COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

The Social Capital of migrants and individual ICT use. A comparative analysis of European countriesDr Frank ThomasFTR Internet ResearchRosny-sous-Bois, France

frank.thomasftr@free.fr

COST 298 The Good, The Bad and the UnexpectedMoscow, 23 to 25 May 2007

COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

The context The free movement of people a major

political objective in the European Union Migrants are important: a - recent -

challenge and a possible solution to a part of Europe's problems

i2010 policy: knowledge and innovation the engines of sustainable growth, towards an inclusive Information Society, through widespread use of ICTs

COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

e-inclusion and migrants The inclusion of migrants into a

sustainable IS has still a considerable way to go.

There are a elite and under-class migrants, the first included in the IS, the second demanding it.

Migrants numerically important: in 2002, a net migration balance of 1.7 mill. inh., i.e. 3.7 per 1,000 inh.

Including migrants a political necessity.

COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

What is a migrant ?

A migrant is not necessarily a foreigner.

Migrant CitizenshipStatus National Non-national

Change of borders- Yugoslavia- Baltic StatesResident foreigners

Non- Standard case - in border regionsMigrant - Baltic States

- GermanyReturning expat

Migrant Having acquired citizenshipInternal migration Standard caseTransnational migration

Non-nationalised 2nd or 3rd generation immigrants

COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

A better definition of a migrant

Lambert (2004) proposes a definition based upon

Having a foreign nationality Having one or two parents born abroad Speaking a language at home which is not

one of the country's official languages A self-definition as belonging to a minority

group in the country

COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

Migrants and social capital Social capital can be understood as the capacity for

collective action by an individual, an institution, a society through

Social links with social acteurs of the same origin: bonding capital, for social identity

= family, friends, neighbours? Social links with acteurs of different origins, that bridge

between bonding networks: bridging capital, for strategic action

= acquaintances, voluntary associations, self-help groups. Trust can be seen either as a result or a condition for

collective action through social capital. Migrants can advance in the receiving contry if they can

create both bonding and bridging capital.

COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

The quality of survey data on migrants (or the lack of it)

Source: OECD EVS ESSIndicator Citizenship Citizenship language citizenship citizenship migrantsYear: 2001 2001 2000 2001 2002/03 2002/03Austria 8,8% 8,9% 1,4% 4,3% 22%Belgium 8,2% 8,4% 11,2% 4,9% 18%Czech Republic 2,0% 5,1% 0,5% 0,4% 12%Denmark 5,0% 4,8% 12,4% 4,1% 2,4% 10%Finland 1,9% 1,8% 0,5% 1,6% 6%France 5,6% 5,6% 8,7% 1,4% 4,3% 25%Germany 8,9% 8,9% 6,7% 2,5% 5,0% 16%Greece 7,0% 7,0% 1,0% 5,3% 20%Hungary 1,1% 1,1% 0,2% 12%Ireland 4,0% 4,1% 1,4% 3,2% 12%Italy 2,4% 2,5% 5,9% 0,1% 0,3% 5%Luxembourg 37,5% 36,9% 37,3% 34,0% 55%Netherlands 4,3% 4,2% 21,4% 2,4% 1,9% 13%Norway 4,1% 8,1% 2,7% 11%Poland 0,1% 0,3% 0,0% 9%Portugal 3,4% 2,0% 2,0% 2,3% 8%Slovenia 2,3% 0,1% 0,1% 14%

EUROSTAT New Cronos

EURESCOM P903

Lambert(ESS data)

COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

Does being a migrant make a difference ?

Social demography

Social position

Social geography

Social bonding capital

Social bridging capital

Trust

Migrant statusMigrant status

Regular Internet & email use

ControlsControls

COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

To give a context : A classification of countries by social capital

Bonding capital Mean number of weekly socializing contacts with family & friends Family judged more important than friends (calculated) Subjective importance of contacts with family Subjective importance of contacts with friends

Bridging capital % Nominal membership in voluntary organizations % Active membership in voluntary associations % Volunteering in voluntary associations

% Helping outside family, associations, work

COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

National profiles of social capital

Corporatist LatinBonding social capital- % Weekly socialising 26 34 34 57- Mean Importance of family (1 ...10) 9,5 9,0 9,4 9,7- Mean Importance of friends (1 ... 10) 8,7 8,4 8,2 8,1- % Family more important than friends 34 43 51 60

Bridging social capital- % Nominal membership 80 75 41 33- % Active membership 44 42 27 15- % Volunteering 25 22 11 9- % Informal & Self-Help 35 45 25 22

Social-democratic & Liberal

Transfor- mation

COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

CorporatistSociodemocrat & liberalTransformationLatin

The Geography of Social Capital in Europe

COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

Major results of the data analysisRegular use of the Internet can best be explained

by, in decreasing order of importance, when using Lambert's definition of migrants

Resource equipment: social position, life cycle, gender, size of community

Bridging capital: nominal or active membership Bonding capital: socializing (mostly in

socialdemocratic & liberal countries) Migrant status (in some countries) Trust: interpersonal trust (in some countries)

COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

And migrants in all of this, after having introduced controls ?

In countries with strong ICT development (DK,SF,NL,UK): no difference for migrants

In countries with younger migrants (EIR, N): more Internet users among migrants

S, D, GR: migrants are less probable Internet users than non-migrants

COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

Social-democratic & liberal countries Corporatist countries Latin countries Transf ormation countries

Odds ratios DK SF N S GB EIR A B D NL ES F I SLO GR HU

Age group- 30-60 yrs- 61 + yrs.Gender (male)Living as a coupleLiving with children in preschool ageLiving with young childr. Living with adolescentsEducational attainment - secondary level- tertiary level, degreeHousehold equival.income- second quartile- third quartile- fourth quartileSize of communitySocial capital: bondingInformal socialisingImportance of friendsSocial capital: bridgingNominal membershipActive membershipVolunteeringInformal volunteeringInterpersonal trustTrust in institutionsMigrant status- migrantSample size 1237 1741 1918 1753 1723 1572 1305 1305 2208 196 861 1209 590 1116 1621 1265Nagelkerke's R 0,40 0,47 0,48 0,47 0,46 0,41 0,38 0,43 0,38 0,32 0,47 0,40 0,41 0,45 0,49 0,52

Red background: negative odds

Yellow background: positive odds

Percentage of variation

explication

COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

Some questions that remain What about mobile use ? What about the effect of broadband use ? What about usage patterns ? A refined analysis of the country & cultural context

There is a lack of longitudinal data Representative surveys lack sufficient sub-samples

of (legal) migrants, to differentiate among migrants Qualitative and quantitative studies remain

unconnected.

COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

And your questions ?

Thank you.

The full text published in the proceedings can also be obtained from the author or

from www.slideshare.com/ftr_

An OpenOffice presentation