted her life to

defending women’s rights and she is enthusiastic about her projects. Her emancipation came

through migration and her particular way of practicing active citizenship has provided her

with a sense of accomplishment. Moreover, her civic participation can be observed in her

many contacts and connections with various migrant associations, the Greek political elite, as

well as members of anti-racist groups and in her networking with other migrants.

At the same time, Lory is working as a domestic worker and struggling to get a residence

permit while her employers are unwilling to register her work. Keeping up her activist work

requires her to settle for a job of caring for the elderly that is badly paid and does not provide

her with the necessary social security. This case shows the problematic position of migrants

who are often forced to choose between their active practising of citizenship on the one hand,

and a job, which they need to make ends meet, on the other. In the end, some settle for a less

precarious position, which may prevent them from fully realising their civic participation due

to lack of time and energy, or, as Lory did, they may choose the activism and personal

involvement and thus risk a life of precariousness on the labour market. Lory’s case is

important because it points to the fact that political integration through civil society

organisations improves the living conditions of migrants and contributes to their sociopolitical

emancipation, but it does not necessarily at the same also improve their integration in the

labour market and society.

Migrant self-organisation

Research on ethnic associations has noted a variety of functions that they may have, ranging

from cultural to political and welfare issues. Associations, for instance, have long been

enjoying a central position in Sweden’s integration policy, which recognised their importance

early on and strove to incorporate models of good practice in its implementation guidelines.

Associational life is thus granted a place at the heart of the Swedish approach to migrants and

minority groups.8 In the UK, likewise, migrant and community organisations are regarded as

essential for the integration process into both the migrant community and wider society.

‘Ethnic’ organisations are valued not only as being important for the affirmation of ethnic

identity and as a means for empowerment of migrants, they also act as mediators between

migrants and the host society. In Portugal, a legal framework protects the rights and duties of

migrants and their descendants’ associations. These are also officially recognised as having a

right to benefit from the state’s technical and financial support for their activities.

Nevertheless, migrants have always been more prone to becoming the scapegoats for

whatever the society’s ill. As a consequence of recent politics of fear driven by the ‘war on

terror’ dictum, many states have changed their laws in clauses that pertain to ethnic

associations or migrant organisations in general. As an example, in Germany the government

may prohibit specific non-citizens associations or restrict their activities when these are

deemed harmful to the peaceful cohabitation of Germans and non-citizens. Since the 1990s

the monitoring of Muslim associations suspected of Islamist activities has increased. This is

the case even though the German authorities have recently begun to regard migrant

8 A number of prominent positions in political and public life of Sweden is occupied by persons with migrant

background.

12

associations as supportive of social integration of migrant populations, supporting them

locally and on federal level by programmes that aim to promote the integration of migrants.

The comparative analysis shows that the majority of migrant associations are active in the

field of arts and culture, but also, particularly in some countries and pertaining to specific

sectors, in religious groups and churches. Apart from cultural activities migrants are also

active in informal self-help networks, for example offering social and psychological support

to members of their community and migrants in general, helping their members obtain legal

representation, or connect them with local human rights NGOs for assistance in various

matters. It is often the case that migrants operate through self-organised communities, which

constitute mechanisms of reception, information and support during their entry and residence

in the country. Devoid of other alternatives in states where the level of NGO support for

migrants remains low, self-organisation helps the migrants to mediate and represent their

interests in contact with the administration and state mechanisms. In Slovenia, for example,

self-support among migrants has long been the only strategy of integration due to a lack of

formal organisation in this area.9

Self-support is also organised as assistance among various groups of migrants in order to find

employment. Self-support is related to individual and collective bases; it is regarded as

psychosocial and access-to-the-labour-market self-support, as networking, and also as self-

employment. Migrants thus create self-supporting groups, especially when faced with the

absence of activities visible on a broader platform. Moreover, bottom-up activities and

initiatives aiming to support and self-organise the migrants often precede state actions.

