Click here to load reader
Upload
pgutierrez86
View
27
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
TILBURG UNIVERSITY 2011
Social Solidarity and the Roma People
Solidarity & Welfare
P.V. Gutierrez Zarate
(141341)
ABSTRACT. This paper elucidates, from the sociological perspective, matters of consideration regarding the implications of the social standing of Roma people in modern society, the welfare state, and the European Union level. Information about Roma people and their current standing social position is reviewed. Given that they are a different ethnic group, the implications of such standing are first analyzed with literature from acculturation and, then enlightened with literature on social solidarity. Furthermore, the crowding-out hypothesis is studied when considering the provision of aid at European state level to this ethnic group. This analysis concludes with a proposal to study welfare programs for Roma people in European Union countries with two purposes: (1) to see how their differences or similarities are explained by the theoretical framework of social solidarity and acculturation, and (2) to analyze the crowding-out hypothesis that the European Union provokes at nation-state level.
Solidarity & Cultural Diversity December 16, 2011
INTRODUCTION
Romani people, also known as Gypsies, first arrived to Europe around the thirteen
century (Hancock, 2005); they were nomadic people who earn their living by performing arts
and working their crafts. They preferred living without compromising their freedom, their
ethnic identity, or their occupational and residential flexibility (Fraser, 2005). That is, they
were not tied to the soil in which they temporarily resided, and did not care much about
establishing themselves as part of the community. On feudal times, they were treated as
slaves, and from the mid-sixteenth to the late eighteen century, European attitude towards
them was also negative and was further exacerbated by racial prejudice and religious
hostility (Fraser, 2005). This feeling underlies the many anti-Gipsy laws around Europe at
that time which explicitly prohibited entry of these people in their lands and penalized those
who helped them do so. Even during the beginning of the twentieth century some new laws
prohibiting immigration were enacted, for example in Sweden. Furthermore, in some
countries, Roma people were required to carry identification with their fingerprints on them
and, in others, the prohibition of nomadism was introduced. Eventually, Roma people had to
settle and coexist with the host culture, many times in a forced situation. Nowadays, about
10 to 12 million Roma people have sizeable populations settled in 18 EU member countries
(European Commission, 2010). These populations, in their majority, are underprivileged and
strongly depend on welfare benefits to survive. Furthermore, they are usually not integrated
with the local community and are subject of discrimination.
Roma people are an ethnic group without a nation, discriminated since their arrival
to Europe, originally nomads that were many times forced to settle, and now settled all
across Europe and mostly living in poverty conditions and subject to discrimination by locals.
They are a group interesting to study especially because of these features and the fact that
they “are arguably the most impoverished and marginalized ethnic minority group on the
European continent” (Goldston, 2010). Specifically, from the acculturation perspective, it is
interesting to see what kind of impact having to settle had on the identity of the Roma
Page 1 of 14
Solidarity & Cultural Diversity December 16, 2011
people, the consequences on the first ‘official encounters’1, and their current social situation.
Furthermore, from this study follows an analysis on how this impact influences on the
motivation both by individuals and the state to provide welfare for these people. This
analysis is made from the perspective of social solidarity and takes into account aspects
such as individual motivations, deservingness, and social capital. Finally, the crowding-out
hypothesis, a popular concept which has been refuted by many researches, is revisited to
analyze it on a different level; namely, the impact of the European Union programs on the
national welfare programs targeted to the Roma people.
This paper is structured as follows: first, theories on acculturation are reviewed to
better understand the current social standing of Roma people. Then, this information is used
to better understand the implications on social solidarity, at individual and national level.
Implications are also reviewed at EU-level were the crowding-out hypothesis is revisited.
Finally, a research study is proposed that analyzes welfare programs for Roma people in
European Union member countries with two purposes: (1) to see how their differences or
similarities are explained by the theoretical framework of social solidarity and acculturation,
and (2) to analyze the crowding-out hypothesis that the European Union provokes at nation-
state level.
THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES
Acculturation
Borhis et al (1997) developed the Interactive Acculturation Model (IAM) in which
they assess “(1) the acculturation orientations adopted by immigrant groups in the host
community; (2) acculturation orientations adopted by the host community towards specific
groups of immigrants; (3) interpersonal and intergroup relational outcomes that are the
1 ‘Official encounters’ is said in the sense of interaction between the host population and the newly nationalized Roma.
