International Migration, Integration and Social Justice in Europe.

Sharing perspectives between academia and civil society.

The 2016 Conference focused on the integration of public policies and processes experienced by international migrants in the European context and beyond. It aimed to combine both academic and grass-roots best practices and perspectives to enrich the knowledge, discussion and outcome of the conference in terms of policy change.

Given the concern regarding integration and migration throughout Europe, there is an urgent need to rethink the policy approach and the ways in which social movements may contribute to this. The integration of migrants is a test case for social cohesion and justice and offers a lens through which to engage in a critical analysis of European societies, fueling public debate and furthering the issue in concrete action and policy. The choice to give voice to a more ‘activist’ side was made in line both with the theme of social justice, as well as the underpinning of sharing perspectives between academia and civil society. The conference aslo bet for gender balance, not only in terms of  equal composition of the panesl, and recognizing the contributions of women as academics, policy makers and activits, but also considered issues of gender justice and balance for the female researchers careers by providing  babysitting service at the conference.

6th July 2016. Open Ceremony

The welcome ceremony officially marked the beginning of the INTEGRIM/SCRIBANI Conference, titled “International Migration, Integration and Social Justice in Europe.  Sharing perspectives between academia and civil society”. José Guibert, the rector of the University of Deusto, begun by thanking the political authorities who intervened to the inauguration of the conference, as well as all the participants. He emphasized the importance of focusing research on social justice and human rights, which are crucial issues for our society. In relation to this point, Guibert highlighted the critical situation of academia in Turkey and called the government to respect the independence of universities. He stressed the fact that a number of academics have been fired, jailed or forced to leave the country for expressing their dissent with the authoritarian and repressive policies of the Turkish government (in particular towards the Kurdish minority). He then expressed his solidarity to conference participant Çagla Aykac, forced to leave Turkey as a result of her involvement in the petition ‘Turkish academics for Peace’ and now hosted by the University of Geneva. Eduardo Ruiz, coordinator of the INTEGRIM program, welcomed the participants and thanked the rector and the other local authorities for intervening to the inauguration of the conference. In particular, Ruiz expressed his satisfaction for the participation of Mr. Urkullu, and took it as a sign of the political commitment of the Basque government to the themes discussed in the conference – namely a commitment to social justice, human rights and a fair and humane treatments of migrants across the world. Ruiz Vieytez also denounced the current situation in Turkey as an example of the deterioration of the political climate, further testified by rising xenophobia and anti-migrant discourses in different parts of Europe in the midst of the so-called ‘refugee crisis’. Ruiz therefore reaffirmed the importance of promoting human rights for everyone, and particularly for minorities of all kinds (ethnic, religious or national). Mark Rotsaert, chairman of the Scribani Council, welcomed the participants and began his intervention by presenting Scribani, an international Antwerp-based network established in 2003 and committed to promoting a peaceful and more just society. The network organized a number of conferences in different cities throughout the years, with the aim of bringing together civil society, academics and different institutions. Asier Abaunza, councellor of the Municipality of Bilbao, praised the organizers for organizing this conference and thanked them for the invitation. He focused his intervention on the migratory context in Bilbao, describing a context where immigration is on the rise and new needs and demands emerge, and where there is an increasing need for research on migration and integration. Abaunza then argued that we should see immigration as an opportunity for growth for Bilbao, and that successful management of migration and diversity will make the city more competitive and more attractive to local and international investors. Iñigo Urkullu, President of the Basque Government, thanked the organizers for the invitation and for organizing the conference. He highlighted the fact that Basque people can easily relate to migration, as more than 100,000 Basques left the country in the past and went through the hardships of migrating and settling elsewhere. He then stated that we are now living a very severe migration crisis, and we should strive to work together to maintain social cohesion in our societies. Urkully finally argued that we should promote equality of opportunity for everyone, and that the Basque country is open to everyone.

Read the Basque President discourse:


The Conference started with a panel chaired by María López Belloso, and gathered experts from the policy making (Philippe Keraudren, deputy Head of Unit at DG RTD in Unit B6 “Open and Inclusive Societies” at the European Commission), from the academia (Sarah Spencer, COMPAS, Oxford University), and civil society (Jean Marie Carriere, JRS Europe). Philippe Keraudren  focused his intervention on two aspects: recent developments in migration policy at the EU level as an effect of the recent ‘refugee crisis’, and the relationship between migration research and the EU institutions as research funders. Keraudren stated that EU institutions, as a result of the latest influx of refugees and migrants, are planning to make migration one of the main research areas for the 2018-2020 period. Research priorities will include: migration flows and drivers; asylum and variation of asylum laws across countries; framing, ethics and history of migration. Keraudren stressed that the EU is trying to foster greater dialogue among policy-makers, civil society and academics, and particularly urged academics to get more involved in the public debate as there is a strong need for people to ‘speak truth to power’. Sarah Spencer, researcher at COMPAS, stressed the fact that a strong integration agenda is now more important than ever in Europe. She argued that, however, integration policies as they are now, do not really tackle fundamental questions of inequality and systemic disadvantage for non-EU migrants. Spencer then argued that the integration concept has suffered from an excess of normativity, as it has often been taken as a synonym of assimilation. She therefore encouraged researchers to rather articulate a non-normative conception of integration which focuses on the process of integration, whichever form it may take on the ground. She finally urged academics to avoid doing policy-oriented research, but rather to think of ways to make their research policy relevant. Jean-Marie Carrière, regional director of the Jesuit Refugee Service in Europe, began his intervention by telling the story of an Iranian migrant successfully integrating in France. He argued, however, that the story shows that those processes are complex, long-term and that they also largely rely on the involvement of the civil society to be successful. Moreover, he stated that integration, here seen as active reception, should start from the very beginning – from the arrival of a migrant in a specific place – in order to work. In his conclusion, Carrière emphasized the importance of the concept of hospitality as the moral guiding principle for integrating migrants in receiving societies.  During the Q&A session, the audience formulated a number of questions to the panelists regarding the role of academics vis-à-vis policy-makers, and the relevance and impact of university researchers on the decision-makers. In response to a comment by Keraudren, who argued that academics have little impact in influencing the wider society, researchers from the audience strongly defended the relevance of their work and their involvement with different types of publics (from trade unions to community groups, from neighborhood associations to local politicians, and more). Other comments focused on Spencer’s presentation, particularly on the feasibility of developing a non-normative concept of integration. A number of participants argued that normativity is intrinsic in every conceptualization of integration.

Presentation of photo exhibitions

Tina Magazzini introduced two photo exhibitions hosted in the university cloister. Gabriele Stabile documented the reception of asylum seekers and refugees in the United States, depicting the stories of people who arrived in the US from all parts of the world. Giulia di Fiore and Giulia Strombini presented their project ‘Siriani in Transito’, a photographic project designed to raise awareness about the situation of Syrian refugees fleeing their country and passing through Italy.

7th July, 2016

Session 1: Identity and Cultural Integration.

Eva Brems presented her paper titled “Addressing Multicultural Conflicts: an Emphasis on Procedural Fairnessk”. In focusing on multiculturalism from a legal point of view, she argued that not only should we be concerned about the outcome of multicultural policies and regulations (fairness of outcome), but also about the way in which these rules come about and are deliberated (procedural fairness). In her paper she specifically focused on the local level, as that is the dimension where issues of both outcome and procedure become concrete empirical questions. Çagla Aykac presented a paper titled “On the neutrality of researchers: thinking through identities on the margins of Europe”. She began her presentation by describing her involvement with ‘Turkish Academics for Peace’ and her signing of the petition condemning the actions of the Turkish government against the Kurdish minority. She explained how she had to resign her job at the university in Turkey and leave the country due to her political commitment. She continued her presentation focusing on the role of academics in society, arguing that academics can have the most impact when they engage politically yet are capable to mobilize ‘objective’ data and information to supplement their arguments. She also pointed out that political action is  not always possible for academics, as people face lots of hurdles and are confronted with difficult choices to make (career vs. criticism, family vs. political principles, etc.). The discussants and the Q&A session touched upon both presentations. Claudia Paraschivescu challenged Aykac to specify her conception of objectivity, particularly as she made clear in her presentation that her specific positionality and emotions had prompted to act subjectively. Roberta Ricucci focused more on Brem’s paper, addressing it from the perspective of Islam and Muslim minorities. People from the audience praised Aykac’s political commitment and life choices, and also stressed the importance that academics have as both researchers and political subjects in the public arena.

Round table 1: Identity, belonging and integration.

In her paper, titled “New Integration Frontiers for Second Generations: Identity changes between Interactions On- and Off-Line”, Roberta Ricucci talked about her recent research on offline-online difference in youth discourse, based in qualitative interviews conducted in Turin, Italy, with young Muslisms. What emerged from her analysis of the respondents’ answers is a significant gap between the services related to cultural integration that the policy maker plans, and what the citizen receives. While the possibility of being a European Muslim should be supported by public institutions, cultural segregation is still very marked amongst the second generations of immigrants in Italy. The main takeaways of Ricucci’s presentation, which will be published in the Deusto Human Rights’ Anuario, where that 1) the role played by the society where one grows and builds one’s identity is crucial 2) how foreigners portray themselves partly depends on how the society where they live sees them 3) being (and being perceived) as both Muslim and European is becoming increasingly difficult with the rise of right-wing movements in several EU countries.

In Kitti Baracsi’s paper, titled “‘Culture’ and ‘integration’ in the making of Roma students: the contribution of a critical and engaged ethnography”, the focus of was on the concepts of ‘culture’ and ‘integration’ within education settings with young Roma students: who gets labeled as a ‘special’ student? And why are Roma so ‘special’?