Migrant associations and non-profit organisations in general play an important role of filling

the gaps of policies, which mainly ignore the particular problems faced by migrants,

especially those who are ‘undocumented’ and as such at even greater risk of social exclusion.

Our data confirm that migrant self-help organisations are active in providing legal and

psychological assistance, and in organising a variety of services, from language courses to

vocational programmes and cultural events. The organisational structure of migrants’

associations varies, yet in most cases it remains loose and ‘informal’ in order to ensure a

higher degree of flexibility and migrants’ collective representation.

The issue of self-support is therefore closely tied to networking among migrants. Often

migrants report that the only way to get employment is on the basis of acquaintances or a

network created by their family, friends, or themselves. The role of the family is emphasised,

the ‘informal level of family,’ hinting at the fact that families have an important role in

migrant’s feelings of belonging, in helping to find employment, and in assistance with

administrative procedures. The role of the family is important particularly because frequently

the family does what the state should do, as noted by a member of a Bosniak Cultural

Association in Slovenia:

And if the state does not deal with that, they [the family] do it. Employment, difficulties with finding a

place to live, administration and bureaucracy – it is all arranged by the family. I suppose a person, for

example, from Iran or Iraq has more difficulties when they come here because they do not have that.

Migrants’ self-organisation is also often tied with ethnicity and culture, which brings along

the ambiguity regarding ethnic involvement. On the one hand, migrants express the

importance of being able to speak their own language, to socialise with people who share with

9 In Slovenia, the first Decree on Integration only came in force in 2008.

13

them certain cultural background. On the other hand, basing migrants’ organisation solely on

ethnic affiliation opens up numerous problematic areas. For one, several migrants express

doubts regarding their belonging to any one particular ethnic group; others refuse to be bound

by such classifications altogether. Moreover, some note that they find they have very little, if

anything, in common with their co-ethnics. Anastasia, born in Russia, now living in the UK,

says: “Not all Russians, put it this way, that I’ve met here, impressed me”.

Migrant organisations that go beyond the mere ethnic and cultural affiliation are therefore a

much needed force. Several of our respondents note how important it is to have contacts with

other migrants. Being a migrant is an experience that they all share, and it is a significant

finding that countries where NGOs do not focus on migrants and where none or very few

migrant associations exist, are in dire need of a more organised activity. Encountering people

who share similar experiences should not be only a matter of random experiences, e.g.

meeting at public administration offices or at the embassies. These encounters offer migrant

women a chance to exchange their experiences and possibly become more active in terms of

civic participation as well. Yet unless the migrants have a chance to meet in more organised

settings, such as at meetings of various associations and groups, they may be entirely reliant

on their own personal contacts and random chats with other migrants, whom they may or may

not encounter. Slovenia and Poland, in particular, exhibit the situation of a significant lack of

information and organisation among the migrant population, women in particular. Accessing

the networks means breaking isolation and is thus crucial for active citizenship as much as it

is important for improving migrants’ broader feelings of belonging to the society.

Generally, the interviewed female migrants have very different relationships to their ethnic

group and their narratives show different views and experiences of what ethnic engagement

entails, in terms of both enabling (e.g. a sense of belonging) and constraining (e.g. preventing

one from learning the local language) mechanisms. Even though many share the view that it is

important to get to know and engage with the local people in order to integrate into the wider

society, learn the new language, acquaint themselves with the local habits, this is by no means

a view shared by all. On the one hand, there are migrants who remain quite secluded within

their ethnic networks of family and friends, or co-workers. On the other hand, there are

migrants who are determined to have as little contact with co-ethnics as possible. For

example, Gabriela, living in Sweden, like Ana, living in Slovenia, are reluctant to engage with

their respective ethnic groups. Instead, they emphasise the importance of creating networks

with people from different countries, including the local people because this is crucial for

integrating into the new society. Language skills, which are often emphasised in the narratives

as being important for the migrants’ future plans and aspirations, do not develop sufficiently

through co-ethnic interaction. Furthermore, some of the migrants may not have a particular

preference for co-ethnic engagement because they put more emphasis on what they have in

common with other people beyond mere ‘ethnic ties’.