Page 2 of 14
Solidarity & Cultural Diversity December 16, 2011
product of combinations of immigrant and host community acculturation orientations”. This
model will be used in assessing the current social standing of the Roma population. The
assessment is done for European Union member countries in general therefore; some
assumptions are made based on historical trends and the current situation as observed by
studies and efforts towards integration.
In order to analyze each component of the model, it is important to again highlight
the special case of the Roma people as an ethnic group without a nation who were nomad
until they were forced to settle in a place that some did not intentionally choose. Taking
these factors into consideration, it can be assumed firstly, that being forced into a sedentary
life went against their traditions and thus, was a personal attack on their identity; second,
being a closed ethnic group, they did not see fit practices of assimilation or integration to the
host culture and became more separatists in reaction; and third, they did not have the
abilities, as sedentary groups do develop, of knowing how to live, work, and construct a life
in one land on a permanent basis.
In order to better understand the acculturation orientations adopted by the Roma
people in the host community, the Revised Bi-dimensional Model of Immigrant Accultural
Orientations from Borhis et al (1997) is used. According to it, because it is considered of
value to Roma people to maintain their immigrant cultural identity and they do not see value
in adopting the cultural identity of the host community, they are separatists. Separatism
indicates that they have no desire of being part of the host community or having relations to
it and strongly prefer to be with members of their own community.
The acculturation orientations of the host communities to the Roma people can be
summarized in the following extract: "[f]or most of this history, the Roma experience in
Europe has been one of discrimination, subjugation, and oppression. Negative stereotypes
that persist to this day have long deprecated nearly every aspect of Roma existence, from
their lifestyle (as nomadic peoples) to their intelligence, hygiene, work ethic, and—perhaps
the most widely known canard—an alleged predisposition to crime” (Goldston, 2010). The
Bi-dimensional model of host community acculturation orientations in Borhis et al (1997) is
Page 3 of 14
Solidarity & Cultural Diversity December 16, 2011
used to further define the attitudes of the host community. It is difficult to determine, in
general, the feelings, attitudes and behavioral intentions of the host community, but on
aggregate it is assumed that, initially, they did not find it acceptable that the Roma
maintained their cultural identity and, at the same time, they were so prejudiced that they
would not accept the Roma as one their own people. This is assumed because Roma were
labeled with many negative stereotypes that became, in the eyes of the host culture, part of
the identity of this ethnicity. This, according to the categorization model, is an exclusionist
attitude towards the Roma. Even though, quite some efforts are seen nowadays towards
more comprehensive programs that aim at integration, it is assumed that the host
community’s sentiment is still one of prejudice that either excludes the Roma or expects
them to assimilate. Assimilation is referred here in the sense of wanting the Roma to forego
their cultural values for those of the host community. An example of exclusion is last year’s
deportation of Roma from France; an example of assimilation relates to efforts to give Roma
education that does include their own history, language, or traditions. A more extreme
example of assimilation was the project called the ‘Kinder der Landstrasse’ in Switzerland,
where children were removed from their parents and placed either in an orphanage or with
foster parents (Infosud Human Rights Tribune, 2008).
According to the IAM, the relational outcomes between the Roma as a separatist
group and a host community with exclusive and/or assimilation orientations towards the
Roma are, as expected, conflictual. History has shown that this is a trend that has
maintained over the years, even with considered efforts to promote integration of both
communities. The following part will analyze further what this has meant in relation to social
solidarity.
Social Solidarity
Individual Motives for Contributing
Page 4 of 14
Solidarity & Cultural Diversity December 16, 2011
Van Oorschot (1998) identifies four individual motivations underlying payments for
welfare taken from solidarity, reciprocity, and rational choice theories: (1) mutual affection
and identification, (2) moral convictions, (3) (long-term) self-interest, and (4) accepted
coercion. An assessment on these motives can enlighten further the sentiments of the host
nation towards the Roma and the impact on their motivation to contribute to welfare that
benefits this ethnic group. Furthermore, the reverse impact is also revised to see whether
these sentiments are exacerbated or mitigated by welfare policies.
It is highly unlikely that the host nation has mutual affection for or mutually identifies
with the Roma people. On the side of the Roma, this is because they are a separatist group
and do not wish to make contact with the host community. In this sense, the host community
sees limited or no chance of bonding and finding a mutual ground with these people. On the
side of the host community, Roma people are visibly different in terms of their physical
appearance. Furthermore, there is still strong prejudice prevalent today which mostly has
become part of how the host community defines the Roma; that is, in their eyes, it is not
prejudice, but it is the Roma identity. Even though one could say that shared history could be
a valid starting point, the history between Roma and Europe has been one of conflict since
the beginning. In conclusion, since both sides are generally unwilling or unable to create a
shared identity or develop mutual affection they cannot create a ‘collective conscience’2 and
therefore, their interests are not collective but exclusive from each other. Solidarity is not
born out of this motive; conversely, lack of collective conscience excludes the Roma people.