Particularly, in an already ‘special’ context such as that of Scampia (one of the most marginalized neighborhoods of Naples, Italy), it is interesting to see how the ethnic/ cultural divide plays such an important role. The main takeaways of Baracsi’s paper (which will come out in December 2016 as part of a WP1 coordinated special issue) were that 1) more research is needed to find a way to assess and critically assess these concepts by conducting participative research 2) it is crucial to design change together with the local actors and 3) the case of Roma students captures how terms related to culture and integration acquire sense in local practices.

In her paper, titled “The role of cultural heritage in the development of the sense of belonging among young Norwegian Turks. Boundary crossing and making”, Karolina Nikielska-Sekula explored multiple aspects of Norwegian Turks’ belonging. She exemplified and problematized the rhetoric of home present in Norwegian Turks’ narration, and argued that the belonging that comprises the feeling at home was expressed towards Drammen but not towards Turkey (places of origin in Turkey). She aimed to answer the question of where the actual home is (for her respondents), and reached the conclusions that the feeling of belonging to Turkey was influenced by 1) autochthonous discourses of “being born from the soil” in Europe (Geschier 2009) and of foreignness of non-Norwegians in Norway (the process of othering of foreigners in Norway) 2) discourses of longing and of an idealized homeland present in Norwegian Turkish families 3) part of a heritage that the respondents received from their families (even though they might not share it personally) 4) this resulted in a dual belonging, divided between Drammen and Norway.

Sahizer Samuk, in her paper titled “Temporary Protection and Temporary Integration: Policies Regarding Syrians’ Integration in Turkey”, she focuses on the temporariness of the Syrians and their level of integration in terms of education. The question asked was whether it is possible to apply the concept of temporary integration to their case, and the answer is (preliminarily) positive.

What Smauk underlined was that the concept of harmonization that the Directorate General of Migration Management in Turkey adopted has evolved over time. In the beginning it was used in contrast with assimilation and now it is more ideologically contested, as it is currently more in line with the history of the Ottoman Empire, and assistance and aid to Syrians is also considered in this respect. This attitude manifests itself more in the area of education and this might have future implications. In legal language integration is a novel term in Turkey that requires a two-way approach, as recalled in the 2012 OSCE Common Basic Principles on integration, but both its theoretical foundations and its practical applications are still contested and controversial. This was exemplified by cases relative to educational integration (work in progress, still developing).

During the debate following the roundtable, issues relating to identity-formation were brought up: how many generations does it take to get over the ‘migrant’ labeling and identification? Methodology relative to qualitative interviewing were discussed, as were potential parallels and comparisons between Turkey ‘harmonization policy’ (linked to Muslim values) and China’s ‘harmonic society’ (linked to Confucian values).

13:15 – 14:15 Documentary Screening – INTEGRIM Film School Session

Davide Gnes introduced the first session of the INTEGRIM Film Festival, centered around the work of the participants to the INTEGRIM Film School in December 2014 and May 2015. He presented the Film School initiative, which was organized by the Center for Policy Studies of the Central European University of Budapest in collaboration with the INTEGRIM and Changing Employment Marie Curie Training Programs, and then went on to introduce the work produced by a few INTEGRIM PhD fellows. The session was concluded with a very brief Q&A session with the audience.

14:130 – 16:00 Session 2: Citizenship and Political Participation.

Michael Jones-Correa presented a paper titled “The Political Effects of Having Undocumented Parents”, which focused on how undocumented status of parents affects participation of children of immigrants in US political life. He argued that the strong level of political mobilization for immigrant rights presents us with an empirical puzzle, given that undocumented immigrants are generally regarded as poorly equipped to engage politically in receiving societies. In his paper, which relies on survey techniques, Jones-Correa argued that political mobilization of children of undocumented immigrants can be explained by theories of social learning that emphasize the education received by parents. Moreover, the polarization of the current debate on immigration in the USA, with current criminalization of immigrants which places a large number of immigrant family at risk of deportation or incarceration, plays a large role in prompting children of immigrants to act.  The discussion focused on different aspects of Jones-Correa paper, ranging from the applicability of his conclusions to the European context, to the importance of external sources of support, such as private funders, in sustaining political mobilization for the rights of undocumented immigrants. Others have highlighted the role of organizational allies, and coalition-building, as a key component explaining for such unprecedented events as the immigrant rights marches of 2006.

16:30 – 18:30 Round table 2: Migration: Contemporary Conceptual Challenges to Citizenship.