The reasons behind both choices – which, it should be noted, only represent the most

divergent sides of the spectrum – are multifarious. Those who keep company of their

compatriots may do so because they lack other options to socialise, often because of a

language barrier, secluded spatial position or long working hours. Migrants who choose to

distance themselves from their co-ethnics often do so because they find it easier to integrate

into their new environment if they communicate with the locals and enter into social circles of

the ‘local’ population. Rather than wilfully avoiding co-ethnics, the reasons for the lack of

14

engagement in ethnic networks may also lie in a conscious choice to avoid socialising in

general and focus on one’s career.

Migrant networks

Expanding on the work done in terms of the role of social networks in facilitating

transnational migration, recent literature has recognised the need to study the complexity,

diversity and dynamism of migrants’ networks (e.g. Ryan et al. 2008). Many migrant women

in our sample emphasise that the role of networks is crucial. Anita, for instance, a highly

educated Venezuelan who works part-time as cleaner and part-time as Spanish teacher in

Sweden, says she registers for everything she comes across: courses, associations, and so on.

She speaks very positively of the women’s association in which she is a member and feels

that this has contributed a lot to her situation, saying it is important to belong to something.

She finds that the networks are an important route towards professional success and she notes

their importance also for helping her to feel at home in Sweden. Anita is a good example of

how a migrant can exercise her civic rights also in more ‘informal’ ways, through active

participation in the society and by membership in various associations.

The role of social networks appears at different places in the migrants’ narratives, and is an

important feature in all the individual stories, if for no other reason than to note the

consequences that their lack has had on their lives. Sometimes the women note that they had

picked their country of migration because they already had networks there (most commonly

some relatives) and these seem to have been important. The importance of having social

networks is also highlighted in relation to migrant women’s accounts of their first few months

in the new country. A particularly gendered experience, they were often very isolated, many

were tied to their home, spending entire days on their own at home with their small children.

These experiences made them appreciate the importance of social networks, not only family

and close friends, but also the need to ‘go out among people’ and the importance of meeting

others.

The church also plays an important role to some migrants, who emphasise the help and

support it offers. A notable example are domestic workers in Cyprus, who in many cases

claim the pivotal role of their local church both in terms of social contact, feelings of

community acceptance, and in offering help, as well as also providing a base for their more

active civic and community involvement. The element of seclusion, so important for Cyprus

and particularly affecting live-in domestic workers, who lack social contacts with ‘the outside

world’ because of lack of good public transport connections, is resonated in many migrant

women’s stories. Frosja’s migration path from Moldova to Slovenia, for example, is entirely

different, yet her experience of isolation and the initial important role of the local church,

make it comparable to other narratives. Frosja followed her husband, who found work in

Slovenia, and she and her children felt totally excluded, particularly because they lived in a

small village. The local priest represented the much needed initial network of social contacts

and information, assisting them in participating in the community. In a similar vein, Susanna

and her family, who came to Sweden from Lebanon, were able to live in the church after their

first asylum claim was refused. In this case, the church was a source of social information and

human contact, which Susanna notes is crucial for migrants, who ‘become like small children’

on arrival.

15

The establishment of personal and social networks gained through active civic engagement is

an important consequence of migrant women’s participation. These networks can be utilised

in order to overcome the various difficulties that migrants may encounter; particularly

allowing them to gain access to valuable information and social services, possibly ease their

access to the labour market, increase their social and transnational mobility. Activity via civil

society organisations can improve the living conditions of migrants and contribute to their

socio-political emancipation, even if their economic position often remains the same. It is

nonetheless significant that migrant women’s civic engagement can provide them with a

strong sense of purpose and it can empower them.