Moral conviction or moral obligation “depends on culturally based convictions” (van
Oorschot, 2002). That is, people feel intrinsically obliged to express solidarity towards
others. It is questionable whether that is the case with the Roma. Much has been said and is
known about the strong prejudice however, there is also growing interest in creating
comprehensive programs that help Roma integrate and improve their social situation. This
interest is evidenced by the efforts at private, state, and European level; and also by
2 “Durkheim uses the term to refer to a body of beliefs, practices, and customary enacments which are held in common by all members of a society.” (Morrison, 2006)
Page 5 of 14
Solidarity & Cultural Diversity December 16, 2011
education which specializes in this topic. In this sense, it could be said that even though the
majority does not feel positive towards the Roma, there is a growing preoccupation for their
wellbeing. Therefore, moral obligation is a potential motivational component of solidarity
towards the Roma.
Even though concern for others is fundamental in cooperating, it alone does not
determine when it is that an individual will cooperate or not (Axelrod, 1984). The reason is
that another aspect of cooperating is the effect on us. The Prisoner’s Dilemma is a game
developed in economic theory to understand whether interaction results in cooperation
between two individuals that have to make decisions which affect the other. Research has
shown that it is more likely that individuals will cooperate when the game consists of an
infinite number of interactions, than when the interactions are finite. Not cooperating in
repeated interactions will cause distrust and consequent retaliation by the other player. From
this perspective, contributing is on the individual’s interest because, in the long term, the
contribution is balanced, or because not doing so is on the individual’s own detriment. In this
sense, the host community could see that it is less harmful to help than not to help because
they will have to live with these people anyway. Furthermore, supported on their prejudice,
they could think that not contributing to welfare could mean increased crime rates and
consequently, deterioration of the quality of life of their own. On the other hand, just as in the
case of France, the host community might believe that the best solution to the Roma
problem is deportation. As in the case of mutual affection and shared identity, this
motivational factor might have excluding effects towards the Roma people.
Finally, as van Oorschot (2002) argues, “solidarity is not necessarily spontaneous
or completely voluntary”. The state is the authorized form of coercion that obliges
contribution according to certain standards, and acts as a mechanism of control for free-
riders. The Roma could be thought of in this point as free-riders because they greatly
depend on welfare and are seen by the host community as doing nothing to get of that
Page 6 of 14
Solidarity & Cultural Diversity December 16, 2011
situation. The result of unwillingly helping the Roma might be the intensification of the
negative attitudes towards them because of a feeling of negative reciprocity3.
Deservingness Perceptions
Van Oorschot (2006) found that Europeans have certain common notions about
deservingness: they categorize people as being more or less worthy. The groups studied in
this paper were elderly people, sick and disabled people, unemployed people and
immigrants; with immigrants being the ones who scored lowest in the scale of
deservingness.
Merely for the fact that they are migrants, the Roma are at the bottom of the
deservingness rank. Their situation as a ‘nation without a country’ makes it difficult for the
host community to deal with them in the sense that, for example, they do not have elsewhere
to go or to be sent to. Furthermore, being a separationist group it is even harder for the host
community to try to understand their attitudes or behaviour. Therefore, it is easier to believe
that they are marginal people taking advantage of the state, instead of people living in a
marginal condition who are not able to survive without welfare benefits.
Van Oorschot (2006) mentions that average conditionality is higher in the poorer
countries of Europe; however he also states that welfare regime type and welfare spending
are not significantly related to national levels of conditionality. The former can be understood
from the burden immigrants impose on nationals, and the perceived negative balance in
reciprocity, especially by groups perceived as free-riders, such as the Roma. The latter
finding together with evidence that welfare policies have been modified to avoid being taken
advantage of by the Roma4, motivates the proposal for research found at the conclusion.
3 Negative reciprocity is meant as “a form of exchange in which the aim is to get something for as little as possible.” (Haviland et al, 2011)4 In 2004, Slovak government decided to reduce direct social payments which resulted in riots by the Roma community because it would affect them the worst. (Vermeersch, 2007)
Page 7 of 14
Solidarity & Cultural Diversity December 16, 2011
The social capital
According to Field (2008), social capital can be summarized as: ‘relationships
matter’. Bourdieu, who developed the theory of social capital in the late twentieth century,
agreed with this statement in the sense that he viewed social networks as a resource and
highlighted their importance. Later on, Putnam classified social capital in three components:
trust, social norms and obligations, social networks of civil activity (Siisiäinen, 2000). Each
component, as defined by Putnam and further elaborated by Van Oorschot, will be analysed
for the Roma population on the following lines.