Christina del Biaggio, in her paper titled “‘You do not know us? It’s normal! We live underground! Reception of asylum seekers in civic protection shelters in Geneva and civic society’s reaction”, examined the infrastructure of reception for asylum seekers and refugees in Geneva, Switzerland. She argued that local institutions have developed a ‘bunkerisation’ of reception, which physically removes asylum seekers – especially young males, whose asylum request has been denied – from the public space. This physical removal also results in the virtual removal of the question of the treatment of migrants and refugees from public discussion. Christina then moved on to examine counter-tactics of asylum seekers and civil society, who engaged in a number of protests and demonstrations throughout out the streets of Geneva. Not only did this mobilization rose awareness about the living conditions of the asylum seekers, but also made political subjects. Celine Cantat, in her paper on “Europeanity, Migration and Solidarity in Hungary”, explored forms of pro-migrant solidarity in different cities in Hungary. In her paper she explored the waves of mobilization which took place in the summer of 2015 and continued throughout the rest of the year, highlighting the complex relations between local and international activists and the challenge of establishing a solidarity movement in a particularly difficult context. Georgiana Turculet, in her paper titled “A fair Cooperation Scheme in a de facto Uncooperative Institution? The EU and the Current Refugee Crisis”, asked the question of how to establish a fair refugee redistributive scheme among EU member states. She argued that two conflicting intuitions – the commitment to refugee protection and to social justice, and the pursuit of national interest on the side of states – require the development of a new notion of ‘fair redistribution’ to ensure that non-cooperative states agree to take their share of asylum seekers and refugees. Michael Nicholson, in his paper titled “The political incorporation of immigrant minorities”, asked what political and social factors drive differences in immigrants’ political incorporation across groups and polities. In his survey study of the Italian, Turkish and Kurdish communities in different Swiss cantons, Nicholson explored the role of immigrant identity in affecting civic engagement in the receiving society, particularly through the notion of communitarian linked fate.

Reception at the Bilbao city Hall

Bilbao Council is an Associated partner in the INTEGRIM project. On the evening of July the 7th the Council offered a reception for Conference participants in the Arab Room of the city hall, where Tomas Hierro, city councellor stressed the commitment of the City with integration of migrants .Eduardo Ruiz Vieytez highlighted the importance of the participation of the council and policy makers in research project and the sound track of collaboration between the Council and Deusto University. The ceremony concluded with traditional poems, music and welcoming dances.

8th July, 2016

9:00 – 10:30 Session 3: Labor and Social Integration.

Demetrios Papademetriou presented his paper titled “The Labor Market Integration of Asylum Seekers and Refugees: Thinking Harder, Thinking Anew”.  In his keynote speech, Papademetriou approached the themes of global migration governance and social integration of migrants. Through a wide range of data he showed the rise of migration and refugee flows to Europe, and argued that the EU reception system has been placed under considerable stress as a result of the high number of arrivals during 2015. Papademetriou argued that this situation, which particularly affected German, has prompted EU member states’ governments – which are the main drivers of EU migration policy – to take a number of steps to curb immigration flows and avoid repetition of a similar ‘overflow’ in the future. The EU-Turkey deal should be therefore seen as the attempt of the EU to limit new migration flows to Europe, and to engage the global community over the issue of refugee resettlement. The discussion and Q&A sessions focused on methodological as well as ethical aspects of Papademetriou’s presentation. Jill Ahrens cautioned against using statistical evidence of arrivals and registrations as objective evidence of the ‘real’ number of asylum seekers and refugees present in Germany and in the rest of Europe, and suggested that Papademetriou may be exaggerating and dramatizing the crisis. Given his role as policy advisor, this may also lead policy- and decision-makers to take the wrong actions. Sonia Pereira instead criticized the way Papademetriou presented his topic, as framing it as a problem of refugee reception rather than the result of an armed conflict (in areas such as Afghanistan or Syria) that harmed hundreds of thousands of people completely changes the terms of the debate, and misrepresents what is really at stake. She also argued that, despite Papademetriou’s acknowledgement that asylum seekers and migrants are making their own choices in selecting destinations, his presentation shows little recognition of migrants’ agency in the process.

11:00 – 13:00 Round table 3: Labor Market and Social Integration.

In her paper, titled “Examining labour market and social integration at times of crisis: labour migrants’strategies and coping mechanisms”, Sonia Pereira focused on access to the labor market in Portugal for non-European migrants.  In her paper, titled “Status access and rights as mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion of third country nationals in European Union law on labour migration”, Bjarney Friðriksdóttir explored access to the labor market by certain immigrant groups. In her analysis of different EU policies and directives concerning circulation of workers, she draws a distinction between different groups, such as for example temporary and seasonal workers or highly skilled workers relying on the Blue Card Directive. She argued that EU policies and directives are poorly harmonized and implemented in member states. Sophie Hinger, in her paper “The Constitution of the (Non)-Refugee Subject in Integration Policies”, focused on the role of local authorities in the integration process of migrants and refugees in Germany. Through an analysis that interrogates the very basis of policy rather than its outcome, Hinger explored the process of policy-formation, from framing an issue as a problem to the proposition of specific solutions. In her paper, Hinger saw the emergence of two different narratives in local arenas: one that sees migration and migrants as a resource, and one that sees integration as equal participation in social systems. Iulius-Cezar Macarie, in his paper titled “Night Shifts in the Days of Post-Circadian Capitalism”, explored the effects of night-work labor practices on the well-being of migrants. Macarie argued that nigh-work is a distinctive feature of late capitalist societies, where production never stops and does not follow the physiological rhythm of human bodies. Through his anthropological field study in a market of London, Macarie showed how sleep deprivation and chronic fatigue affects the lives of night workers, undermining their ability to live a normal live as well as their ability to resist and collectively act against the very system that exploits them.

