European civic integration programmes claim to provide newcomers with necessary tools for successful participation. Simultaneously, these programmes have been criticised for being restrictive, market-driven and for working towards an implicit goal of limiting migration. Authors have questioned how these programmes discursively construct an offensive image of the Other and how colonial histories are reproduced in the constructions seen today. The Dutch civic integration programme is considered a leading example of a restrictive programme within Europe. Research has critically questioned the discourses within its policies, yet limited research has moved beyond policy to focus on discourse in texts in practice. This study presents a critical discourse analysis of texts used in the civic integration programme and demonstrates that they participate in multiple discursive constructions: the construction of the Dutch nation-state and its citizens as inherently modern, the construction of the Other as Unmodern and thus a threat, and the construction of the hierarchical relationship between the two. The civic integration programme has been left out of discussions on decolonisation to date, contributing to it remaining a core practice of othering. This study applies post-colonial theories to understand the impacts of current discourse, and forwards possibilities for consideration of decolonised alternatives.
Citizens have responded to newcomers in the Netherlands with acts of solidarity and programmes to support integration, often in response to increasingly restrictive government policies. In a previously published study by the primary author, a critical discourse analysis was conducted of texts used in mandatory government integration programmes. Findings showed that texts discursively construct the “modern Us” the “unmodern Other” and a hierarchical relationship between the two, recreating in practice racialized categories reminiscent of colonial times. Considering the role citizen initiatives play in integration, it is important to also understand their discourse on integration. A critical discourse analysis using Bacchi’s What’s the Problem Represented to Be? approach was conducted on texts used in citizen initiatives for integration in the Netherlands. Additionally, as part of a larger institutional ethnography, ethnographic data was gathered on their day-to-day work. These data were analyzed through a theoretical lens inspired by occupational science, governmentality and post/decolonial studies. Initial findings show dominant discourses found in formal integration programmes being actively reproduced in citizen initiatives. Additionally, findings display concepts of ‘successful’ integration, the “Us”, and the “Other” being discursively shaped by promoting ‘modern’ occupations as part of ‘successful’ everyday life. Occupational science is a field with particular interest in social transformation projects, projects often based in the informal sector. Understanding how dominant discourses are reproduced in informal programmes provides important perspectives on their impact on everyday life, demonstrating the importance of remaining critical of discourses in projects operating in the peripheries.
MULTIFILE
Throughout Europe, refugees must participate in civic integration programs aimed to improve language and to have them learn and adopt the ‘European’ way of life. These programmes have been criticized for being restrictive, discriminatory and as negatively impacting on the lives of refugees. Our study aims to explore the Dutch civic integration programme at the level of discourse.MethodThis three-part critical ethnography explores civic integration in the Netherlands by drawing on Foucauldian and decolonial theories. Firstly, a critical discourse analysis of practice texts (course books, exams) explored how they present integration and the Other. Secondly, observations during integration courses and focus groups with staff will further explore how these concepts are shaped. Lastly, a variety of creative methods will be offered to refugees, exploring how they demonstrate their integration through everyday doing.Impact/ResultsResults of the first study demonstrate that texts are actively constructing an image of the unmodern Other, attributing inherently unmodern values and ‘ways of doing’ to them. This image is reminiscent of previous historical depictions of the Other; suggesting that colonial classifications have their afterlife in programs today. It demonstrates that Othering is an indestructible practice across time and across multiple levels of integration, from policy to practice.Conclusions/OutcomesThe discourse we use shapes our understanding of who belongs and who not. These understandings impact on the treatment of groups and their occupational possibilities. Analyzing discourses creates spaces for new narratives and for new understandings of integration.
MULTIFILE