Civic participation therefore provides female migrants with valuable social contacts, access to

information, and an important feeling of personal achievement, which all contribute to their

empowerment. Public activism through supporting migrant co-workers, through voluntary

work, organisation of self-help groups, involvement in church activities, promoting migrants’

rights, and so on, are just some of the most common forms of civic participation of the

migrant women in our sample. Whether their contribution is in active engagement with

politics and migrants’ rights, focused on the labour market dimension by promoting socio-

economic rights of migrants and striving to improve their labour market situation, or informal

self-organisation of migrants through networking and religious groups, the uniting thread of

all the varied forms of civic engagement is in their ability to provide a certain purpose,

allowing the migrants to regain agency and enhance their social networks. Moreover, it also

offers a coping strategy to overcome the many difficulties they experience as migrants in a

foreign country. The feeling of belonging may thus form based on ethnic ties with co-

nationals through active participation in ethnic groups and associations, it may grow from

being a part of a religious community, or be connected to activist involvement based on co-

workers organisation, migrant organisation, transnational networking, or political engagement

with any number of focuses, ranging from feminist to trade-unionist, or migrant-specific

promotion of rights.

Conclusion: civic participation and prospects for redefinition of citizenship

Though not an emerging topic for so-called old countries of immigration, civic participation

of migrants is an entirely new theme for the studied new EU member states (Slovenia, Poland,

Cyprus), as well as remaining a worrying taboo theme in several other states (e.g. Greece).

The comparative evaluation of the new empirical material used here shows predominantly

harsh conditions experienced by migrants, both in terms of accessing the labour market on

equal terms as nationals, as in terms of their formal status and general social position in

society. Most are overburdened, immersed in work, employing various coping strategies to

improve their situation and hoping to achieve their life plans (cf. Pajnik and Campani 2011).

Though considerable differences exist in terms of access to political rights and civic

participation, on the overall the situation for migrants in general and women in particular

should be much improved. ‘Third country’ migrants in particular are excluded from political

rights, unless they naturalise. Formal civic participation seems most engaging in trade unions,

where such activity is more common (e.g. Italy), whereas political life of migrants is low or

non-existent in countries with generally weak civic involvement, and where migrants self-

organisation is lacking or limited (e.g. Slovenia, Poland, also Cyprus). On the overall, the

situation can be described as rather disappointing on the issue of civic participation of

migrants, even though differences exist among the country cases and certain encouraging

signs have been detected. Rather than being actively engaged in political activities, the

16

migrant women in our sample are mostly involved in ethnic, cultural associations and

religious organisations. Nevertheless, several exhibit strong activist engagement, and even

though civic participation is here understood broadly as including the multifarious informal

ways of engagement, we can conclude that even formal political participation, while still

uncommon, is not entirely absent from migrants’ lives.

The interviews confirm that the issue of citizenship is in fact the most relevant dimension of

civic participation. This, however, does not mean that all migrants are considering applying

for citizenship, nor does it mean that they find citizenship as a status a relevant category. The

fact that it represents an important formal break with the status of a ‘foreigner’ shared by all

migrants is what affects the narratives of our respondents, as they reflect on current policies

and the obstacles that they encounter as migrants. Citizenship as a status is perceived as a

‘way out’ of marginalised migrant status.

Our research confirmed the need to redefine citizenship as a formal national affiliation to

include broader perspectives of identity, belongings, multiple memberships and transnational

ties (cf. Anthias 2002, Yuval-Davis 2007). It is essential to recognise the results of research,

which point to a need that the meaning and significance of active civic participation of

migrant women is acknowledged, as well as allowing the migrants the ability to alert to their

specific problems and become active participants in their resolution, as well as active

participants in future policy-making processes (cf. Pajnik 2007). Good practices based on

local (e.g. municipal, regional) experiences from those states where civic participation of

migrants is already in place through various forms of migrants’ consultative bodies should be

examined and widely adopted.

It is noteworthy to consider encouraging political participation of migrants through local

policy schemes. Various forms of civic participation, especially the so-called ‘informal’

networking and self-organisation would greatly benefit from such (financial) stimulation.