13:00 – 14:30 INTEGRIM Film Festival Documentary Screening

Davide Gnes and Tina Magazzini introduced the second session of the INTEGRIM Film Festival. This session included the films sent to the festival by independent film-makers and which fitted the broader theme of the conference. After a short introduction, the film-makers engaged in a brief Q&A with the audience

14:45 – 16:15 Session 4: Urban Integration, Residential Patterns and Mobility.

Thomas Maloutas presented his paper titled “Rethinking urban diversity”. He began by addressing Steven Vertovec’s concept of ‘super-diversity’, arguing that it is crucial to re-consider diversity in relation to inequalities and social justice. Moreover, he suggested that the very concept of diversity may actually hide the importance of class positions and inequalities in sustaining and reproducing diversity, reifying and celebrating differences which are built on unequal access to resources. Discussants Siresa Lopez and Reinhard Schweitzer tried to challenge and push further some of Maloutas’ argumentations. Lopez wondered whether Maloutas’ argument would benefit more from incorporating in his paper the concept of culture, and asked him why avoiding a crucial dimension such as culture in the treating of diversity. Schweitzer, on the other hand, encouraged Maloutas to systematically clarify the concepts he used in order to make it easier to operationalize them and distinguish them.

16:45 – 18:30 Round table 4: Migrants and Cities: Diversity Beyond (In)Visibility.

In his paper, titled “Identibuzz: migrants’ visibilization through co-creation and the dissemination of audiovisual narratives”,  José Luis Roncero presented a project on social narratives through a participatory methodology. The project aimed to generate digital content, by working on new European identities and showing how those are dynamically constructed. Moreover, Roncero stated that Identbuzz sought to bring out the value if multiculturalism and ethnic diversity to general audiences. He stressed the importance to produce visual material by including the voice of foreign people, particularly through documentaries and interviews. He then moved on to show an excerpt from this visual project. Maria-Grazia Montella, in her paper “Visible spaces, migrants’ practices and the role of planning policies. A case study from Rome”,  focused on the planning of multicultural spaces. Drawing on the idea of ‘multicultural planning’, she examined the ‘Nuovo Mercato Esquilino’ market in Rome as a case study where different planning processes are at work – gentrification, beautification. Through her study, Montella asked the questions of how Italian institutions face the challenges of multiculturalism, and of how institutions can deal with cultural differences in places as diverse as markets while avoiding cultural discrimination.Franz Buhr, in his paper titled  “Navigating Lisbon: urban apprenticeship as migrant integration”, focused on cities as ‘spaces of learning’, as spaces that generate knowledge. Buhr argued that the urban generates opportunities to acquire and mobilize knowledge that is used by its inhabitants to live this very space. In relation to migration, he specifically asked the question of how migrants acquire and produce practical knowledge and skills that are necessary to use a new city  where they settle. Buhr built on the idea of ‘becoming a local’, arguing that this process is open to everyone and depends on a period of apprenticeship, not on status, class or ethnicity. Through his ethnographic analysis of how migrants mobilize urban resources in Lisbon, Buhr showed us how migrants construct their own mental maps of resources and opportunities available in the city and rank them in order of importance. In conclusion, he urged us to consider not so much the question of whether migrants integrate in the city, but rather how, or in what way, they choose or manage to do so.

18:45 – 20:00 Closing Ceremony

The closing ceremony was chaired by Toñi Caro, Director of the International Research project Office of the University of Deusto, who stressed the sound track of collaboration and commitment of the University and the INTEGRIM network with Migration and Integration issues, since the beginning of the Humanitarian net, the GEITONIES project, and the IMISCOE excellence network. According to Mrs Caro, this collaboration and expertise underlies the solid body of knowledge that INTEGRIM has generated. She stressed the opportunities ahead with new research topics in forthcoming calls and WP, and reminded he need of fostering interdisciplinary and intersectoral collaborations among research communities  that will help to map and assemble existing research on migration in Europe, reducing fragmentation and maximising the impact of research.  She linked then to the speech of Ramon Flecha, expert on social impact of research, presenting some of the initiatives of INTEGRIM project to achieve this social impact, as the story telling video that was screened, or the survey answered by the INTEGRIM researchers.

Ramon Flecha acknowledged the work done by the INTEGRIM team to monitor the impact of the project, and revised the concept of social impact. He explained the difference between dissemination, outreach, transfer and social impact. According to Ramon, even though social impact is yet a new concept to be developed in depth, there are already some tools and ways to measure the social impact of research, as SIOR database or ORCHID. In social impact terms, Mr. Flecha emphasized the role of institutions as the University of Deusto and the Human Right Institute that have always stood up for collaboration with society and close collaboration with social stakeholders and civil society.