Social norms comprise shared civic values, norms and habits of cooperation (van
Oorschot & Arts, 2005). In this sense, because the Roma people have a separatist
orientation, their moral obligations and norms are to their own people. This would be a good
contribution to social capital if the relationship analysed was one with Roma people;
however, considering that Roma live together with other people, such a stance is detrimental
to their social capital.
Social trust comprises generalized trust in social institutions and in other people.
More would need to be researched in order to give a further account on the attitude of Roma
towards the institutions and the people of the country at which they are residing. The
assumption is made that they do not have much trust in institutions or people because they
are separatists, and because of historical reasons; namely of being forced to settle
themselves in lands and continuous discrimination. On the other hand, it could be argued,
that they have some trust that institutions will provide them with the necessary minimum
means to live.
Social Networks refer to the relations within and between families and friends,
involvement in community and organizational life, and public engagement (van Oorschot &
Arts, 2005). Roma living in disadvantaged communities are usually uneducated and
Page 8 of 14
Solidarity & Cultural Diversity December 16, 2011
unemployed. Latent discrimination is both present in the education as in the employment
arena which hinders the opportunities of Roma to extend their social network. Furthermore,
they lack the ability to plan their life in financial terms, for example, which becomes a
pressuring matter considering that the Roma are usually part of big families. Consequently,
they are likely to get involved in high criminality, begging or scamming to survive. On top of
this, the poorest Roma live in crowded small shelters built with whatever they can find or
built by the government and provided to them. Both of these have segregating
consequences. In some cases, it is even clearer that the objective is to keep Roma out or
far5.
In summary, the Roma are likely to have very low social capital and this puts them
in a considerably disadvantaged position because, according to Bourdieu, “social capital
becomes a resource in social struggles that are carried out in different arenas or fields”
(Siisiäinen, 2000).
The Crowding-Out Hypothesis
The crowding-out hypothesis is defined by Van Oorschot & Arts (2005) as: “[f]or
every welfare state, if social obligations become increasingly public, then its institutional
arrangements to an increasing extent crowd out private obligations or make them at least no
longer necessary”. This hypothesis has been refuted for the state level however, here is
proposed to look at it from another perspective; namely European welfare’s effect on the
schemes of welfare states for Roma people.
There has been increased attention at European Union level towards minorities,
Roma people within them, which has resulted in initiatives for improving their current
situation. The crowding-out hypothesis can help elucidate whether these European-level
initiatives were the reaction of a lack of support at national level. Furthermore, it can also
5 An example of that can be found on the following article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8548417.stm
Page 9 of 14
Solidarity & Cultural Diversity December 16, 2011
help analyze the impact of these initiatives at national level, by for example asking whether
these are being supported at national level, or brought forward in majority by members of a
certain European Union member country. It is possible that, even though the initiatives
brought forward are meant to help, in abundant numbers they will actually do the opposite
because of decreased social capital and a stronger feeling of negative reciprocity of the host
community. That is, the relevance of doing such a study comes from the special situation of
the Roma and their dependency on the welfare states but, most of all, of the real impact of
policies brought forward at European Union level and imposed on a national level.
CONCLUSION (summary, limitations, indications for future research)
From the acculturation theories, the interaction between the Roma and their host
communities in various countries in Europe was studied. It was found that the Roma are a
separatist group and the host communities have exclusion and/or assimilationist orientations
towards the Roma. The IAM model then predicts that the relations between the Roma and
their host communities are conflictual. This prediction is supported by past events but also
by modern developments regarding the Roma presence in Europe.
Regarding sociological theories, first the individual motivations to contribute were
analyzed. It was found that mutual affection and identification had exclusive effects towards
Roma people. Arguably, long-term self-interest and accepted coercion also have detrimental
effects. This conviction is supported on events such as the deportation of the Roma from
France. Furthermore, it is assumed that accepted coercion makes the host community
contribute but, at the same time, exacerbates the negative attitudes towards them because
of a feeling of negative reciprocity. Finally it was found that moral convictions were one
potential motivator for solidarity towards the Roma. Second, deservingness criteria were
studied. Van Oorschot (2006) found that the lowest rank of deservingness was of the
immigrants and that there was no significant correlation between conditionality and welfare
Page 10 of 14
Solidarity & Cultural Diversity December 16, 2011
regime type and welfare support. Roma people are among the group seen as most
underserving but their unique characteristics make them a special type within this group.
