The role of social capital in migrants’ engagement in local politics in European cities

1. The role of social capital in migrants’ engagement in local politics in European cities Laura Morales (University of Murcia & University of Manchester) Katia Pilati (University of Trento)

2. Theoreticalapproaches: Literature on politicalparticipationbymigrants: -POS approachfocusing on the institutionalstructure (Koopmans et al. 2005, Bloemraad 2006) -Organizationalapproachfucusing on intermediate meso-structures (Fennema and Tillie 1999, 2001; Togeby 1999) LINK withtheoriesdistinguishingdifferenttypesofstructures/links: -overlapping and intersectingstructures (Simmel) -bonding and bridging social capital Hypothesis : different structures/links different types of participation If migrants interact with their co-ethnics they will be more likely to be exposed to participation that relate to issues and concerns framed around their own ethnic group. Consequently, bonding -rather than bridging – social capital will provide fertile ground for political engagement with an ethnic focus . Instead, ethnically diverse social interactions will promote political engagement related to issues and concerns that affect the larger society. Researchobjective:To examine how bridging and bonding social capital differently shape political attitudes and behaviors of migrants across cities in Europe.

3. Data source: • micro data collected through a survey carried out between 2007 and 2008 in 8 European cities: Barcelona, Budapest, Geneva, London, Lyon, Madrid, Milan, and Zurich. • data from organizational survey (index on ethnic links among organizational networks) • MainIVs: 4 indicatorsofbonding social capital • Involved in ethnic organizational type; • Involved in organizations with 50% members of R’s ethnic group (%); • Ethnic homogeneity of informal relationships; • Ethnic ties of organizationalnetwork • DVs: 4 typesofpolitical engagement (ethnic and non ethnic) • Political interest, • Contacts • Protests • (Political consumerism) Methodological notes on the empiricalstudy

4. DVs: interest, contacts and protests

5. IV: Involved in ethnic organizational type

6. IV: Involved in organizations with 50% members of R’s ethnic group

7. IV: Ethnic homogeneity of informal relationships

8. IV: Ethnic ties of organizational network

9. Preliminary findings • Involved in organizations with 50% members of R’s ethnic group • Ethnic homogeneity of informal relationships; • Decrease host country political engagement (interest, contacts and protests) • Increase political engagement with an ethnic focus (interest) • Increases home versus host country political engagement (interest, contacts)

10. Involved in ethnic organizational type; • Increase host country political engagement (interest) • Increases political engagement with an ethnic focus (interest, contacts) • Ethnic ties of organizational network • Increase host country political engagement (contacts, protests) BUT decreases host country interest • Decreases political engagement with an ethnic focus (interest, contacts) • Decreases home versus host country protests BUT increases home versus host country political interest

11. MORE • interacting effects of bonding social capital with contextual variables may be of interest (analyses seem to suggest that they are often significant for explaining host country interest/protest by reducing the negative impact of bonding at the individual level. • interactions between bonding social capital with ethnic identities.