Finally, Gorka Urrutia, Director of the Human Right Institute, closed the conference and the session by making a summary of the ideas shared during the conference and thanking the whole team of the conference, the Scribani and INTEGRIM network and all participants the contributions and debates during the sessions and called upon further collaborations in the future to continue with path and the success of INTEGRIM.

*Conference rapporteurs: Davide Gnes, Tina Magazzini and María López Belloso

dossier prensa web

Photo galery:

INTEGRIM Participants in the MIGRINTER 30 Ans Colloque

The MIGRINTER colloque for the 30 ans aniversary was organised together with the INTEGRIM network. Many of our INTEGRIM researchers participated in the organization of the panels, as speakers or presenting papers.

The conference was a great success and gathered more than 200 researcher with a high participation of ESRs.


The conference is organized by the Pedro Arrupe Human Rights Institute at the University of Deusto in the framework of the INTEGRIM (Integration and International Migration: Pathways and Integration Policies) research training program in conjunction with the Scribani Network’s bi-annual conference.

Conference website:




INTEGRIM (Integration and International Migration: Pathways and Integration Policies) ( is a Seventh Framework Programme research training network at eight academic partner institutions and six non academic partners fostering a multidisciplinary research career on international migration and integration within the European Union and neighbouring countries.

Within the project, 23 ESR have been recruited in three different calls. In the first call, 8 ESR were recruited for a 36 month period, and in the following 2 calls, 15 new ESR were selected but for a 12 month period (8 in the 2014 call and 7 in the 2015 call).

Meet our researchers and listed to their experience:

Marie Curie Networks Film School

The Center for Policy Studies hosted and helped organize a documentary filmmaking training course for young academics from the INTEGRIM and ChangingEmployment Marie Curie Initial Training Networks.

The MCN Film School was an intensive two-week training program in documentary film-making for Junior Research Fellows of the ChangingEmployment and INTEGRIM Marie Curie Training Networks. It aimed to provide the theoretical grounds for the role of visuality and film in social research; to offer a practical training in documentary film-making; and to supervise the development of visual projects developed by the members of the networks at all stages of production.

It was taught by Vlad Naumescu, professor of visual anthropology and ethnographic methods at the Central European University, and Klara Trencsenyi, freelance director and cinematographer, both authors of the documentary film “Bird’s Way” ( During the second week they were supported by the Czech director, writer and editor Šimon Špidla (



INTEGRIM was at the workshop for researchers and practitioners “PROTECTING AND INCLUDING ‘NEW’ AND ‘OLD’ MINORITIES: OPPORTUNITIES, CHALLENGES, SYNERGIES” organized by Roberta Medda-Windischer (EURAC) in Bolzano/Bozen on February 27, 2015.
Based on their on-going PhD theses, the INTEGRIM research fellows Tina Magazzini and Stefano Piemontese presented a paper titled “Cha(lle)nges in diversity management as a consequence of westward Roma migration in the EU: the case of Spain”.
The authors also drew upon findings from the 2011-2012 research project “Evaluating the Six Years of the Comprehensive Plan for the Roma Population in Catalonia” (EMIGRA and FAGiC) as well as from data collected during the workshop for scholars, policy makers, and NGOs “Bridging the Gap between Policy Making and Social Research. Strengths and challenges of the policies for Gitanos/Roma in Spain” (Barcelona, October 17, 2014) co-organized by Taller ACSA, the EMIGRA Research Group (Autonomous University of Barcelona) and the authors with the financial support of the European Academic Network on Romani Studies.
Thanks to Roberta Medda-Windischer for this opportunity, and also to all participants for the feedback and the outstanding quality of their presentations!



7 New Research Positions within the INTEGRIM Marie Curie Initial Training Network:

INTEGRIM network launches its third and last call for the recruitment of ESR. The Consortium is looking for 7 new ERS researchers who would ideally  be PhD candidates who are already in advanced stages of their doctoral research and the elaboration of their thesis (applicants should have no more than 4 years of full-time research experience since obtaining the degree that entitles them to pursue doctoral studies). The programme offers them the possibility of enjoying a one-year-long research stay at one of the academic institutions of the network, either to improve their analysis or to develop the corresponding field work for their projects.

The online application will be open from February the 2nd until March the 2nd on the project web page (

This project aims to research on policies and pathways of integration processes concerning migrants and minorities in European societies. The early-stage research positions offered in this call are open to students exploring issues related to migration and the integration of migrants in European societies, whose doctoral research should fit into the following INTEGRIM themes:

1. Identity and cultural integration;

2. Citizenship and political participation;

3. Labour and social integration;

4. Urban integration, residential patterns and mobility.

The ESR positions should ideally be assigned to PhD candidates who are already in more advanced stages of their doctoral research and the elaboration of their thesis (applicants should have no more than 4 years of full-time research experience since obtaining the degree that entitles them to pursue doctoral studies). The programme offers them the possibility of enjoying a one-year-long research stay at one of the academic institutions of the network, either to improve their analysis or to develop the corresponding field work for their projects.