Furthermore, it is believed that in the case of the Roma, welfare policies have been modified
as a mechanism of control therefore, a research study on this topic is proposed on the final
paragraph of this paper. Third, social capital was also analysed in the components defined
by Putnam and further categorized by van Oorschot & Arts (2005). The conclusion of the
assessment was that the Roma are likely to have very low social capital and this puts them
in a considerably disadvantaged position because, according to Bourdieu, “social capital
becomes a resource in social struggles that are carried out in different arenas or fields”
(Siisiäinen, 2000). Finally, the crowding-out hypothesis was revisited but from another angle;
namely the impact of European Union initiatives to improve conditions for the Roma on the
welfare states.
This paper lacked data to correctly confirm some hypothesis and assumptions
made. For this reason, and having shed some light on the current social standing of the
Roma people, a research study is proposed that analyzes welfare programs for Roma
people in European Union member countries with two purposes: (1) to see how their
differences or similarities are explained by the theoretical framework of social solidarity and
acculturation, and (2) to analyze the crowding-out hypothesis that the European Union
provokes at nation-state level.
Page 11 of 14
Solidarity & Cultural Diversity December 16, 2011
References
1. Axelrod, R. (1984). The Evolution of Cooperation. In Hechter, M. & Horne, C. (2009),
Theories of Social Order: A Reader (pp. 175-185). United States of America:
Stanford University Press.
2. Bourhis, R.Y., Moïse, L.C., Perreault, S. & Senécal, S. (1997). Towards an
Interactive Acculturation Model: A Social Psychological Approach. International
Journal of Psychology, 32(6), 369-386.
3. European Commission. (2010). Improving the tools for social exclusion and non-
discrimination of Roma in the EU. Retrieved December 14, 2011, from:
http://www.errc.org/cms/upload/file/improving-the-tools-for-the-social-inclusion-and-
non-discrimination-of-roma-in-the-eu-summary-and-selected-projects-2010.pdf
4. Field, J. (2008). Social Capital (2nd ed.). United States of America: Routledge.
5. Fraser, A. (2005). The Gypsies. United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing.
6. Goldston, J.A. (2010). The Struggle for Roma Rights: Arguments that Have Worked
[Electronic Version]. Human Rights Quarterly, 32, 311-325.
7. Hancock, I. (2005). We are the Romani People. Great Britain: University of
Hertfordshire Press.
8. Haviland, W.A., Prins H.E.L., McBride, B., Walrath, D. (2011). Cultural Anthropology:
The Human Challenge. United States of America: Cengage Learning.
9. Infosud Human Rights Tribune. (2008, February 6). Swiss gypsies relive a painful
past. Retrieved 14 December, 2011, from: http://www.infosud.org/spip.php?
article2784
10. Morrison, K. (2006). Marx, Durkheim, Weber: Formations of Modern Social Thought
(2nd ed.). Oxford: The Alpen Press.
11. Siisiäinen, M. (July, 2000). Two Concepts of Social Capital: Bordieau vs. Putnam.
Dubling: ISTR Fourth International Conference. Retrieved December 15, 2011, from:
http://www.istr.org/conferences/dublin/workingpapers/siisiainen.pdf
Page 12 of 14
Solidarity & Cultural Diversity December 16, 2011
12. Van Oorschot, W. (November, 1998). Shared Identity and Shared Utility: On
Solidarity and its Motives. Work and Organization Research Centre, 98.11.008/2.
13. Van Oorschot, W. (2002). Individual motives for contribution to welfare benefits in
The Netherlands [Electronic Version]. The Policy Press, 30(1), 31-46.
14. Van Oorschot, W. & Arts, W. (2005). The social capital of European welfare states:
The crowding out hypothesis revisited [Electronic Version]. Journal of European
Social Policy, 15(1), 5-26.
15. Van Oorschot, W. (2006). Making the difference in social Europe: deservingness
perceptions among citizens of European welfare states [Electronic Version]. Journal
of European Social Policy, 16(1), 23-42.
16. Vermeersch, P. (2007). The Romani Movement: Minority Politics & Ethnic
Mobilization in Contemporary Central Europe. United States of America: Berghahn
Books.
Page 13 of 14