Policies of financial support and promotion of activities of migrant organisations should be

promoted. Migrant self-organisation and networking constitute effective means of civic

participation. Moreover, being active in associations assist migrants to overcome feelings of

social isolation. As long as migrants are only considered as ‘temporary guests’ (i.e. foreign

workers on short-term work and stay permits), the issue of full development of migrant

communities, including their own economic, social, cultural and political structures, will

remain obscured in public discourses and as such reflected in migration policies, as well.

References

Aleksynska, Mariya (2008) “Quantitative Assessment of Immigrants’ Civic Activities –

Exploring the European Social Survey.” Pp. 59-74 in Vogel, Dita (ed.) Highly Active

Immigrants: A Resource for European Civil Societies. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Anthias, Floya (2002) Where do I belong? Narrating Collective Identity and Translocational

Positionality. Ethnicities, 2(4): 491–514.

Bajt, Veronika (2000) “Invisible Nationalism: How National Rituals Perpetuate National

Identity.” Pp. 183-202 in Kapralski, Sławomir, Susan C. Pearce (eds.) Reformulations:

Markets, Policies, and Identities in Central and Eastern Europe. Warsaw: IFiS Publishers.

17

Balibar, Étienne (2004) We, the People of Europe? Reflections on Transnational Citizenship.

Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Bauböck, Rainer (2003) “Reinventing Urban Citizenship.” Citizenship Studies, 7(2): 139–160.

Faist, Thomas (2000) The Volume and Dynamics of International Migration and

Transnational Social Spaces. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Faist, Thomas, Jürgen Gerdes, Beate Rieple (2004) “Dual Citizenship as a Path-Dependent

Process.” International Migration Review, 38(3): 913–944.

Fenton, Steve (1999) Ethnicity. Racism, Class and Culture. London: Macmillan.

Goodman, Sara Wallace (2010) “Integration Requirements for Integration’s Sake?

Identifying, Categorising and Comparing Civic Integration Policies.” Journal of Ethnic and

Migration Studies, 36(5): 753–772.

Gropas, Ruby (2008) “Immigrants in Europe – How Migration Situations Differ.” Pp. 33-46

in Vogel, Dita (ed.) Highly Active Immigrants: A Resource for European Civil Societies.

Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Isin, Engin F. (2002) Being Political: Genealogies of Citizenship. Minneapolis: University of

Minnesota Press.

Joppke, Christian (2010) Citizenship and Immigration. Cambridge: Polity.

Kertzer, David I. (1988) Ritual, Politics, and Power. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Moore, Sally F., Barbara G. Myerhoff (eds.) (1977) Secular Ritual. Assen/Amsterdam: Van

Gorcum.

Niessen, Jan, Thomas Huddleston (eds.) (2009) Legal Frameworks for the Integration of

Third-country Nationals. Boston: Leiden.

Pajnik, Mojca (2007) “Integration Policies in Migration between Nationalizing States and

Transnational Citizenship, with Reference to the Slovenian Case.” Journal of Ethnic and

Migration Studies, 33(5): 849–865.

Pajnik, Mojca, Giovanna Campani (eds.) (2011) Precarious Migrant Labour Across Europe.

Ljubljana: Mirovni inštitut.

Ryan, Louise, Rosemary Sales, Mary Tilki, Bernadetta Siara (2008) “Social Networks, Social

Support and Social Capital: The Experiences of Recent Polish Migrants in London.”

Sociology, 42(4): 672–690.

Smith, Anthony D. (1998) Nationalism and Modernism. A Critical Survey of Recent Theories

of Nations and Nationalism. London: Routledge.

18

Soysal, Yasemin Nuhoglu. (1994) Limits of Citizenship: Migrants and Postnational

Membership in Europe. Chicago: The University of Chicago.

Vogel, Dita (ed.) (2008) Highly Active Immigrants: A Resource for European Civil Societies.

Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Yuval-Davis, Nira (2007) “Intersectionality, Citizenship and Contemporary Politics of

Belonging.” Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 10(4): 561–574.

Zlatković Winter, Jelena (2001) “Državljanstvo, nacionalni idenititet i migracije: europska

perspektiva.” Revija za sociologiju, 1–2: 39–49.