List of vacancies:


CALL 2015

DEUSTO            1ESR (12Months)WP1

SCMR-USO        1ESR (12 Months)WP3

CEDEM-ULG      1ESR (12 Months )WP2

IGOT-CEG/UL    1ESR (12 Months )WP4

IMES-UVA           1ESR (12 Months )WP2

MiReKoç KU      1ESR (12 Months )WP1

MIGRINTER-UP   1ESR (12 Months )WP4

For more information:

INTEGRIM: Second annual conference held in Budapest

The second Annual Conference of the INTEGRIM Network took place between December 9-12, 2014 in Budapest, Hungary. The host and overall organizer of the series events within the Annual Conference was the Center for Policy Studies, Central European University, Beneficiary 7 of the INTEGRIM project consortium.

In the framework of the Annual Conference, a one-day large-scale conference was organized on December 11, focusing on the theme “Fissures and Ruptures in European Societies: Masses, Migrants and Minorities.”

The conference addressed empirical and conceptual opportunities and recent explorations in understanding how migration flows, policies, and debates relate, move, reveal or clash with other important discords in society. Competitive, cooperative, transformative, or mutually constitutive relations of marked ruptures in society were explored and explained. The field of migration studies has obvious cross-currents with interdisciplinary scholarship on social inequalities, regimes of citizenship, practices of social exclusion and inclusion, and other key concepts capturing pronounced or disguised social ruptures. Similar types of encounters characterize the field of Romani Studies, whereas the two fields have generated only thin crosscurrents until now.  The conference brought together important scholars with the aim of promoting academic conversations across these two fields of studies and facilitating encounters of these two disjointed scholarly communities.

Keynote lectures

Two individuals were invited to present the keynote lectures of the conference:

1) Adrian Favell, Professor of Sociology at Sciences Po, Paris, prepared a talk on Immigration, integration and mobility: New agendas in migration studies.” Migration studies have exploded in recent decades, without always accumulating much wisdom. Via an overview of the changed landscape of migration and mobilities in Europe since 1990, his presentation discussed how these changes have challenged established paradigms of immigration and citizenship internationally, focusing particularly on the hugely problematic conception in policy and research of “integration”.

2) Catherine Neveu, from the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), L’Ecole des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales (EHESS, Paris, France), offered the talk Of some of the benefits to be gained from de/recentering citizenship”. The abstract of the talk she shared with the audience is as follows: «Euro-American» assumptions for conceiving citizenship have long remained out of scope, and this does have effects as to the ways citizenship is conceived of and analyzed. There is therefore a need to disclose such implicit framings. If efforts to better grasp contemporary reconfigurations of citizenship require to pay attention to other ways to define and practice it (i.e. among postcolonial minorities or in non-Western sites), they especially require us to adopt new tools and standing points from which to explore citizenship processes, tools and standing points that should avoid to subsume the complexity of citizenship struggles to one or another theoretical “model”. In other words, the much needed destabilizing work in citizenship studies is not just about enriching the picture with views and practices that challenge established meanings; it is also about adopting a political and academic standpoint that reframe citizenship in general, and clearly contextualize it. Here the simultaneous move of recentering and decentering citizenship from its agreed connections and positions proves particularly fruitful.

Talks and presentations

In addition to the keynote speakers, five scholars were invited to present during the Dec 11 INTEGRIM conference:

Prem Kumar Rajaram (Central European University, Budapest, Hungary): Common marginalizations: How austere neoliberalism impacts undocumented migrants and Roma in Europe

The study of the marginalization of undocumented migrants tends to focus on how states govern migrants in order to reinforce its sovereignty. These are important accounts, but the tendency is then to think the marginalization of undocumented migrants as being of a significantly different order to the marginalization of other groups or populations. In this essay Dr Rajaram argues that the contemporary neoliberal relation to politics, economy and the law in Europe cultivates surplus populations, amongst which are undocumented migrants and Roma. Their marginalizations, while each possessing singular features, is related to the marginalization of other groups surplus to neoliberal political economy. It is important to understand this common marginalization as part of an ongoing history of the relation between capital and labor.

Peter Vermeersch (University of Leuven, Belgium): The Roma as a subject of policy: Frames and counterframes

The paper focused on the various ways in which Roma appear as a subject in policy-related documents. In particular, Dr Vermeersch examined how frames emerging from Roma activism – and promoted by various stakeholders in the formation of policies on Roma on the European level – are reflected in EU policy-related documents. European policymakers seek out Roma to direct social assistance their way – but the Roma are also identified as a special group when states impose immigration control or extend security measures on them. While Roma activists have pushed for the Roma’s special position and legal recognition to alleviate the stigma of ‘Gypsy’ and make them a topic of concern in EU policy debates, new counterframes, in particular but not exclusively in the fields of migration and security, have stimulated and objectified the worrisome trend to see the Roma as a social group that is completely separated from national populations and do not share interests with other groups within these national populations.


Luicy Pedroza (German Institute for Global and Area Studies, Hamburg, Germany & Central European University,

Budapest, Hungary): The political integration of migrants before and beyond citizenship

The focus of reflections on the formal political integration of migrants in democracies has often fallen onto the citizen/non-citizen divide. Certainly, in the contemporary world it would seem like the best path open for migrants to safeguard  the civil, social, political, economic, cultural rights they enjoy in their countries of residence is to naturalize: that is, to acquire the citizenship (understood as nationality) of the country they live in. Yet, this focus on citizenship-qua-membership in a national community as the only path to formal political participation obscures and deactivates the potentialities of citizenship, which has historically referred to less and more than nationality. Dr Pedroza discussed these potentialities empirically, opening up the concept of citizenship for different meanings that can be activated by migrant residents to demand formal political inclusion beyond nationality.

Huub van Baar (Justus Liebig University Giessen, Germany & University of Amsterdam, Netherlands): At the nexus of migration, citizenship and Romani studies: The effects of the EU’s border regime on Europe’s Roma

Migration and border scholars have convincingly argued that the Europeanization and securitization of migration and border policies in Europe have led to practices and techniques of population management that constitute a questionable divide between EU and non-EU groups, as well as between different non-EU populations. Dr van Baar built on this debate, and argued that these securitizing processes and transnational governmentalities have also impacted on the under-researched, ‘intra-EU’ divide regarding irregularized EU citizens, such as Europe’s Muslim and Roma minorities. Consequently, these minoritized, religionized and ethnicized groups have been faced with, for instance, having the adequate exercising of their citizenship – including their right to free movement in the EU – impeded. Dr van Baar focused on the position of the Roma, and on how the post-1989 Europeanization of their minority status – including the institutionalized promises for European citizenship and ‘integration’ – ambiguously relate to the securitization of migration and borders in Europe. He discussed several intra-EU mechanisms and practices of bordering and policing and showed that these securitizing processes affect not only migrating Roma – including those who have fled and asked for asylum – but also many other Roma, particularly the poor and segregated, who are confronted with both forced mobility and forced immobility. Dr van Baar argued that new border practices have increasingly been articulated at sites, such as banlieues, ghettoes, settlements, and poor, ‘colored’ neighborhoods, that are considered as ‘dangers’ to both the state project and the newly devised European project. He reflected on how the continued representation of the Roma as irregular migrants and citizens – particularly through their problematization as ‘rootless nomads’, ‘itinerant criminals’ and ‘undeserving citizens’ – has led to confronting many Roma with forced mobility and to a situation that calls into question the political articulation of freedom of movement in contemporary Europe.

Ricard Zapata-Barrero (Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain): Framing the intercultural/multicultural divide

The Multicultural/Intercultural (Mc/Ic) emerging controversy resides in the logic of the necessary requirements to manage a society that recognizes itself as being diverse.  The great multicultural debates of the late 20th century, and even in the early 21st century, followed a script driven by a cultural right-based approach of diversity, centered on such questions as the cultural recognition of rights in the public sphere and how to re-assess equality and cultural rights of non-national citizens coming with different attributions of language, religion, and cultural practices. This focus to diversity has founded the multicultural citizenship studies until the emergence of a new paradigm that is taking shape in this second decade of the 21st century: intercultural citizenship. Interculturalism invades this negative diagnosis of multiculturalism as a lifeguard costume. But it is also true that even if we are in an “intercultural turn”, there is still no political theory founding this turn. It is within this framework that Dr Zapata-Barrero explored the building blocks of a preliminary theory, having Europe as main contextual framework. According to him, to look for the foundation of interculturalism we need to identify some substantial criticisms of multiculturalism that has been deployed this last decade. Dr Zapata-Barrero entered into this foundational frame of discussion taking citizenship as main focus.

Participation of INTEGRIM scholars

The Dec 11 conference was planned, designed and convened by Viola Zentai, Director of the Center for Policy Studies at Central European University. At the end of the day, Paul Statham of the University of Sussex offered the final session reflecting on the themes and currents of the talks and presentations offered. Sonia Gsir (University of Liege, Belgium) and Lucinda Fonseca (University of Lisbon, Portugal) facilitated by chairing the morning and afternoon sessions. Floris Vermuelen (University of Amsterdam, Netherlands), Michael Collyer (University of Sussex, UK) and Dolores Morondo Taramundi (Deusto University, Bilbao, Spain) contributed to the sessions by acting as discussants for the presented talks and papers. The conference greatly benefited from the participation of the senior scholars from the INTEGRIM Network, and was attended by an international audience of approx 100 participants.